To write is to participate in one of the most human things to do; to create literature is to bestow a human gift to the world. As a true believer in that idea, I am thrilled when I come across works dedicated to the study and craft of literature. How could we, as a species, not devote ourselves to developing one of our unique creations in this world? There is a deep history in the progression of our perspectives of literature and our connectivity to that creation and the people who make it. It is in the nature of seeking human-to-human connection that Ars Poetica is written, as Horace dedicates his epistle to the Piso family, yet functionally seeks to advise all poets. What attracts so many to the poem is not only Horace’s influential advice but also his dedication to balance and harmony. The heart of the poem lies in its call for harmony, unity, and restraint when crafting poetry. Horace does not seek to dissuade poets from the craft, rather, he highlights the benefits of harmonizing with the world and humanity, and warns of excess and inauthenticity when approaching literature from the place of a writer, and human.

            Written as an epistle, Ars Poetica offers a degree more of intimacy as it was not intended to reach such a wide and historical audience as it has achieved. He can write with purpose directly to a known audience, explaining as much as he needs to explain and being succinct when necessary. He does so at the very start of the epistle, encouraging imagination and critical thinking by inviting the reader to imagine a painter creating a grotesque combination of many animals and humans, ending his introduction with a crisp first lesson: “The point is, whatever you’re making, it should be unified and coherent” (134). His very first lesson is to teach unity—to establish the necessity of balance and coherence in whatever a writer designs to make. He provides a warning against both extremes in doing the most or doing too little, advising, “Aiming at grandeur, you become turgid; over-cautious and fearful of the storm, you creep along the ground” (134). Horace removes any notion of bias regarding those who take risks with a greater approach or those who write following strict guidelines and with little risks. Both approaches are equally disruptive to the art of poetry. He incorporates the example of investing too much in a subject leading to placing a dolphin in the woods, or a boar in water, signifying the dangerous imbalance of nature when things are not unified. On the other end, avoiding blame or taking stances yields flaws, further dismantling the artistic value of poetry.

            The risk of imbalance leads to his emphasis on writing to your strengths; and to be authentic to your craft by being honest with yourself. Horace offers, “When you write, choose material to match your strengths, and long consider what your shoulders refuse to bear and what they will. The writer who selects according to his abilities will lack neither style nor a clear arrangement” (134). He highlights the importance of self-awareness and having the capacity to understand what a writer can feasibly achieve with their writing. This authenticity is critical for maintaining balance since, to Horace, it would guarantee a work that has sufficient style and arrangement. It offers a perfect starting point for a poet, or any writer, as it contextualizes the effort it takes to create literature and how much it depends on the writer. If the writer cannot be honest and effectively use their strengths, they cannot hope to produce quality work that is unified and coherent.

            The unification and coherence of poetry can only drive the pen so far until a poet must decide the impact the work strives to achieve. Horace writes brilliantly about what poetry should be doing. He states, “It is not enough that poetry be noble: it should impart delight, and transport the listener as it likes. As people’s faces respond with laughter to those who laugh, so do they cry in response to those who cry” (136). Horace values the interconnectivity of poetry and that, when done well, has the power to inspire emotions in readers. Such a harmonious process is cultivated through careful planning and workshopping; with the poet willing to immerse themself into the subject they write about. He goes on to say, “If you want me to cry, you must first cry yourself” (136). This is such a powerful statement as it actively places the writer as an audience member as well. They must inject themselves with the material, live with, and react to it as readers who journey into and experience a written work. Horace emphasizes the humanness and importance of writing, as well as the power of literature beyond just bringing pen to paper. These emotions play such a vital role in appealing to our human nature—collectively and individually—as we respond to literature. Horace shares:

First, you see, Nature shapes us within for every aspect of life’s fortunes. She gives us pleasure, or drives us to wrath, or brings us to earth with the profound anguish of grief. Afterwards she brings out the heart’s emotions with the tongue as their interpreter. If a speaker’s words are not consonant with his fortunes, the people (both horse and foot) will burst out laughing! (136)

To Horace, a deep understanding of nature is vital for poetry to be fully realized. He covers the emotions innate within us, the emotions that must be channeled into the work of literature to bring it out within readers. Therefore, it is imperative to study and be tuned to the emotions and natures of all kinds of people. This shifts Horace to focus on the characters—the imitations of humans—and how to make them live up to the reality of humanity.

