MLLL
4063 / 5063 2008:
Early Literary Criticism
(U of Oklahoma, Fall 2008)

Prof. A.
Robert Lauer
Notes for the course based on
Adams, Hazard & Leroy Searle, eds. Critical
Theory
since Plato. 3rd. ed. Australia; [Boston, Mass.] United
States: Thomson/Wadsworth, 2005. ISBN: 0155055046.
INTRODUCTION:
- The Early Period: From Plato (400s bC) to 1870.
- The main themes in the history of Western civilization from
Plato to
Kant.
- The vigorous and dynamic quality of imaginative thinking.
- The history of literary criticism and theory has always
been
intertwined
with that of philosophy.
- The relation of rhetorical theory to poetics (for the first
time).
- Chronological, not topical, ordering.
The history of Western criticism begins with a quarrel over the
word imitatio (mimesis).
The history of philosophy and of literary thought can be
divided into
four major phases:
- The Ontological (spans
2000 years:
Plato-Renaissance: 400s bC-16th Cen): addresses the nature of Being
(for
Plato, Being’s location is in the eternal ideas of forms) and
verisimilitude.
- The Epsitemological
(spans 300
years:
Descartes, Locke: 17th. Cen.-20th Cen): addresses the question of
knowing
(what and how we know), obviously a prior question to that of
Being.
René Descartes: cogito ergo sum; Francis Bacon’s
experimentalism;
John Locke’s empiricism: secondary (subjective) experiences and primary
(objective) qualities of experiences (ascertainable and real through
measurement).
Knowledge became identical with the results of the scientific
method.
Immanuel Kant’s “subjective universality” in his theory of aesthetics.
- The Linguistic (spans
200 years:
late
19th Cen.-1960s): Man is a linguistic or symbol-making animal (and
literature
is composed of language [and rhetoric helps one to employ language for
specific ends or effects]). Can what we call knowing occur apart
from language or other symbols like mathematics? Language plays a role
in the way reality appears to us. No longer did language imitate
some prior entity or idea; language makes those entities or at least
establishes
the limits within which these entities exist for us. Thinkers
like
Ferdinand de Saussure, Roland Barthes, Claude Lévi-Strauss,
Jacques
Derrida have studied language as a system or structure.
Deconstruction
is a critique of the structuralist position (wherein what matters is
not
substance but sets of pure relations among things; these relations or
the
“difference” between things became real, not the things
themselves.
Language was merely a system of differences, each linguistic unit
definable
in terms of its difference from all the other units in the system, not
in terms of its relation to an object beyond it) by alleging there is
no
“center” or grounding point on which to anchor thought; hence, meaning
has no origin. Meaning is an infinite regression and
interpretation,
a philosophical impossibility, and which produced irresolvable
contradictions
or aporias. Deconstruction was the culmination in theory of the
Linguistic
mode.
- The Phase of Political Moralism
(since
the 1960s): the phase of political and cultural critique. A
Marxist-derived
social criticism. Critiques of colonialism and racism.
Feminism
and queer theory: gender theories. Grounded on a certain set of
moral
principles connected with theories of power; set to bring about social
change. Here, literary texts are studied almost exclusively as
documents
for social analysis.
PLATO (c. 427-c. 347 BC):
He was a student of Socrates and founder of the Academy in
Athens.
He is the major figure in the history of Western philosophy. He
is
the earliest of thinkers to discuss poetry at length. He writes
dialogues
in dramatic form. He bequeaths to literary criticism the theory
of
imitation or mimesis, dominant in literary criticism until well into
the
18th century. Plato has Socrates locate reality in what he calls
the ideas or forms rather than in the world of appearances or phenomena
experienced through the senses. Objects we perceive are merely
copies
of their ideas. It is only by means of our rational power
exercised
in dialectical search than can advance us toward truth. In the
Phaedrus
he states there is the divine madness of the poet, who becomes inspired
when he imitates appearances (thusly being twice removed from
reality).
The poet is to be exiled from the Republic, although he can redeem
himself
by singing the praises of the gods and famous statesmen.
Rhetoricians
and sophists are sinister creatures because they deliberately delude
and
gain illicit power over their listeners.
Besides imitation (as connected with the theory of forms),
imitation
in a technical sense is in the Republic (composed in 373 BC):
- A “pure imitative form” (as in drama), where the poet has
others
speak;
- Pure narrative (where the poet speaks always in his own
voice);
and
- A mixture of the two (as in epic).
In the Sophist, the second
type
of imitation is described as of two types:
- Icastic (an imitation
with the aim
of making a likeness) and
- Phantastic (an
imitation
of imagined
things or the making of mere appearances).
