WITH A GREAT WEALTH ON MY TONGUE

From The Apocalypse of Quintilius.  Peter Russell.  Selected and introduced by Glyn Pursglove.  Salzburg (Austria): Salzburg University.  Salzburg Studies in English Literature, Poetic Drama, & Poetic Theory 77.3 (Volume 14), 1997.

 

John Gery

 

      While Ezra Pound has inspired a variety of poetic traditions, including now generations of post-Imagist poets, post-Sinologist poets, post-Vorticists, and so on, few of his successors have committed themselves to a work approaching the scale of The Cantos.  Louis Zukofsky is one.  Another is British poet Peter Russell, who, living mostly in exile, has followed Pound’s example in scope, if not quite in subject, structure or style.  In the energetic spirit of Pound’s early “translations” of the Latin poet Sextus Propertius, for half a century Russell has been developing and expanding the persona of one, Cittinus Aurelianus Quintilius Stultus, a fabricated fifth-century “Grecified” Latin poet “we know nothing about,” who, anachronistically, is only mentioned in passing in Horace’s odes yet who, for Russell, has grown into a vast, diverse, multilingual, prolific, and iconoclastic, if not notorious, figure, an unforgettable character whose voice scintillates with a mad mix of lyricism, social satire, arcane scholarship, philosophic speculation, and spirituality. 

      As Russell himself tells the story of Quintilius’s origins (as quoted in Glyn Pursglove’s introduction to this book), in 1948 one morning after he had visited the aging George Santayana in a convent in Rome, Russell found himself composing an imitation of an elegy by Tibullus (whom Santayana was in the midst of translating).  The poem, apparently spawned by a troubled love affair Russell was embroiled in at the time, and written during a “terrible hangover,” also took on elements of Virgil’s eclogues, with echoes of Catullus, Propertius and other Latin poets thrown in for good measure, creating a kind of “pseudotranslation,” or as Pursglove calls it, a “pseudoepigraphical translation.”  And so Quintilius was born. 

      Over the next several years, Russell produced a half-dozen elegies in this same voice, attributing them to Quintilius and publishing them in small journals (such as his own Nine), as well as in limited editions.  Eventually, they were gathered in The Elegies of Quintilius (1975) and still later reissued in an “enlarged” edition (1996) that included a brief “biography” of Quintilius, a preface, further poems on the madness attributed to him, and no less than six appendices.  This more recent collection some fifteen years in the making, From The Apocalypse of Quintilius, now adds to The Elegies Pursglove’s compilation of 142 poems “selected” from Quintilius’s life’s work, together with her introduction, detailed notes, “Three Statements on Quintilius” by the “translator” Russell himself,  and four further “glosses.”  In this highly self conscious, pseudo-scholarly edition, Russell has constructed not only an elaborate, varied, sometimes harrowing, and utterly fantastic biography for his persona from the “Lower Empire” (including, for instance, references to his lifelong correspondence with his “classmate” Augustine debating Plato and Aristotle), but an equally esoteric body of medieval scholarship surrounding his activities and poetry.  More than a supreme fiction––although surely it is that!––Russell’s detailed insinuations of Quintilius’s travels throughout Europe, Africa, the Near East, and even China, of his experiences ranging from military heroism to enslavement, of his correspondence, of his historical encounters, and of fragments of his writings sometimes recoverable only from translations of them into a host of other languages, inevitably raises the specter of the fiction of all non-fiction, of the questionable nature of whatever scholars may assert as authentic in history or literature.  Indeed, Russell’s whole grand scheme is so unbelievable, so rambunctious, so ambitious, we are sorely tempted to believe it, all of it, since the human folly, estrangement, sexual longing, sacrifices to beauty, plunges into despair, and frailty of the spirit Quintilius expresses in poem after poem are so evocative, so damnable, so cogent, why shouldnt all            of it be true?  As Quintilius himself points out in Poem 38,

 

                        Nothing is real until it is transformed.

                        The unrealities acquire a copula. All things

                        As we know them, are something else

                        In this world,

 

and once we are conjoined to Quintilius’s world, his world, like ours, becomes paradoxically familiar and peculiar at the same time.  As Russell justifies his persona in one of his statements, “Instead of the Poundian technique of a modern consciousness penetrating into the past I use the device of a consciousness from the distant past penetrating ‘unconsciously’ into the future!”