            The humanity of art becomes increasingly relevant as Horace explains the importance of maintaining consistency with a character. As previously cited, a character becomes unbelievable if they do not speak in a way authentic to their backstory, or fortunes. His focus on the mouth—of our audible form of communication—is central to the way we express emotion, placing high demand for a poet to ensure they are well connected to the world around them (as relevant to the subject), and the real people who occupy it. His lessons thus indicate a necessity to be in harmony with the world and humanity as one cannot be ignorant and expect to elevate their work involving human characters, or human emotions. He delves deeper into the complexities of just an individual and the development of life. Horace eloquently writes: “You have to observe the characteristics of each age, and attribute proper behaviour to impulsive natures and years… A characters will always dwell upon what is inseparable from, and suited to, his age” (137). This advice is vital in long-form work that typically follow a character throughout many stages of their life. A poet writing such content would need to craft their characters with such visceral details as their response to plot developments and conflicts won’t solely rely on their logical reactions, but deep emotional and instinctual responses as well. These actions need to be imitated as authentically as possible or else the character won’t seem believable and, therefore, not respected by the readers.

            To maintain respect with readers requires consistency and restraint that aligns with the genre of a chosen work. Horace outlines the importance of understanding the nature of the subject that is being written and ensuring the proper way the characters and the narrative itself are communicated. He affirms that different techniques should not always be used across different genres. For example, he warns, “Tragedy despises all chatter in light verses, and will be too ashamed (like a matron bidden to dance on holidays) to mix with wanton satyrs!” (138). Tragedy and comedy should not mix to the point where characters and the narration suffer due to the injection of unnecessary techniques or tropes. In his example of tragedy, dialogue should not occur during light verses or mixed with humorous tones. However, he acknowledges the achievements of his fellow Roman poets and that they’ve been able to move past the literary standards of Greek poets. Horace appreciates the risks Roman poets have taken, and that they are willing to write about subjects including the daily lives of their people—of the mundane and ordinary—yet giving it the respect as if it was an epic or out-of-the-ordinary tale. Ultimately, every poet who is serious about their work must dedicate themselves to proper reflection and editing. He directly advises, “As for you, O offspring of Pompilian blood, rebuke the poem not disciplined through many a day and many an erasure, and not trimmed off and ten times smoothed to the nail!” (140). He is saying that works that are not thoroughly refined and edited with the respect they deserve should not be respected by the people. Inconsistencies and errors are a natural consequence of mismanagement and an incorrect approach toward the writing process. Therefore, Horace is transparent with the connectivity of poetry, and treating it with the respect it deserves reflects the respect a poet should have for the craft, and for the people who engage with it.

            Horace delves deeper into his lessons as he shifts the focus to the dynamics among humans and the many natures and qualities people have, and understanding an individual’s place in it. One of the fundamental abilities of the writing process is the ability to judge the characters of the people around them, and the poet to recognize their place in the world. That cultivates a level of unity and harmony that enhances not only the quality of the poetry but also of the poet. Everything surrounding literature works to grow all the humans involved with it, whether the writer, the critic, or the reader—everyone’s role is something to be respected and treated as authentically as possible. Horace injects this into a real-life lesson about developing character roles in a written work. He states:

Correct writing finds its beginning and source in discernment. Socratic scrolls can show you your subject matter, and when that has been planned ahead, the words will follow without reluctance. The person who has learned what he owes to country and friends— what regard he should have for parent, brother, and guest, what a senator’s duty is and a judge’s, the role of a general sent into battle— certainly knows how to assign the appropriate qualities to each character. (140)

Horace writes that a writer must have good judgment to discern the people and personalities of the world. Doing so would enable a seamless translation of those living individuals into literary icons—cementing a living legacy into a literary one. By having your finger on the pulse of the world around you, the touch of reality can easily be transposed onto the paper. Horace excels at offering valid life advice in teaching the importance of self-awareness and recognizing the roles people have, including the poet. This immersion of human dynamics serves to provide appropriate qualities and characteristics that bring dimension and depth to fictional characters. Doing so supports the other lessons imparted by Horace, such as keeping consistency with a character’s actions, behaviors appropriate to their age and fortune, and the way they speak throughout their narrative journey. Horace thrives in interconnecting the different aspects involved in creating poetry, artfully mapping the writing process while highlighting the complex links among humans in the real world.

