Distinguish Between Idealism and Parody in Leucippe and Clitophon

In Leucippe and Clitophon, we find a novel, at face value at least, with a similar plot to the other ancient novels: the protagonists are two young lovers who go through numerous misadventures, while staying true to each other, and are rewarded with marriage. However, it could be argued that the novel parodies its predecessors and the idealised picture of love portrayed in them, and that Achilles Tatius makes a mockery of the ideas typical of the ancient novels вЂ" or, as Morgan puts it, вЂ?conducts a prolonged guerrilla war against the conventions of his own genre’1.

According to the genre, the ultimate aim of the two lovers at the start of the novel is to be united in a harmonious marriage, a convention idealised in the other ancient novels, but in Achilles Tatius’ novel the main aim seems to be sex. In Chaereas and Callirhoe we see Chaereas, after his first sighting of the young maiden, �tell his parents that he was in love and would die if he did not marry Callirhoe’2, which is in stark contrast to Clitophon’s numerous references to �desire’ at the beginning of Leucippe and Chariton: �The male desires the female…[the palm] declines in the direction of its desire’3. Furthermore, in the same sequence, we see love depicted in a vulgar, animalistic manner, at odds with the natural, unsullied love we find in the other authors: �The viper, a land snake, lusts for the eel’, described as Clitophon’s �erotic lesson’ to Leucippe. Thus we can clearly observe an early hint of, as Kathryn Chew comments in �Achilles Tatius and Parody’, Achilles� �parodic subversion of romantic standards’4. Moreover, the lovers do not fall in love both instantaneously and simultaneously, as is the case in the likes of Daphnis and Chloe and Chaereas and Callirhoe, since it takes time for Leucippe to fall for Clitophon’s youthful exuberance: �She discretely indicated that she had not been displeased by my discourse’5.

1. Morgan 1995: 142

2. Reardon 1989: 23

3. Reardon 1989: 188

4. Chew 2000

5. Reardon 1989: 188

What is more, whereas Callirhoe does not venture to speak of her passion for Chaereas before their wedding is announced, Leucippe, with the topic of marriage not even broached, readily accepts Clitophon’s proposal to �add erotic grace notes’6 to their love.

The ideal of chastity is also a concept which Achilles Tatius treats differently to the other ancient novelists, since, it could be argued, his approach is to mock it. The sexual idealism found in Heliodorus’ novel, where the central characters intend to remain chaste, is the very antithesis of Leucippe and Clitophon’s predicament, since they intend to make love very early on in their relationship and are only prevented from fornicating by dreams in which gods instruct them not to. Thus, it is not their personal ideals that maintain their chastity, but rather an unwelcome external influence. Moreover, from this we can observe both Achilles Tatius’ realistic approach to sexuality, a stark contrast to the other novelists’ idealisation, and also his inclination to parody it. Indeed, from the very start of the novel, by his references to Zeus and Europa, this underlying mockery is evident. On his first sighting of Leucippe, Clitophon remarks that he вЂ?remembered Europa, sayling upon the backe of the bull’7 вЂ" Achilles Tatius is here asking the reader to think of the acquiescing abduction of Europa by Zeus in the guise of a bull, and thus a parallel may be drawn between the mythological story and the protagonists of Achilles Tatius’ novel. We may wonder at the likening of Clitophon to Zeus, the supreme adulterer, in a novel supposedly meant to be viewed as an idealised, serious account of unadulterated love.

The reversal of expectations is characteristic of, and a vital component to, parody, and, along with the stock ideas of the genre, such as romanctic love and chastity, being treated in an unexpected manner, Achilles Tatius’ characters also surprise the reader with their feelings and actions if we compare them with other characters of the ancient novels. I have already touched upon Leucippe’s attempts not to preserve her chastity and Clitophon’s initial salacious lust, rather than romantic love, for Leucippe, but there are other instances when our

6. Reardon 1989: 198

7. Burton 1597

expectations are subverted. Having fought off Melite’s attempts to consummate their marriage following Leucippe’s �death’ because of his love for the latter, Clitophon finally gives in to her offer of guilt-free sex, but only after the reapparence of Leucippe, very much alive. Although

Clitophon’s giving in to his sexual desire could be viewed as being realistic behaviour, it is clearly not in keeping with the norms of the genre вЂ" naÐ"Їve Daphnis does have sex with Lycaenion but this is only so that he can possess вЂ?the skill that would make him able to do what he wanted to Chloe’8, while knowing Clitophon meekly attempts to justify his sexual weakness:

�the act could no longer be considered precisely a marital one but was rather a remedy for an ailing soul. So when she embraced me, I did not hold back; when our limbs drew close, I did not refuse the touch. Everything happened as Love willed.’ 9

Our expectations are further subverted when Melite passes a chastity test. Challenged to prove her fidelity by Thersandros, who asks if she has had sex with anyone since he was away, Melite, denying this, walks into the waters of the Styx, which do not rise to her neck вЂ" which would prove her to be false. We half-expect her to fail this divine test, having witnessed her sexual encounter with Clitophon, and are rather surprised when she survives through a glitch in her oath вЂ" she only slept with Clitophon after Thersandros returned. Plepelits argues that when we compare the fraudulent nature of this test and also the test of Leucippe, who likewise passes even though she earlier displays wanton desires, with the virginal tests in Heliodorus’ novel, we can more readily observe Achilles Tatius’ mockery10. In my opinion, his argument is valid,