In the Ion (an early
dialogue,
from 390 BC), Socrates critiques the critic (rhapsode [professional
reciter
and commentator of epic poetry], actor) for allegedly claiming he knows
everything about Homer’s works. Ion is merely irrational (mad)
and
divinely inspired. For Socrates, a poem is its content (not its
structure).
Plato is the founder of moralistic and didactic
criticism. He
separates content from form, privileging content.
The Cratylus (from
Plato’s
Middle Period) treats the elusiveness of language.
ION (390 BC, an
early dialogue):
Socrates and Ion (dialogists).
Socrates assumes Ion, as a rhapsode, knows
Homer’s works well and, hence, is able to interpret him. But Ion
claims he only knows Homer well, not others. Socrates claims Ion
knows Homer’s works without art or knowledge then, for as a rhapsode he
would know the rules of art. Ion says he loves to hear wise men
talk
(11). Socrates says poets are wise; men like Socrates only speak
the truth. Socrates says Ion is divinely inspired; he lacks
art.
The Muse inspires men. Good poets compose not by art but by
divine
inspiration and possession. Poets are not in their right minds
when
they compose. There is no invention in poets until they are
divinely
inspired. If Ion could speak about all poets then he would have
learned
art by rules, but since he only claims to know Homer he must be
divinely
inspired. God (like Bacchus) uses him as he would a diviner or
prophet.
Socrates says that the spectator is the last of the rings which receive
the power of the original magnet from one another (12). The rhapsode
and
the actor are intermediate links. The poet is the first of them
(the
birth of reception theory). Socrates says that he who has no
knowledge
of a particular art will have no judgment of the sayings and doings of
that art (hence, a carpenter, a general, a charioteer, a medic, would
know
Homer’s art better than the rhapsode). Socrates calls Ion a
deceiver
(15) for claiming he knows Homer’s works. He is like Proteus and
takes many shapes. He has no knowledge. He is only a
simulacrum
(Baudrillard). Either he is dishonest or divinely inspired.
Ion chooses the latter.
REPUBLIC (373
BC):
A disquisition on justice, which is either a) what is to the advantage
of the powerful [Thrasymachus] or b) [Socrates] related to the good,
and
the ideal statem the Republic.
BOOK TWO: Socrates &
Adeimantus:
A disquisition on the education of the heroes: 1) gymnastics for the
body
and 2) music (poetry/literature) for the soul. Literature (for
children)
must be good, not bad. Therefore, censors should accept the
former
and reject the latter (16). There are two types of lie: 1) the
good
lie (on behalf of the preservation of the state [apology of
propaganda])
and 2) the bad lie (which constitutes an erroneous representation of
the
nature of gods and heroes). Stories of pity and lamentation, of
quarrels,
or of the nasty doings of the gods, should be excised or passed over in
silence. Even if we attribute an allegorical meaning to them
(17),
they should not be admitted into the State, for a young person cannot
judge
what is allegorical and what is literal. The tales which the
young
first hear should be models of virtuous thoughts (17).
God is always to be represented as he truly
is (truly good). Evil should not be attributed to God (17).
God cannot change (he cannot take other forms). Mothers should
not
tell scary stories to children, for fear of making them into cowards
(19).
A good lie is a form of medicine (19), not harmful but healthy.
The
superhuman and divine is absolutely incapable of falsehood. God
is
perfectly simple and good in word and deed. He does not deceive
by
sign, word, dream, or vision (19). The gods are not magicians who
deceive mankind by transforming themselves. The teachers and
guardians
of the young must be true worshippers of the gods themselves (they must
be moral themselves) [20].
BOOK THREE: Socrates,
Adeimantus,
Glaucon: Such (above) are the principles of theology: some tales
are to be told, others not, so that youth honor the gods and their
parents.
Also, the tales about the miseries of the
dead must be expunged so that soldiers will not fear death and would
choose
death in battle rather than defeat and slavery. These stories
must
be excised not because they are unpoetic or unattractive but because
the
more poetic and charming they are the less they are meant to be for
young
boys and men who are raised to be free rather than slaves. They
should
not fear death. It’s not that those passages don’t have a use of
some kind, but there is the danger that the nerves of the guardians
would
be rendered too excitable and effeminate by them. The
weeping
and wailing of famous men should also be excised, for the good man will
not consider death terrible. This stuff is meant for (some) women
and baser men.
Men should be raised to feel shame and
self-control
(22); they should not whine and lament. Guardians should not
laugh
excessively either. Nor should the gods be shown as capable of
great
laughter. Truth should be highly valued instead. Only the
guardians
of the state should have the privilege of lying for the sake of the
public
good. Youths should be temperate, that is, obey their
commanders
and exercise self-control in sensual pleasures (22). Youth should
hear tales of endurance by famous men. They should not be
raised
to be receivers of gifts or have them love money (23). Hero
worship
(24). Tales of cowardice or vice engender laxity of morals.
