by Jon Lackman | 20 November 2007 | Ancient, Books
In the most recent issue of Mouseion (VI:2), Kelly Olson reviews John R. Clarke’s Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: Visual Representation and Non-Elite Viewers in Italy, 100 B.C. – A.D. 315:
When I first received this book for review, I admit I was quite skeptical. Could we really identify “ordinary” Romans? Could one determine what non-élite viewers “thought” of art when no literary record of this exists? Was it possible to know what role “art” therefore played in their lives? Could we actually isolate any criteria for identifying non-élite works of art? I was suspicious: wasn’t the whole project somewhat reminiscent of the faintly supercilious study of “plebeian” art in the late 1960s, when “real” Roman art was the art of the élite?
By the end of the book, I was convinced that the answers to the above questions were yes, yes, yes, yes, and no. John Clarke, with the meticulous yet innovative scholarship that made Looking at Lovemaking: Constructions of Sexuality in Roman Art, 100 B.C. – A.D. 250 such a must-read for historians of Roman sexual mentalité, has produced another original and provocative book … Clarke admits that there is scant literary evidence for ordinary viewers’ reactions to art, and thus feels entitled to utilize a healthy dose of historical imagination. (This may seem problematic to traditional scholars, but this is in fact essential: done prudently, such hypothesizing is invaluable in the study of ancient mentalité, as it can illuminate primary materials and enhance the understanding of historical processes.) …
To my mind, the most fascinating chapter is Chapter 6 (“Laughter and Subversion in the Tavern: Image, Text and Context”) … [in one tavern picture] the unknown artist attributed advice concerning bowel-movement techniques to the Seven Sages: likely, as Clarke states, a hilarious send-up of élite culture.