      Unlike for his Aristotelian rival Augustine, whom he mocks as a hypocritical “master/ Of tall stories” who “can’t even read Greek, and . . . sits up worrying all night/ About his career” (“Gnostical Animadversion”), thus perpetrating “a brainless concept like ‘survival/ Of the best adapted’” (“Probabilia Nihil Est Tam Incredible. . .”), Quintilius’s metaphysics are doggedly Platonic.  From his early embrace of “Air my bread” in “The Prelude to The Apocalypse” (where he adds, “You will hear me muttering to myself/ But it will be the silences/ That speak of worlds”), to his later rant against his contemporaries who, like the figures in the cave, “gather in little groups and watch these images/ Creeping like beetles or flashing like swallows or swifts/ Against a smooth plaster wall. . ./. . .these fond fatheads/ [who] Sit gazing solemnly at walls,–what they fondly call their ‘screen’,/And swear to themselves it’s reality” (“Animae Nox Obscura”), Quntilius is devoted to the preeminence of the ideal, despite recurring bouts of despair.  “Reality’s so different from what they choose to imagine,” he insists, and a page later, “The shadows are only shadows/ Of the shadows of reality, things we perceive with the senses. /–You have too [sic] look through the shadows, not at them, to see/ The realities that lie beyond.”   As though refuting both modernist credos such as “No ideas but in things” and the postmodernist propensity for image-based poetry drenched in sensual, private experience, Russell’s Quintilius remains staunchly outward-looking, reminding us again and again, “The poet’s true task is divine song.  Do not despise it” (“Non Enses at Ex Norico Carmen”).

      Yet the nexus of voices uttered in The Apocalypse, in poems that range from a few fragmented lines to nearly twenty pages in length, compositely offers more than sustained philosophical musings or spiritual supplication.  In fact, nothing in Quintilius’s own era (which is of course ours, too) extends beyond the reach of his wrath, and though more accessible, and finally less cryptic, than The Cantos, his poems shift mood as abruptly, as dramatically, and sometimes as comically and unexpectedly, as Pound’s.  Longer poems tend to roam across Quintilius’s obsessions with avarice, cultural and material poverty, academicians, lust, and greed, reading as though translated from Greek or Latin hexameters:

 

                        I myself after a lifetime of unrewarded servitude

                        Inanely sing on, on a far shore to desert halcyons,—

                        The Muse is unkinder to me than ever Cynthia to                                                                       Propertius,

                        Yet I have loved her more than Propertius himself.

                        Of all men’s products good verses alone

                        Are never superseded.  I write good verses.

                        Be that my epitaph (though who will pay for the stone,

                        Let alone a chiseller?)                   (“We Need a Censor”)

 

Yet such poems are interspersed by hymns, epistles, allegories (such as “The Key” and “The Yellow Bird,” two of the best poems in the book), songs, and epigrammatic fragments resembling early Greek poems, such as “Dicunt Mihi Puellae,”

 

                         Dicunt mihi puellae

                        anacreon senex es

                                           PD I, pp. 122-23

 

                        The young girls all say to me now: “Quintilius,

                        You’re an old man,–what would you want with us?”

 

This is another occasion when it is better to keep silence, of extended word-play and lyrical ascent:

 

                        Miniatures or minotaurs

                                                            I care not which

                        Ichors and acres, landscapes of the mind

 

                        Hoary old life is nearly dead

                        But death is something we don’t talk about

                        In decent circles

                                                                                    Our days revolve

                        Around the roundabouts and swings

                                                                                                                         It is

                        The gladiator not the swan

                        Today who sings              (“The Metaphysics of the Muse”)

 

      Reading through such a rich variety of voices is not always easy to sustain in large doses, especially because some poems are angry rants which, we are told in a footnote, “transcend even respectable antiquarianism by reflecting 20th century insanity in quite transparent spirit.”  When disguises wear thin (see “Fiddlesticks,” for instance), the topical nature of a poem can become taxing. And the physical presentation of the book itself, with its workmanlike cover and ringed binder not liable to wear well, is rudimentary, at best. Yet the line drawings inside are engaging enough, and most significantly, the underlying effect of the poetry itself is that, even though we may not always “get” Russell’s layered allusions, we do get we his intimations, or “inside” story, of just how difficult it is to survive the world in any age with one’s spiritual and intellectual integrity in tact. 

      Despite the use of a persona, the obscure variety of “sources,” the mix of languages, and the dissembling of histories, The Apocalypse of Quintilius pays homage to the art of self-expression.  While Russell’s Quintilius makes it clear that he despises the self-aggrandizing sophistries of postmodernism, his apocalypse, or as he calls it, his “chrestomatheia,/ A manual for use, a guide for the perplexed to unique emotions, authentic/ Evocations of the Good and the True” (“Quintilii Ricardo Epistola”), stands poised on the cusp of Poundian modernism as a truly “post-modern” text, “indeed a legacy/ To the Gods who are coming. . . the Gods that will be/ Not our fathers, but our children. . .”  Thanks to Pursglove’s admirable arrangement of Russell’s considerable body of work to its best advantage, we leave Quintilius not so disturbed by his vitriol sometimes verging on misanthropy as we are moved by his allegiance to the divine, his writing his “Solitudes” to remake the world into a place of wonder, thereby earning him the right to “sink into the carrion earth serene/ With a great wealth on my tongue” (“Vitam Reddere ad Asses”).  And as a poet who has stubbornly gone his own way, refusing to compromise his vision, no matter what the personal cost, “so that the mystery vanish not” (“Last Judgements”), Peter Russell has promulgated a poetry that, while it may not have actually been celebrated sixteen centuries ago, may well be sixteen centuries from now.