Poets must not tell youth that the wicked are happy and the good
miserable,
or that injustice is profitable when undetected (socialist
realism?).
The above constituted the subject (content)
of poetry. Now the style (24). All mythology and poetry is
a narration of events, either past, present, or future. There is
simply narration (drama) or a union of the two (epic). When the
poet
is the only speaker, that is the dithyramb. The combination of
both
(the poet speaks, then the characters) is the epic (25). Should
tragedy
and comedy be admitted in the state? Youth should imitate early
on
only those characters who are courageous, temperate, holy, and free;
they
should avoid illiberality or baseness, for fear they would become that
way, for imitation grows into habits and become a second nature,
affecting
body, voice, and mind (a theory of education and morality here)
[26].
Good men should not imitate women or sickness, love, or labor.
They
should not represent slaves, male or female. They should not
represent
bad men, or cowards, or the mad, or the bad. They should not
imitate
artificers or other workers. They should not imitate the neighing
of horses, the barking of dogs, or other animals. They should not
copy the actions or speech of madmen. He should use the same
style
and keep within the limits of a single harmony and make use of nearly
the
same rhythm (26).
Music (27) has three parts: words, melody,
and rhythm. Notes of sorrow should be elided and not allowed to
the
youth, even to women of character. Sensuous harmonies, and ones
suggesting
softness, drunkenness, and indolence, are unbecoming of our
guardians.
Military music is fine (27). Simple (harp, lyre = Apollo)
music; no flutes (Marsyas). Keep melody simple. Rhythms
should
be simple and suggest courage and harmony; adapt the music to words of
the same spirit (not the words to the melody) [Wagner’s music].
Eliminate
rhythms expressive of meanness, insolence, fury, or other
unworthiness.
Good rhythm and harmony are regulated by the words (not the words by
them).
Beauty of style and harmony and grace and good rhythm depend on
simplicity
(28). [The beautiful for Socrates is what is mathematically
proportionate].
Ugliness and discord and inharmonious motion are allied to ill words
and
ill nature, as grace and harmony are the twin sisters of goodness and
virtue
(29).
The above rules affect other arts like
architecture
and sculpture. Mora deformity should be excised. It
corrupts.
Our youth should dwell in the land of health, amid fair sights and
sounds,
and receive the good in everything, and beauty, that should flow into
the
eye and ear, and draw the soul into likeness and sympathy with the
beauty
of reason. Musical training is essential, for it imparts grace
and
predisposes the soul to the good and the beautiful. Youth must
learn
to hate the bad (the ugly, the infirm) early on. A musical
education
is essential (29).
BOOK X: Socrates, Glaucon: The
rule
about poetry (30). Theory of imitation (what things have in
common
with an innate idea). Artificers do not make ideas; they copy
them.
There are three objects of imitation (a bed): the idea of bed made by
God,
the work of a carpenter, and the work of a painter (a semblance of
existence).
God made one real (not particular) bed in nature out of choice or
necessity.
The artifice makes a particular bed. The painter makes a
semblance
only. The artist (poet) is therefore thrice removed from the
truth.
The poet cannot compose well unless he knows his subject. He
deals
with appearances only and not realities (31). The poet is like a
painter: he can only copy images of virtue but can never reach the
truth.
There are three arts concerned with all
things:
a) one which uses, b) one which makes, and c) one which imitates.
Imitation is only a kind of play or sport. The poet does not
appeal
to reason but to the senses and passions (what is easily imitated)
[35].
His creations have an inferior degree of truth. He impairs reason
(trompe l’oeil). It stirs the emotions instead of
controlling
them. Poetry feeds and waters the passions instead of drying them
up. Homer is great but we should only admit in the state hymns to
the gods and praises of famous men. Law and reason must reign,
not
pleasure and pain (35). We are aware of poetry charms, but we
should
not betray truth (36). Poetry has no use, only delight.
Justice
and virtue might suffer on account of the delight of poetry.
PHAEDRUS: Socrates
and Phaedrus.
There are two types of madness: 1) One produced by human infirmity and
2) A divine release of the soul from yoke of custom and convention: a)
prophetic (inspired by Apollo), b) initiatory (Dionysus), c) poetic
(the
Muses), and d) erotic (Aphrodite and Venus), the best kind of madness
(36).
Poetic madness gives not truth but the semblance of truth (37).
Writing
is like painting. Once something is painted or written, it
remains
silent.
