DANTE
This week we discussed Dante's Inferno (Book I of his Divine Comedy). I was surprised to have enjoyed this poem. Before this course started Lauren and I looked at a copy of the book and it looked very daunting. The poetry and the imagery made it quite an interesting read. I'm not sure I would have called it a comedy myself but the translator explains it in his introduction writing:
a "tragedy" begins in tranquility but comes to a sad end, and a "comedy" begins under adverse circumstances, but always has a happy ending
Stephen mentioned some background and then we discussed several questions.
The classical writings had been lost for a period of time but scholars were digging through old librairies to find the writings of ancient greek and roman thinkers. The Inferno merges the medieval world with the classics (such as Virgil's Aeneid and the writings of Aristotle). Power was shifting to the middle class (mercantile often) at the expense of feudalism. Some thinkers (Thomas Aquinas) were starting to reconcile Aristotelian thought with Christian teachings and this spurred interest in ancient texts.
Is the poem a theological text or could Dante be mocking or satirizing biblical teachings (or the church)?
The general thought was that Dante certainly had contempt for the church as it was at the time (with corruption, power grabs etc). Inferno deals very severely with simonists etc but he is also very severe with many other sinners. Overall though, Inferno is a very serious vision of what happens after death and was intended to let people know what they could expect if they did not live their lives according to the precepts of the bible or Catholic Church.
What is Dante saying about imagination, the idea of sin, power hierarchies and religion?
The numerous and detailed divisions in the Inferno are very important. For example the vestibule with the castle was a way to try and reconcile good and wise people who happened to be non-Christian (many because they pre-dated the birth of Christ so one can hardly blame them for not being Christian since christianity did not even exist) and the Church's strict teachings that only the baptised could hope to make it to Paradise (via Purgatory) and all others would be automatically consigned to Hell.
Stephen mentioned how the Europeans in the Middle Ages learned about Aristotle and his teachings from the Arabs.
We discussed the proposition in Mark Musa's introduction, that the Pilgrim (Dante) symbolically participates in each type of sin during his journey. If this is true, it was likely because he was supposed to be learning about sins, not sympathizing with the sinners (as he did with the lovers Francesca and Paolo). The purpose was to renounce the sins.
We also discussed the hierarchy of the sins and whether these would hold true today. In general we felt that they wouldn't all be considered the same today - most notably, today's society has much less tolerance for violence so these sins would be lower down - with the exception of suicide which would likely not be considered as harshly as in the 1300s. Deep at the bottom would be people like Robert Mugabe, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Hitler, as well as serial killers, mass murderers, pedophiles, domestic abusers etc. There was a general feeling that the worse sins would be violence against the vulnerable. We discussed whether treachery an dishonesty would be considered as vile as in the 1300s. Some people felt that it was almost expected people will lie, and politics was mentioned. I think that people still want honesty and usually expect honesty but most people do feel a little cynical and so if someone turns out to be dishonest or a cheater (Lance Armstrong springs immediately to mind) we are very disappointed and angry but there is a part of us inside saying "You can't trust anybody".
It would be an interesting exercise in a large group to get people to list sins (and see what would and wouldn't be classified as a sin these days) and then to rank them.
RUMI
In contrast, our other text this week was Rumi's poetry. I don't know much about Sufi-ism but these poems were a jarring contrast to Dante's world view. Stephen gave us a brief overview of the ancient picture in the Middle East with the Shi'ites, Sunnis (more fundamentalist muslims) and how the Sufis fit in (as mystics). Interestingly this was the time of Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes whose invasions were the impetus for Rumi's family to leave Afganistan and head towards Persia.
We spoke about how mysticism tends to become popular in times of political unrest and turmoil. People want to turn inwards and seek out states of communion with God.
People read various favourite poems and Gordon suggested an interesting exercise which was for everyone to read a line from a poem, going around in a circle, one line each read without any comment or hesitation and you go around until the poem has been read aloud 3 times. We read A HOUSE FOR THE NAKED this way and it was amazingly powerful and moving. It was interesting to hear every ones voice, each different and also to hear how the way people read changed each subsequent time around. I wish I could have recorded it. Something I'd like to try again in a large group. It also really made you listen to the poem.
No comments:
Post a Comment