Eloquence and Liberty

Abstract

This essay intends to study, in the works of eighteenth-century French writers, the occurrence of an idea borrowed from Tacitus' Dialogue1 and from the last chapter of Pseudo-Longinus' treatise On Sublimity2: eloquence, in order to develop all its powers, needs freedom and even civic disorders; when freedom disappears, eloquence degenerates accordingly. In Tacitus' Dialogue, this idea is expounded in the final speech of Maternus, but Maternus does not deplore the condition of his time which left eloquence reduced to a minor role. Thanks to the emperor's authority, public affairs are now peaceful, the flame of civil wars is extinguished. Maternus invites his friends not to regret an art which flourished with that licence which fools call liberty. He himself has chosen to devote his talent to poetry: consequently, he expects not to be blamed if he spends most of his time writing a tragedy of Cato. It is significant that this subject brings Maternus' mind back to the days of the Republic, the very same past which he declares not to regret. Taken literally, Maternus' speech could be read as a lesson in the historical relativity of the arts: there is a time when great minds cannot help being involved in public quarrels; there is another time when, things being held firmly in the hands of an authoritarian government, gifted men would just waste their time pleading petty lawsuits; they can do better, if they devote themselves to more pleasant or to more useful tasks.3 As we shall see, in the eighteenth century Maternus' thesis gave occasion to some generalizations: peace and prosperity are not the proper stimulus for artistic achievement: but are not peace and prosperity preferable? And, if in the present time eloquence and even poetry are weaker, should the citizens of Europe blame their century, which in so many other respects has made them happier and more secure? One could define this interpretation as an optimistic one: if the best minds are busy with matters of public welfare, they cannot be also orators,