SOPHIST: Theaetetus
&
Socrates. The sophist (rhetorician) has a sort of conjectural or
apparent knowledge only of all things, which is not the truth
(38).
He is a magician and mimic (39). There are two divisions to the
imitative
art: 1) the icastic (the art of likeness-making) and 2) the phantastic
(the art of making things that do not exist). Phantastic art
produces
an appearance and not an image (i.e., a statue that is placed atop a
building
and must be designed disproportionately to be seen proportionately by
those
below). Neither of them has being, though.
PHILEBUS:
Protarchus, Philebus,
Socrates.
CRATYLUS: Socrates,
Hermogenes,
Cratylus. Does the correct name indicate the nature of the thing?
Names are given in order to instruct. Naming is an art. The
legislators make the names (41). The right assignment of names is
truth; the wrong assignment, falsehood (42). But is there a right
or wrong assignment of verbs and sentences? Do appropriate
letters
and syllables produce a god image, a name? Would the subtraction
or addition of letters or syllables make up a good or bad name?
Is
the legislator, like other artists, then good and bad? Can one
name
be correctly and another incorrectly given? But if so, shouldn’t
names correspond to the objects represented by them?
Maybe only the general character of the thing described should be
retained?
So the, a name is not the expression of a thing in letters or
syllables?
Is a name a representation of a thing? Are nouns primitive or
derived?
Are primitive nouns first nouns and representations of things? Is
Hermogenes correct when he says that names are conventional and have no
meaning to those who have agreed about them? Is convention the
only
principle? (43). Is representation by likeness sufficient? Do
some
words express motion, hardness, smoothness, softness, and the like
(onomatopoeia).
Do we understand words by custom only? Is custom
convention?
So then the correctness of a name turns out to be merely a convention
(i.e.,
not truth)? [44]. Is the signification of words given by
custom
and not by likeness? Custom and convention are supposed to
contribute
to the indication of our thoughts? It would be wonderful to use
likeness
to justify the appropriateness of language, but it seems custom rules
[44].
The first legislator named things according to his conception of
things.
But could he have been wrong in his conception of things? (Ontological
crisis here). Custom could then be based on an error (not
truth).
All things seem to be in motion (Heraclitus). If not static, how
can word define them? (i.e., words must change too). The first
givers
of names had to have been legislators. Did they know the things
that
they named? (a computer mouse) [45]. Are things to be known by names
only?
(46). Were there legislators before names? A power more than
human
must have given things their first name (God?). But can the gods
contradict themselves and give erroneous names? How could things
be known without names? [Derrida: there is no source or origin,
only
infinite regress and “difference”] {46}. Socrates claims real existence
is beyond comprehension (beyond the dialectical method, beyond
ontology).
The knowledge of things is not to be derived from names. But
then,
can there be any absolute beauty or good? Especially if things
are
in flux? How can a real thing be in s state of transition?
If everything is in a state of flux, can there be real knowledge?
Socrates asks Cratylus to think like a man and when he has found the
truth
to come back to tell it to him.
ARISTOTLE (384-322 B.C):
Aristotle was a student of Plato’s during
Philip II of Macedon’s reign (Philip was the father of Alexander the
Great),
founder of the Lyceum (or Peripatetic School [Aristotle walked while he
taught] of philosophy). Aristotle’s Poetics is the most
influential
treatise on poetry in the Western world. It was lost and became
available
again to Europe during the Renaissance. His Poetics is a
treatise
on the art of making (while his Rhetoric is a practical
art).
Aristotle differs with Plato with respect to the latter’s theory of
(immutable)
forms. He denies the being of ideas apart from things.
Things
have a purpose (telos) in an ever changing universe.
Reality
is the process in which a form is manifested from matter by
nature.
The poet is an imitator and maker. In imitation the poet
discovers
the ultimate form of an action. Literary art is an improvement on
nature, for the poet brings about to completion what nature, operating
with its own principles, is still developing.
PHYSICS: Book
2, Chapter
8:
Nature acts for the sake of something (it
has a purpose). The same is true with the parts of nature (our
teeth
come out of necessity, etc.). Art completes what nature cannot
bring
to a finish and partly imitates her. Artificial and natural
products
are for the sake of an end. Nature means two things: 1) the matter
and 2) the form; the form is the end of matter. The form,
therefore, must be the cause. When an event takes place, it is
not
incidental or by chance. Purpose is always present in art or
nature,
even if we do not observe it.
METAPHYSICS: Book A
(1),
Chapters 1-2:
All men by nature desire to know. We
delight in what we take in with our senses, especially sight. By
nature animals are born with the faculty of sensation, and from
sensation
memory is produced. Animals live by appearances and memories, but
man also by art and reasoning. Memory produces experience.