            Ars Poetica develops further outside of the confines of literature and bridges the importance of poetry harmonizing with the real world. Life is the greatest source of inspiration and thus deserves to be respected for the creativity, imagination, and art born from it. Horace develops the importance of balancing accuracy with the ability to connect to, entertain, and educate readers. He observes:

Poets wish either to benefit or delight, or else say things at once pleasant and suited to life. Whatever your precepts, be brief, so that people’s minds may grasp what you say quickly and easily and retain it faithfully. All excess overflows from a mind that’s full. Things fashioned to give plea sure should be very close to reality. (141)

He homes in on the goals of a poet: to benefit and teach important life lessons, or delight and entertain. Despite being seemingly simplified, both goals require a lot of practice and dedication. Yet, as a means to not overwhelm or deter would-be writers, Horace emphasizes the importance of simplicity. A writer cannot overwhelm a reader with so much detail—they must be mindful of the audience’s limits when they are writing. Excess is dangerous as it overwhelms the mind and ruins the union that bonds a reader to the poetry. Writing efficiently and succinctly is especially important when a writer strives to impart knowledge or inspire an emotion in another human. Keeping the subject as close to reality allows it to be digestible to readers. As to not dissuade experimentation and trying new things out, Horace recommends that mixing the “useful” with the “sweet” is a concoction for success (141). This is a stark difference from his warnings of mixing aspects of genres like tragedy and comedy, as aiming to teach and entertain is a respectable and fruitful goal for any writer, actively contributing to the legacy and fame of an author.

            The human need to succeed and develop a legacy is satiated by Horace’s calls for the best of poetry. Without mincing his words, Horace places poets on a high pedestal. So much so, that there is great pressure for them to succeed; the role of the poet is not for the meek or lazy. To him, “a poem, created and revealed to give our hearts delight, approaches the worst if it falls short of the best” (141). Poets cannot be given passes for flaws, failures, or inconsistencies in their work. Their poetry is either the best or the worst. There is no in-between. Horace does not underestimate the importance of the poet—after all, Ars Poetica has succeeded in highlighting all the ways a poet is responsible for crafting the art and beauty of humanity into poetry. Such a task is not easily ignored or disrespected; it deepens the responsibility it has for a poet to succeed in their imitation—their representation—of humanity. However, Horace is fair in addressing the diversity of art and how humans interact with it. He offers the comparison of, “A poem is like a picture. One will captivate you if you stand closer, one if you stand further away. This one favours shadow; that one will want to be seen in daylight if it is not to dread the edge of a critic’s tongue. This one pleased just once, this one will after ten visits” (141). There is no one correct way to create a poem. Each poem will require different circumstances to be appreciated. Some appreciate a close reading, others a causal, surface-level read. A poem may only be read once and be thoroughly enjoyed and absorbed by its themes and lessons, another may need to be revisited multiple times with attention paid to different details each read-through. The further comparison to the art of a picture validates the art of poetry and the art of our humanity.

            When something is considered art, it represents all steps and forms of the creative process. To round out his legendary epistle, Horace finishes with a focus on the collaborative nature of the writing process, educating on the necessary steps and precautions to develop a balanced and efficient creative workshop. Collaboration is at the heart of all things human as Horace notes, “For my part I don’t see what dedication can achieve without a rich vein of talent—or, for that matter, untrained inspiration. The one calls for the resources of the other and makes a friendly collaboration with it” (142). He highlights the unity of dedication and talent—how the two collaborate to produce the artistic gifts the world thoroughly deserves.

