American Journal of Philology

Godwin's volume joins two other recent ones that also offer a text and English translation of the poet, along with introduction and notes: G. P. Goold, Catullus: Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Notes, 2d ed. (London 1989; 1st ed., 1983), and Guy Lee, Catullus: Edited with a Translation and Brief Notes (Oxford 1990). The proportion of commentary varies considerably among the three editions. Goold's notes are very brief, occupying less than one-sixth the number of the pages of the text plus translation; they identify references mostly, or sketch a background, either historical or personal. Lee's notes, somewhat more devoted to language and interpretation, amount to one-fourth. In Godwin's book the commentary equals the text and translation. This, clearly, is intended to be the author's chief contribution, and indeed it is easily the most valuable part. (In the same format he dealt with the longer poems, 61-68, in a volume published in 1995.) Rather than an editor or translator, Godwin is an interpreter of literature.

Most parts of the introduction are reliable. "Catullus' Life and Times" balances familiar scholarly positions with criticism. Against Ross's view (originating with Reitzenstein, actually) that the poet applied the language of politics to love, he cites Lyne's, that poet and politician alike used the language of the governing class. He is skeptical of identifying Lesbia with Clodia Metelli. The next section describes the performance of poetry, an important subject, if less obvious. The discussion of poets' financial rewards here would be less neat had the instructive researches of Peter White been taken into account (JRS 64 [1974]: 40-61; HSCP 79 [1975]: 265-300; JRS 68 [1978]: 74-92). Godwin afterward sets forth well first the poetic standards and strivings of Catullus and his fellow-neoterics, then the major interpretative strategies practiced by literary critics: biography, New Criticism, New Historicism, and attention to intertextuality, to the arrangement of poems, to their closure (but not structuralism or deconstruction). His own stance is characterized by a keen awareness of the literary artifact, and this will make for some fine, persuasive interpretations.

The section on meter, however, is seriously defective. Addressed to the rank beginner, who is taught when syllables are long, when short, what elision is, and which patterns of longs and shorts constitute the various meters, it is bound to mislead in important ways. It ignores prodelision (which Goold, for the sake of correct reading, represents in his text: gratumst, for example). Nowhere does it say that the fifth foot of a hexameter is regularly a dactyl, much less that the substitution of a spondee there is a neoteric affectation (see Cic. Att. 7.2.1). It claims that "the second half of the pentameter is in the overwhelming majority of cases dactylic" (17, my emphasis). For iambic senarii and choliambics it fails to mention the caesura. Lack of attention to meter probably explains why Godwin prints vehemens (rather than vemens) at 50.21 and vastasque paludesque at 115.5 (no other verse among the elegiacs is hypermetric, though 64.298 is), and also why in the commentary on poem 4 he does not draw attention to Catullus' tour [End Page 283] de force in writing pure iambics; this would have strengthened his point that the verse gives "the movement of the poem a swift impetus appropriate to the movement of the yacht" (117). The last part of the introduction is a concise statement of how the text has been transmitted.

The text here printed is Godwin's own. Let it be compared with Goold's, which is, in my opinion, the truest ever produced--comprehensive in understanding the sources, fearless in replacing manuscript nonsensicalities with Catullan sense and elegance, from start to finish marked by sound judgment. As a sample I chose 49 poems, the verses of which represent 57 percent of the total number in Godwin's volume. Of the divergences from Goold's text in the sample, about two...