Science and art come to men through experience. Experience made
art
(inexperience luck). Art arises when from many notions gained by
experience one universal judgment about a class of objects is
produced.
Experience is knowledge of individuals, art of universals.
Artists
can teach (because they have theory and know the why of things), while
men of experience cannot (they know the know-how, but not the
why).
When at leisure, man produces knowledge (especially not of a useful
kind
[theoretical knowledge, not practical]). Wisdom deals with first
causes and the principles of things.
POETICS (330 BC):
The 1) means, the 2) difference in the
objects,
and the 3) manner of their imitation (of epic poetry, tragedy, comedy,
dithyrambic poetry, and other modes of imitation). The means are
rhythm, language, and harmony. The objects the imitator
represents
are actions, with agents who are either good or bad. Manner, as
when
one narrates or dramatizes.
Drama comes from “dran” (to act), comae is
hamlets (where first performed).
The origin of poetry: imitation is natural to man from childhood.
He is the most imitative creature in the world and learns first by
imitation.
It is also natural for all to delight in works of imitation. We
delight
even in the painful and the grotesque because we learn something from
it.
To be learning something (gathering the meaning of things) is the
greatest
of all pleasures. Imitation, a sense of harmony, and rhythm, are
natural to us.
Poetry broke into two kinds: Tragedy (for
the grave and noble) and Comedy (for the mean and ignoble). They
began in improvisations (of dithyrambs for the former; phallic songs
for
the latter). Aeschylus increased the number of actors to two.
Sophocles
added a third actor. Tragedy requires magnitude, a tone of
dignity,
an iambic (not trochaic [associated with satyr plays and dancing])
meter,
and a plurality of episodes or acts.
Comedy deals with imitations of men worse
than the average; the Ridiculous is a species of the Ugly [not
productive
of pain or harm], e.g., a mask, and, at one time, invective.
Epic is narrative, action without a fixed limit of time.
Tragedy should keep as far as possible within a single circuit of the
sun
[alleged unity of time].
Definition of Tragedy: A tragedy is the imitation of an action
that is serious and has magnitude, complete in itself, in language with
pleasurable accessories (with rhythm and harmony of song), in a
dramatic
(not narrative) form, with incidents arousing pity and fear, to
accomplish
its catharsis of such emotions.
Melody and Diction are the means. The
subject represented is an action, and the action requires agents
(Character
and Thought [what agents say]). The action is represented in the
play by the Fable or Plot.
There are six parts to every tragedy: 1) Fable
or Plot, 2) Characters, 3) Diction, 4) Thought, 5) Spectacle, and 6)
Melody.
The most important element of the six is the
incidents of the story (Plot). Tragedy is an imitation not of
persons
but of action and life, of happiness and misery. All human
happiness
or misery takes the form of action. Character gives us qualities,
but it is in our actions (in what we do) that we are happy. The
Fable
or Plot is the end and purpose of the tragedy. A tragedy is
impossible
without action. The tragedies of most of the moderns are
characterless.
The most powerful elements of attraction in Tragedy, the Peripeties
(peripeteia)
and Discoveries (anagnorisis), are parts of the Plot. Characters
come second (after Plot). Third is Thought (the speeches, the
province
of Politics and Rhetoric). Character in a play is
that
which reveals the moral purpose of the agents. The fourth element is
the
Diction (the expression of their thoughts in words). The Melody
is
the greatest of the pleasurable accessories of Tragedy. The
Spectacle,
though an attraction, is the least artistic (a matter for the
customier).
“The tragic effect is quite possible without a public performance and
actors”
[apparently, for Aristotle, the play-text, not the performance-text, is
what matters].
A story or plot must be of some length but
of a length to be taken in by the memory [alleged unity of action], a
length
which allows of the hero passing by a series of possible or necessary
stages
from misfortune to happiness, or from happiness to misfortune.
The poet’s function is to describe not the
thing that has happened, but a kind of thing that might happen, i.e.,
what
is possible as being probable or necessary. That is the
difference
between a poet and a historian. The historian describes the thing
that has been, the poet a kind of thing that might be. Hence,
poetry
is something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since
its statements are of the nature rather of universals whereas those of
history are singulars. By a universal statement is meant one as
to
what such or such a kind of man will probably or necessarily say or
do.
Tragedy adheres to historic names, for what convinces is the
possible.
Comedy uses common names. But one must not aim at a rigid adherence to
the traditional stories of tragedy.
Plots may be simple or episodic. The
episodic are the worst (improbable and unnecessary). Tragedy is
an
imitation of a complete action and of incidents arousing pity and
fear.
