The erotic situations are always either sculptural or pictorial, but two people speiaiking together about their love is neither sculptural nor pictorial. But the solid engaged couple always begin with such chitchat, which goes on to become the thread that holds their loquacious marriage together. This chitchat is also the beginning of the dowry Ovid mentions: dos est uxoria lites [the dowry of a wife is quarreling] and the guarantee that their marriage will not lack it. -If there must be speaking, it is sufficient that one person does it. The man should do the speaking and therefore ought to possess some of the powers in the girdle of Venus with which she beguiled: conversation and sweet flattery, that is, the power to ingratiate. -It by no means follows that Eros is mute, or that it would be erotically improper to converse, provided that the conversation itself is erotic and does not wander off into edifying observations on life's prospects etc. and that the conversation is actually regarded as a respite from the erotic action, a diversion, not as the ultimate. Such a conversation, such a confabulatio [fantasizing together], is entirely divine by nature, and I can never become bored conversing with a young girl. That is, I can become weary of a particular young girl, but never of conversing with a young girl. That is just as impossible for me as it is to become weary of breathing. What is really the distinctive characteristic of such speaking together is the vegetative flowering of conversation. The conversation keeps contact with the earth, has no actual subject; the accidental is the law of its movements-but daisy [Tusindfryd, thousand delights] is its name and the name of what it produces.
Hitz egin behar baldin bada, nahikoa da batek egitea. Gizonak hitz egin behar du, eta horretarako Venusek gerrikoan zeramatzan eta liluratzeko erabiltzen zituen ahalmen batzuk izan behar ditu; solasa eta lausengu eztia, hau da, limurtzeko ahalmena. Honek ez du esan nahi Eros mutua denik, inola ere ez, edo ikuspuntu erotikotik hitz egitea oker dagoenik; hori bai, solasak berak izan behar du erotikoan egindako atsedentzat hartu behar da, denborapasatzat, ez funtsezkotzat. Halako solasa, halako confabulatio bat , guztiz jainkotiarra da berez, eta ez naiz sekula aspertzen neska gazte batekin solasean ari naizenean. Hau da, agian neska zehatz horretaz aspertuko naiz, baina inoiz ez neskarekin hitz egiteaz. Niretzat arnasa hartzeaz aspertzea bezain ezinezkoa da. Halako elkarrizketaren benetako ezaugarria da solasaren loratze begetatiboa. Solasak lurrari eusten dio, objektu zehatzik izan gabe; bere mugimenduetan agintzen duen legea kasualitatea da, baina bitxilorea da bere izena, baita bere fruituarena ere.