Plutarch's 'Lives' and the critical reader

This paper analyses the kind of reader constructed in the Lives and the response expected of that reader. It begins by attempting a typology of moralising in the Lives. Plutarch does sometimes make general 'gnomic' statements about right and wrong, and occasionally passes explicit judgement on a subject's behaviour. In addition, the language with which Plutarch describes character is inherently moralistic; and even when he does not pass explicit judgment, Plutarch can rely on a common set of notions about what makes behaviour virtuous or vicious. However, the application of any moral lessons is left to the reader's own judgement. Furthermore, Plutarch's use of multiple focalisations means that the reader is sometimes presented with varying ways of looking at the same individual or the same historical situation. In addition, many incidents or anecdotes are marked by 'multivalence': that is, they resist reduction to a single moral message or lesson. In such cases, the reader is encouraged to exercise his or her own critical faculties. Indeed, the prologues which precede many pairs of Lives and the synkriseis which follow them sometimes explicitly invite the reader's participation in the work of judging. The syncritic structure of the Parallel Lives also invites the reader's participation, as do the varying perspectives provided by a corpus of overlapping Lives. In fact, the presence of a critical, engaged reader is presupposed by the agonistic nature of much of Greek literature, and of several texts in the Moralia which stage opposing viewpoints or arguments. Plutarch himself argues for such a reader in his How the young man should listen to poems.

‘Souvenirs, souvenirs': the role of memory in the work of Annie Saumont

The work of nouvelliste Annie Saumont constantly explores the phenomenon of memory, and of memories. This article identifies and nuances the various forms that this exploration takes. An introductory contextualization of author and theme is followed by the presentation of a short story, ‘Méandres’, which embodies the first quality of memory to be examined: its capacity not only to recall but also to re-evaluate a past which is thus shown to be as hypothetical as the future. Memory as guilt that moulds or puts its indelible stamp on lives is then evoked by means of examples from other stories, illustrating the gradations Saumont achieves in her investigation of the power of this complex faculty. The next section turns to her portrayal of involuntary memory. Unlike for Proust, the instances of spontaneous remembering that are experienced by her characters lunge at them down the years almost exclusively to wound or disorientate. Depictions of the memory which conserves, and is thus burdened by, secrets are then considered, and finally Saumont's evocation of characters who have different reasons to analyse the way their own and other people's memories work. The conclusion to be drawn is that for Saumont, we are our memories; the ability to master a ‘judicious interpretation’ of memory – or indeed, to forget – is, in her stories, overwhelmingly a quality to be envied.