When they occur unexpectedly and in conjunction, they are most
effective
(the marvelous [the appearance of a design and not merely of chance] is
at work). Plots are either simple of complex. A plot is
simple
if it lacks a Peripety or a Discovery; complex if it involves one or
the
other or both. A Peripety is a change from one state to its
opposite.
A Discovery is a change from ignorance to knowledge. The finest
form
of Discovery is one attended by Peripeties. A Discovery with a
Peripety
will arouse pity and fear and it will serve to bring about the happy or
unhappy ending. The Plot, hence, consists of five parts:
Peripety,
Discovery, Suffering, Pity, and Fear.
A Tragedy has the following parts:
- Prologue: all that precedes the Parode (first statement) of
the chorus.
- Choral Portion: Parode (first statement of the chorus)
& Stasimon
(a
song of the chorus).
- Episode: all that comes in between two choral songs.
- Choral Portion: Parode (first statement of the chorus)
& Stasimon
(a
song of the chorus).
- Exode: all that follows after the last choral song.
- [Commos or lamentation exists only in some, not all, works]
For the finest form of tragedy, the Plot must
not be simple but complex (that is, with Peripeties and Discoveries)
and
imitate actions arousing fear and pity. These Plots must be
avoided:
a) a good man must not pass from happiness to misery [odious], b) a bad
man must not pass from misery to happiness [untragic], c) an extremely
bad man should not pass from happiness into misery [this might occasion
joy, not pity and fear]. Pity is occasioned by undeserved
misfortune;
fear by one like ourselves. An intermediate kind of person would
be a man not pre-eminently virtuous and just, whose misfortune,
however,
is brought upon him not by vice and depravity but by some error of
judgment
(hamartia [“missing the mark”] <hubris: pride, superiority, shaming
and dishonoring others for self-gratification>). The perfect
plot
must have a single, not a double issue; the hero must go from happiness
to misery (not from misery to happiness). The finest tragedies
are
always on the story of some few houses. “The poets merely follow
their public, writing as its wishes dictate” [cf. Lope de Vega].
The Spectacle may provoke fear and pity
(Euripides’
The Trojan Women), but it is better to just hear an account (an appeal
to the intellect) [Sophocles’ Oedipus]. The tragic pleasure is
that
of pity and fear. “Whenever the tragic deed, however, is done
within
the family . . . these are the situations the poet should seek after.”
[59; 14] The deed of horror may be done a) consciously
(Euripides’
Medea), b) in ignorance (Oedipus), or c) about to be done but then not
done (Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac). “But the best of all is the
last, . . . where Merope, on the point of slaying her son, recognizes
him
in time.” 59; 14].
In the Characters, what a personage says or
does reveals a certain moral purpose. Characters must be
consistent.
Characters must endeavor always toward the necessary or the
probable.
The Dénoument should arise out of the plot itself, and not
depend
on a stage-artifice. A Tragedy is an imitation of personages
better
than the ordinary man.
Discovery: a) the least artistic is discovery by signs or marks, or
b) discoveries made by the poet. C) Discovery through
memory.
D) Discovery through reasoning. E) Bad reasoning, F) from the
incidents
themselves (the best kind).
“Poetry demands a man with a special gift for it, or else one
with a touch of madness in him” [cf. Plato’s Ion]. In plays, the
episodes are short; in epic poetry they serve to lengthen the poem.
Every tragedy is in part Complication (all that comes before
the change of the hero’s fortune) and in part Dénoument
(from
the beginning of the change to the end).
There are four kinds of tragedy:
- Complex Tragedy (with Peripety and Discovery
[Oedipus]),
- The Tragedy of Suffering [The Trojan Women],
- The Tragedy of Character [Sophocles’Ajax?]. and
- The Tragedy of Spectacle [one with scenes of the
Netherworld].
Diction and Thought. Thought belongs to
rhetoric (attempts to prove, with words, or to arouse emotions).
Diction belongs to the art of Elocution (question/answer, etc.).
Diction must be clear and not mean. But it can be embellished
with
metaphors. The creation of metaphors is a sign of genius, since a
good metaphor implies an intuitive perception of the similarity in
dissimilars.
Epic poetry (narrative). It should be
based on a single action (like the Trojan war). It can be simple
or complex, a story of character or one of suffering. It requires
Peripeties and Discoveries. The Iliad is simple and a story of
suffering;
The Odyseey is complex and a story of character. The epic can
present
sundry simultaneous actions (unlike tragedy) and hence, gives a sense
of
grandeur and increases the body of the poem. It also gives it
variety
of interest and room for episodes of diverse kinds. It uses the
heroic
meter (dactylic hexameter), which is more tolerant of strange words and
metaphors. The iambic (life and action) and trochaic (dance) are
meters of movement.
