The Wooden Bridge
What do Orpheus and the Lorax have in common? Orpheus, like the Lorax of Dr. Seuss, had connection to the trees and acknowledged the importance of the environment’s role for humanity. Both the Lorax and Orpheus were responsible for a collection of trees. The placement of “the catalogue of trees” could seem random in the midst of two tragic narratives in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, but it in fact serves as a bridge between two unique stories by providing meaningful insight into the proceeding story of Orpheus as well as creating a vivid setting for the following story of Cyparisuss.
Ovid strategically placed the tree catalogue after the story of Orpheus and its placement should not be considered lightly. We should instead use the passage to provide further insight into Orpheus and his close connection to the gods. In the section of reading just before the tree catalogue, Ovid recounts how Orpheus petitioned the gods for the chance to save his bride. Orpheus was distinguished as a musician and used his skill with the lyre to move the gods to mercy, allowing him to proceed to the underworld in search of Eurydice. Through his musical skill and his heart, he was able to touch the gods, “for the first time ever, overcome/ by the effects of his song, the Furies wept, / nor could Persephone reject his prayer” (10.60-62). Orpheus’s ability to affect the gods in such a profound way speaks to the connection he has to them, an idea continued in “the catalogue of trees”. In that portion of the text Orpheus is referred to as the “poet born / of heaven” (10.126-127). This proves that Orpheus did in fact have some relation to the divine or was touched by the gods themselves as the previous passage suggests. He even appears to have been given special abilities from the gods, including the power of creation. The lyre he played was given more than the power to share a meaningful melody with the world, but also the life-sustaining gift of springing up trees with its song, “and plucking his resounding lyre strings, / he summoned many shade trees to his presence” (10.128-129). While Orpheus was not the creator of all trees and shade, he can boast of his ability to birth them with song, a gift that continues to prove his deep connection with nature itself and the gods controlling it. Due to this, Orpheus’s connection provides a solid foundation for the first end of the bridge.
The other side of the bridge that is “the catalogue of trees” is founded in the literal connection of the story of Cyparissus that follows and the trees themselves. In the story of Cyparissus, the young boy has become dear friends with a stag and is filled with sorrow when he accidentally “transfixed him with his deadly javelin”(10.180). Cyparissus, filled with immeasurable grief, begs the gods to permit him an eternity of mourning. The gods, in their quintessential fashion, grant him his wish by transforming him into a new being befitting the enormity of feeling. The boy stands now in leafen form as a tree that represents all those who grieve. His transformation even left the gods mourning as they told him “by your presence, you will signal grief”(10.197). This fate ties him directly to the trees listed in the previous passage in that his tragedy not only takes place in the woods created by Orpheus, but also in that his name could be forever attached to the end of the list of those whose fates were likewise sealed into leaves and bark. Each tree compiled in that index shared a similar fate and is now called by their final (and fatal) characteristics as well as their name, “soft linden, beech and laurel / useful ash / river-dwelling willows”(10.133,134,139). The mourning Cyparissus tree would now fit smoothly in line with the catalogue, considering he too is now a symbolic tree and one metamorphosed into such; thus, his fate provides a balanced bridge end for the placement of the catalogue.
“The catalogue of trees” may at first glance appear to be a strange divergence from the tragedies it rests between, but its location is perfectly placed to bridge the two. Its placement after the story of Orpheus provides crucial insight into the connection Orpheus has with the gods that can enlighten his tragedy, and the placement directly preceding Cyparissus’ story serves to give setting and foreshadowing of the boy’s fate. This bridge is not only useful but necessary in that the passage effectively ties the two together by accentuating the relationship that they have to the narrative as a whole.
With love always,
olivia combs
This is a thoughtful and balanced analysis of an initially bizarre section of Ovid's work. “The catalogue of trees” is a difficult passage primarily due to its abrupt nature; there is no immediately evident explanation for why the poet would include the list. Although understanding why Ovid gives a litany of trees between Orpheus’ plight and the tragedy of Cyparissus is daunting at first, the twofold explanation provided here is both satisfying and soundly rooted in the text. Linking the trees to Orpheus’ distinct bond with nature and the divine realm is an insightful connection, as is the comparison between Cyparissus’ fate and the numerous other trees that are described with human qualities. Overall, reading this passage as a bridge between two otherwise disparate stories is an excellent way to explain its presence in the broader narrative. The analysis provides insight useful both to an understanding of the passage being immediately dealt with as well as its surrounding context.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(Something messed up, so I had to copy/paste and post again. I apologize!)
ReplyDeleteOlivia, your interpretation has great specificity, and I appreciate how you take a focused look at "the catalogue of the trees." I agree with you in saying that the placement of this section is not there out of mishap, but rather provides a crucial insight - or as you put it, a "bridge" - between the story of Orpheus and the story of Cyparissus. Ovid put this "catalogue " here, in interpretation, because he wanted to effectively introduce us to the deeper meaning behind Cyparissus's metamorphosis, as well as to highlight the importance of Orpheus's character, being the "poet born/ of heaven" (10.126-127) that brought trees into the world. Your analysis is well developed, and I like how well your essay flows. Showing both sides of the "bridge" makes it clear for your audience to understand what exactly you are arguing. Specifically, your statement that "its placement should not be considered likely," I think, is a well put argument for the author's purpose. Though this passage may seem out of place in this part of the poem, Ovid makes clear of your interpretation in saying "...in the midst of this commotion / was the cone-shaped cypress, who, though now a tree, / was once a boy, beloved of that god" (10.152-154). This section of the poem links Orpheus creating these trees to the significance of the cypress tree and the story of Cyparissus, falling right in line with the points made within your argument. Your analysis provides great insight to this seemingly confusing, detail oriented part of Book X, and illustrates how this section is rightfully a "bridge" between the surrounding accounts of Orpheus and Cyparissus.