No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
No one questions the importance of Malherbe. We read and admire some of his poems in anthologies, we know that his literary doctrine was a landmark in French criticism, we are aware that he and his disciples did much to bring about the development of seventeenth-century classicism. Yet, except in the monumental studies by René Fromilhague, not much has been written concerning Malherbe's technique as a poet. Fromilhague has investigated every detail of stanza forms and rhymes in Malherbe but there are many aspects of his art which deserve further attention: his imagery, his sonorities, his expression of emotion, to name just a few. In the present paper I shall limit myself to his odes, which are of course his major writings, and within the odes to the question of their form and content. It will be necessary, first, to discuss very briefly Malherbe's concept of the ode as a literary genre. Then I shall go on to inspect the seven completed odes (in one case virtually completed), particularly their themes and internal organization. The interest of this problem arises from the unanimous acclaim which literary historians have given to the “rigorous logic” or “admirable structure” or the tight “enchaînement des idées” in these poems. Such comments, we shall see, have little to justify them.
1 René Fromilhague, Malherbe: technique el création poétique (Paris, 1954), and La Vie de Malherbe: apprentissages et luttes (1555–1610) (Paris, 1954).
2 Malherbe: technique …, p. 174.
3 Malherbe et Du Périer: harangue pour le prince de Joinville (Paris, 1956) and “Malherbe Quintilius,” XVII' Siècle, No. 31, pp. 230–246.
4 This fragment has been studied in some detail by Gustave Allais, Malherbe et la poésie française à la fin du XVIe siècle (Paris, 1892), pp. 287–299.
5 La Vie de Malherbe …, pp. 159–161.
6 La Vie de Malherbe …. pp. 210–212.
7 La Vie de Malherbe …. pp. 196–198.
8 The order of stanzas in the earlier version was as follows: 1–6; 14–15; 17–20; 7–10; a stanza which was eliminated; 11; eleven stanzas, suppressed and replaced by 12; 13; 23–26.
9 La Formation de la doctrine classique en France, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1957), pp. 352–353.