The marvelous is certainly required in Tragedy. The Epic,
however,
affords more opening for the improbable, which is the chief factor in
the
marvelous. The marvelous, however, is a source of pleasure; that
is why we always tell a story with additions. A likely
impossibility
is always preferable to an unconvincing possibility. Paralogism,
the art of framing lies. One has to justify the Impossible by
reference
to the requirements of poetry, or to the better, or to opinion.
RHETORIC:
Book I: Rhetoric is the art of
persuasion
and may be divided into political (deliberative), forensic (legal), and
epideictic (ceremonial). Wondering implies the desire for
learning,
so that the object of wonder is an object of desire, while in learning
one is brought into one’s natural condition. Since learning and
wondering
are pleasant, acts of imitation must be pleasant, even if the object
imitated
is not itself pleasant; for it is not the object itself which here
gives
delight. The spectator draws inferences and thus learns something
fresh. Dramatic turns of fortune and hairbreadth escapes from
perils
are pleasant, because we feel all such things are wonderful. It
is
pleasant to complete what is defective, for the whole thing thereupon
becomes
our own work. It is pleasant to be thought wise, for wisdom
secures
us power over others, and most of us are ambitious. Amusements and
relaxation
are pleasant activities, and ludicrous things. Unpleasant things
are the opposite of the pleasant.
Book III: In making a speech, one must
study three points:
- the means of producing persuasion,
- the style or language to be used (clear and simple),
and
- the proper arrangement of the various parts of the speech
(orderly).
Persuasion is achieved in three ways:
- by working on the emotions of the judges,
- by giving them the right impression of the speakers’
character,
and
- by proving the truth of the statements made.
The whole business of rhetoric has to do with appearances. We
should
not annoy our hearers. Nothing should matter except the facts,
but
our hearers have defects and the way a thing is said affects its
intelligibility.
All arts are fanciful and meant to charm the hearer. Nobody uses
fine language to teach geometry. Appeals to pity require dramatic
ability. Style to be good must be clear since speech that fails
to
convey a plain meaning will fail. Avoid meanness and undue
elevation.
Clearness is secured by using the words that are current and
ordinary.
But variations from the norm make the language appear statelier.
A writer must disguise his art and give the impression of speaking
naturally
and not artificially. Naturalness is persuasive; artificiality is
the contrary. Hearers become prejudiced if they think one has a
design
against them. Words of ambiguous meaning are used by the Sophist
to mislead his hearers. Metaphor gives style clearness, charm,
and
distinction. The beauty of words lies not just in the meaning but
their sound.
***
MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO
(106-43 BC):
(Trajan)
Cicero was a politician, an orator, and the
greatest of Latin prose stylists in the Roman Golden Age (the
Republican
period). Philosophically he was a Stoic (moderation in all
things).
He supported Pompey (vs. Julius Caesar, Dictator Perpetuus of Rome) and
was present at Julius Caesar’s assassination (in 44 BC). Cicero
was
subsequently persecuted and assassinated by Marc Antony. His
important
rhetorical works are: De Oratore (On the Orator) [55
BC], Brutus
(46 BC), and Orator (46 BC). For Cicero, the orator is a
philosopher.
Cicero’s style was highly ornate, unlike that of the Attic group, who
preferred
plainness and lucidity.
BRUTUS (46 BC):
The orator who is approved by the multitude
must inevitably be approved by the expert. An orator should
effect three things:
- instruct his listener,
- give him pleasure, and
- stir his emotions.
Only the people can judge the success of the
orator
in these respects. The supreme orator is recognized by the
people.
When one hears a real orator, he believes what is said, thinks it true,
assents and approves; the orator’s words win conviction. What the
multitude approves must win the approval of experts. The
correctness
of popular judgment (judgment of fine art requires educated expertise
and
some standard). A poem full of obscure allusions will only win
the
approbation of the few. If the listener does not respond, the
orator
has failed. There is nothing that has so potent an effect upon
human
emotions as well-ordered and embellished speech. An orator must
win
credence. If an orator does not win the approval of the people,
he
cannot win the approval of the expert either.
***
QUINTUS HORATIUS FLACCUS (HORACE)
[65-8 BC]:
Horace, son of a freedman, was a Roman poet
during the period subsequent to Julius Caesar’s death. He served
in the army and was later amnestied by Augustus (first emperor of
Rome).
He is famous for his Odes (ode 1.11 containes the famous line “carpe
diem,”
[“seize the day”]), epodes (his second epode contains the famous line
“Beatus
ille” [“Fortunate he . . .”]), and his letter in verse to the Piso
family,
the Ars poetica (Art of Poetry > Epistle to the Pisos).
