QUEER SOCIALITY AND PETRONIAN FRATERNITY

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 0 CLASSICS RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1017/rmu.2022.13
Jay T. Oliver
{"title":"QUEER SOCIALITY AND PETRONIAN FRATERNITY","authors":"Jay T. Oliver","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"‘How tough it is for outlaws’ (quam male est extra legem uiuentibus, Sat. 125.4), laments Encolpius, the petty-criminal narrator of Petronius’ Satyrica, as he frets about whether he and his buddies will be found out as they engage in a scheme to fleece the legacy hunters of Croton. But Encolpius and his crew are outlaws in more senses than one. Having forgotten, or simply disregarded, marital-reproductive household arrangements, they engage in novel forms of relationality that their cultural lexicon can barely cover as they quest after sex, feasts, money, or simply subsistence. Much Petronian scholarship, promoting a reading that looks down on the characters, views these forms of relationality as parodic and ‘purely comic’, ludicrously failed attempts by low, satirized characters to appropriate sublime Roman social institutions like fraternal pietas. In this article, taking as my primary example the reformulation of brotherhood and the use of the kin term frater by Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton, I read these forms of sociality as queer: that is to say, potentially challenging to normativity rather than simply inadequate to meet its demands. Petronian brotherhood, read in this light, appears richly shaded and contested, not merely a one-dimensional misappropriation composed for the benefit of a ‘superior’ elite audience. What exactly it means to be a ‘brother’ in this postlapsarian world is always an active question in the scenes involving the trio. I offer in this article a more detailed close reading of Petronian brotherhood than has been possible in other, briefer scholarly accounts, focusing in particular on the competing conceptualizations of ‘brotherhood’ by different characters, from Encolpius’ exclusive use of the term as something like ‘boyfriend’ to Ascyltos’ more capacious use of the word.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"32 1","pages":"224 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.13","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

‘How tough it is for outlaws’ (quam male est extra legem uiuentibus, Sat. 125.4), laments Encolpius, the petty-criminal narrator of Petronius’ Satyrica, as he frets about whether he and his buddies will be found out as they engage in a scheme to fleece the legacy hunters of Croton. But Encolpius and his crew are outlaws in more senses than one. Having forgotten, or simply disregarded, marital-reproductive household arrangements, they engage in novel forms of relationality that their cultural lexicon can barely cover as they quest after sex, feasts, money, or simply subsistence. Much Petronian scholarship, promoting a reading that looks down on the characters, views these forms of relationality as parodic and ‘purely comic’, ludicrously failed attempts by low, satirized characters to appropriate sublime Roman social institutions like fraternal pietas. In this article, taking as my primary example the reformulation of brotherhood and the use of the kin term frater by Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton, I read these forms of sociality as queer: that is to say, potentially challenging to normativity rather than simply inadequate to meet its demands. Petronian brotherhood, read in this light, appears richly shaded and contested, not merely a one-dimensional misappropriation composed for the benefit of a ‘superior’ elite audience. What exactly it means to be a ‘brother’ in this postlapsarian world is always an active question in the scenes involving the trio. I offer in this article a more detailed close reading of Petronian brotherhood than has been possible in other, briefer scholarly accounts, focusing in particular on the competing conceptualizations of ‘brotherhood’ by different characters, from Encolpius’ exclusive use of the term as something like ‘boyfriend’ to Ascyltos’ more capacious use of the word.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
酷儿社会和petronian博爱
彼得罗尼乌斯(Petronius)的《萨提里卡》(Satyrica)中,小罪犯的叙述者恩科尔皮乌斯(Encolpius)哀叹道:“对不法之徒来说,这是多么艰难啊!”他担心自己和伙伴们参与了一项抢劫克罗顿遗产猎人的计划,是否会被发现。但恩科尔皮厄斯和他的船员在很多方面都是不法之徒。他们已经忘记,或者干脆无视,婚姻和生育的家庭安排,他们参与了一种新的关系形式,他们的文化词汇几乎无法涵盖,因为他们追求性,盛宴,金钱,或者仅仅是生存。许多佩特罗派学者,提倡一种看不起人物的阅读,认为这些形式的关系是模仿的,是“纯粹的喜剧”,是低级的,讽刺的人物对崇高的罗马社会制度的可笑的失败尝试,比如兄弟会。在这篇文章中,我主要以恩可庇俄斯、阿斯基托斯和吉顿对兄弟情谊的重新表述和亲属术语“兄弟”的使用为例,将这些社会形式解读为酷儿:也就是说,它们潜在地挑战了规范性,而不仅仅是不足以满足其要求。从这个角度来看,彼得罗尼亚的兄弟情谊,似乎是充满阴影和争议的,而不仅仅是为了“优越”精英观众的利益而构成的一维挪用。在这个堕落后的世界里,成为“兄弟”到底意味着什么,在涉及三人的场景中一直是一个活跃的问题。在这篇文章中,我提供了一个比其他更简短的学术文章更详细的佩特罗尼亚兄弟情谊的细读,特别关注不同角色对“兄弟情谊”的竞争性概念,从恩科尔皮乌斯(Encolpius)专门使用这个词作为“男朋友”,到阿斯基托斯(Ascyltos)更广泛地使用这个词。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
CONFLICT, TRAGEDY, AND INTERRACIALITY: BOB THOMPSON PAINTS VERGIL'S CAMILLA THE THIRD LIFECYCLE OF PHILOKLEON IN ARISTOPHANES’ WASPS METAGENRE AND THE COMPETENT AUDIENCE OF PLAUTUS’ CAPTIVI ERASING THE AETHIOPIAN IN CICERO'S POST REDITUM IN SENATU RMU volume 51 issue 2 Cover and Back matter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1