            Collaboration is important as Horace proves with the existence of Ars Poetica, an epistle that helps advise poets in their craft. He offers critical advice on how and when to approach other people to seek their advice or reactions to a work. He warns:

Don’t introduce him to your verses when he’s sated with happiness… Just as hired mourners at a funeral say and do more than those who are grieving from the heart, in the same way a mocker makes more of a show than the man whose praise is sincere… If you compose poems, the sentiments that lurk beneath the skin should never deceive you (143)

When getting a second opinion, to go to someone who is already feeling the emotion written about does so much harm to the poem. Horace equates that method to the hired mourners or mockers at a funeral or show that purposely act into the emotions required in the environment around them. It’s unnatural and counterintuitive to the power of poetry; it disrespects the art of poetry and the capabilities of humans to both create art that speaks to people and those who can connect to the work. An ideal poet will be able to notice such deception, actively avoid such people, and seek the confidence of those who would be authentic. It benefits all parties involved and contributes to the productive harmony of the poetic and literary craft.

            As a final testament to Horace’s master intuition, he acknowledges those who would don the mantle of “poet” that may not necessarily fit the mold (which is inherently not always a bad thing). With his push for surrounding yourself with a supportive, authentic, and honest support group, Horace turns the lens back to the poet and the necessary characteristics they need to succeed in the craft. Citing Quintilius’ method of criticism, Horace mentions how he would say nothing to poets insistent on defending a mistake in their poetry. Such a stubborn and defensive approach is not suitable for the art and the spirit of human collaboration, and should rightfully be ignored and unsupported according to Horace. The ideal critic “will rebuke verses lacking craftsmanship, fault harsh ones, put a black oblique stroke of the pen next to your sloppy ones, cut back ambitious adornment, force you to illuminate what is unclear, reproach you for an ambiguous statement, censure what should be altered” (143). The types of criticisms a poet needs are those that call out blemishes in the craftsmanship of their verses and lines, contributing to the synergistic process of crafting the best poem possible with the perspective of fellow humans living and responding to their work. A poem will not thrive whether the criticisms or the poet lacks. When there is a positive balance between the two, a poem has no choice but to excel beyond expectations and exemplify human art.

            At last, Horace pours both warnings and respect into “mad” poets. These types of poets, to him, may not fit the mold but offer something deeply unique and worth protecting. He is honest with his assertions that such poets should be avoided and left alone as “The young and impetuous flush him out and chase after him” (143). Those in the public who are too inexperienced and impulsive are quick to criticize and disregard those deemed “mad,” not considering what their art has to offer. Horace admires the lifestyle of the poet—the dedication to their art that drives them to the point of this “madness.” In discussing the passion for legacy and immortality—something literature is capable of offering—Horace affirms any poet who seeks to live a life that speaks to their passions no matter how volatile or dangerous. He states, “Poets should have that right—let them perish! To save someone against his will is like murder” (143). Ultimately, poets should have the right to follow their passions—inspiring a life in which a poet’s life is art, and their very humanity is art. Such a lifestyle is the right of the poet for it is the life that bridges the art of poetry to the art of humanity.

             Ars Poetica succeeds in showcasing the brilliance of Horace and the life of the poet—of the writer. Horace graces the epistle with lessons exploring the nature of art and literature, and the humanness of the poem. Horace is careful to offer important lessons in crafting literature while relaying the dangers of inauthenticity and writing with excess, or with little to say. Ars Poetica is pushed beyond just a literary guideline as under the surface lies serious life lessons that promotes growth and interconnectivity on a personal level. The very nature of Ars Poetica epitomizes the harmony between humanity and literature, and how developing literature aligns with the development of a person. Dedication, passion, and talent will cultivate a deep unity with the craft of poetry, and the writer’s ability to connect with the world. To create art is to live, and to live is to create art. Truly, to write is to participate in one of the most human things to do.

Works Cited

Horace. “Ars Poetica.” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, 3rd ed., edited by Vincent B Leitch, W.W Norton and Co., 2018, pp. 133-144.