Gibson and Morello's volume offers a welcome contribution to recent scholarship on the letters of Pliny the Younger (Wilcox 2012; Shelton 2013). G. and M. adopt a two-pronged approach that (1) considers various strategies for reading and rereading the letters and (2) explores key themes and topics. They eschew the traditional ‘mosaic’ approach, which tends to compile small, thematic groupings of letters to create an overall ‘picture’ of the author and his life, instead advocating John Henderson's (2002) ‘kaleidoscope’ metaphor, which envisions an array of connections and thematic parallels apparent to perceptive readers. The result significantly advances the increasing appreciation of Pliny the Younger's sophisticated literary artistry and self-positioning within Roman epistolary literature.
Chs 1 and 2 provide the foundations for the rest of the book. Gibson focuses on Pliny's autobiographical reticence in Book 1, whereby as a literary strategy he omits certain life events to avoid detracting from the optimism of post-Domitianic literary freedom. Subsequently, the reader's reinsertion of previously omitted autobiographical details into ‘pools of time’ (27) proves crucial in appreciating key themes and Pliny's deliberate self-fashioning. G. then explicates a basic premise of the volume, namely that linear reading of the letters and rereading of the corpus illuminate Pliny's conscientious structuring and artistry — aspects too often undervalued by scholars. Ch. 2 offers a case study of Pliny's literary workmanship through a close reading of Book 6, analysing the book's structural design and introducing ‘reading by cycle’ (68), that is, examining individual letters as part of a larger thematic series, either within the same book or among several in the corpus.
Ch. 3 extends the cyclical reading approach, investigating letters containing references to Pliny's epistolary rival Cicero. Morello fleshes out Pliny's nuanced allusions to Cicero, through whom he justifies his own amateur poetic activities. Yet, in delaying explicit mention of Cicero as letter-writer until Book 9, Pliny distances himself from his predecessor and asserts his own status as a superior epistolary exemplum.
Chs 4–7 form a loose quartet focusing less on methodology and more on the investigation of topics and themes. Chs 4 and 5 employ the ‘reading by cycle’ method to study Pliny's relationships with his elders (4) and his peers (5). This demonstrates, for example, how Pliny pays homage to his elders while revealing their limitations as models, enabling him to promote his own epistolary exemplariness. In this context M.'s sequential evaluation of the Tacitus cycle is especially insightful. Her close reading persuasively shows that when it comes to reputation, Pliny positions himself not just as Tacitus' equal, but his better.
Chs 6 and 7 pursue a similar line of comparative investigation, examining the theme of time management. Focusing on literary pursuits, M. suggests that Pliny's balance between otium and negotium is informed by Seneca's epistolary example. Pliny echoes Seneca's espousal of otium for the study of natural science and philosophy by detailing the lives of other people as if conducting a scientific study. In recording his own balancing act between work and leisure, Pliny's letter collection embodies his idealized practice as the letters mirror the variety and repetition of daily life and thus represent the successful outcome of time-management, the product of an otium perfectly spent.
In ch. 7 G. extends the time-management theme within the context of Pliny's villa letters (9.7, 2.17 and 5.6), effectively demonstrating that each letter contributes to Pliny's deliberate self-fashioning by creating an overall picture of his utilization of otium amidst the constant interruption of negotium and officium. Pliny's lengthy description of his Laurentine villa (2.17), for instance, serves as a ‘counterweight’ to the negotium-heavy topics of Book 2 and as a symbolic exemplum of Pliny's successful time-management skills.
The eighth and final chapter reviews the cohesion of Pliny's collection, suggesting that Pliny's comments on oratory and speech-writing may function as guides for how readers should approach Pliny's epistolary oeuvre, both as segmented parts and an interconnected whole. Notably, M.'s reassessment of Book 10 contributes to the growing evidence suggesting that Pliny acted as the architect and publisher of the book. Pliny's friendly correspondence with the emperor Trajan trumps his epistolary predecessors and helps further define his own epistolary authorship, while proudly proclaiming his important rôles in relation to the emperor's letters. Pliny's literary dialogue with Ovid further avows his self-assertions about his primacy among the canon of Roman letter-writers: Pliny's amicable communication with Trajan contrasts sharply with Ovid's unsuccessful letter-writing campaign from exile.
This book accomplishes its stated goals, providing a fresh perspective on Pliny the Younger's letters, though it should be noted that the volume is not an ‘introduction’ in the regular sense, rather an introduction to new reading methodologies. Those who will benefit most are readers already deeply acquainted with Pliny since the writing is occasionally dense and a full appreciation requires considerable foreknowledge of Cicero, Ovid and Seneca. For example in ch. 2, G. asserts an architectural symmetry for Book 6, citing as evidence ‘understated’ connections between letter pairings, verbal resonances and textual allusions to certain letters of Cicero. While this interpretation is certainly attractive, it is so nuanced that one wonders about the likelihood of readers independently recognizing such ‘delicate signposting’ (43) even when adopting the reading methodologies suggested and employed by the authors. Moreover, owing to G. and M.'s attention to audience and reading strategies, the study would benefit from a discussion about ancient readership and the reception of Pliny's letters as a whole, thereby highlighting the implications of sequential reading and rereading within historical contexts.
These criticisms should not detract from the book's overall value. The textual analyses will appeal to many and the highly accessible appendices are broadly useful, including: (1) Pliny's timeline and a discussion of the Comum inscription; (2) a catalogue of the content and addressees of Books 1–9; and (3) a helpful list of epistolary topics, relevant letters in the Plinian corpus and a preliminary bibliography for each topic. The greatest contribution of this volume may be the authors' insistence that (re)reading Pliny's letters both linearly and selectively will proffer the greatest appreciation for Pliny's conscientious attention to the organization and thematic development of his epistolary collection. Moreover, G. and M.'s reading strategies will significantly benefit readers embarking anew on (re)reading the letters.