Therein he
explains that a poem is like a painting, “ut pictura poesis” (it may be
viewed from many angles, as one does a painting) and should delight as
well as instruct.
ART OF POETRY (20
BC):
A work of art should have 1) simplicity and
2) unity. It should say only what is necessary and the material
should
be well arranged. Foreign words should be used sparingly.
The
form of poetry should be adjusted to the speaker. Hence, kings
should
express themselves in dactylic hexameters (the heroic verse).
Verses
of unequal length are good for elegies. Anger should be expressed
in iambs (although tragedy and comedy have adopted this meter, the
iambic,
for dialogue). “Let each style keep the place to which it
belongs.”
[theory of decorum]. Thyestes’s banquet (of his sons) [Seneca’s
Thyestes]
cannot be expressed in ordinary language. Comedy cannot be
expressed
tragically (i.e., by using dactylic hexameters). Poems should be
beautiful but also affecting. If the words of a speaker are
inappropriate
to a situation, Romans of all classes (popular and aristocratic) will
simply
laugh. Follow tradition (theory of imitation) or, if you invent,
be consistent. Present what is fitting to the various natures and
ages. Events are either acted upon the stage or narrated (styles:
dramatic and epic). Use a deus ex machina figure sparingly (only
when strictly necessary). Tragedy scorns any temptation to babble
light verses. Study the Greek masterpieces day and night (theory
of imitation > as influence), but also draw experiences from
life.
Wisdom is the source and fountain of all good writing.
The aim of the poet is to 1) inform or 2)
delight (dulce et utile) or to combine together pleasure and
applicability
to life. When instructing, be brief in what you say so that your
readers may grasp it quickly and retain it faithfully. Fiction
invented
in order to please should remain close to reality. Faults in a
predominantly
beautiful poem must be forgiven. It’s a case of carelessness or
human
frailty.
Poetry is like a painting (ut pictura poesis) and pleases from
the angle you view it.
When you write something, show it to Maecius (a strict critic)
first and then keep it in a closet for 9 years.
A praiseworthy poem is the product of Nature and conscious Art,
for the value of study without native ability (or genius without
training)
is useless: they depend on each other.
***
STRABO (64-63 BC-after 21
AD):
Strabo was born in Anatolia (Turkey), a
province
of the Roman Empire (Caesar Augustus reigned at that time). He
was
a Stoic and a defender of Roman imperialism. He studied geography
and philosophy in Rome. He traveled to Egypt and Ethiopia.
In Strabo’s Geography (Geographica) he contradicts Eratosthenes, who
regarded
poets merely as entertainers, by claiming poets were wise
teachers.
Poetry delights and teaches. Strabo sees Homer as an authority on
geography, although not in all sciences necessarily. Homer on
purpose
mixed fact with fiction to delight and instruct better. Myths
provide
insight into the emotional nature of the reasoning animal.
GEOGRAPHY (7-20
AD):
Eratostheness contends that the aim of every
poet is to entertain, not to instruct. The ancients assert, on
the
contrary, that poetry is a kind of elementary philosophy. The
wise
man alone is a poet. That is why in Greece children are educated
by means of poetry from the beginning (for the sake of moral
discipline,
not for the sake of entertainment). These studies discipline and
correct the character. Poets are disciplinarians in
morality.
Homer was an expert in geography and other
sciences, although he might not have been an expert in all
things.
Rhetoric is wisdom applied to discourse. In order to be a good
poet
one has to be a good man (and have life experiences).
Poetry is the source and origin of style
(ornate,
rhetorical style), for when poetry was recited it employed the
assistance
of song. The fact that non-metrical discourse is termed
“pedestrian”
suggests its descent from a height to the ground. Homer does not
deal wholly in marvels, but for our instruction he also uses
allegory
or revises myths.
Man is eager to learn, and his fondness for tales is a prelude to this
quality. Fondness for tales grabs our attention. Myth is a
new language that tells one of things not as they are but of a
different
set of things. And what is new is pleasing, and so is what one
did
not know before. This is what makes men eager to learn. If
you then add the marvelous and the portentous, you increase the
pleasure,
and pleasure acts like a charm to incite to learning. Philosophy
is for the few, but poetry is more useful to the people at large and
can
draw full houses.
PUBLIUS CORNELIUS TACITUS
(c. AD
55-c. 117):
Tacitus was born in Gallia Narborensis or
Hispania and was probably of aristocratic descent. He is one of
the
most important historians of the Roman Silver Age. He is known
for
his Annals (the history of Rome from the death of Augustus to that of
Nero:
14-68 AD), his Histories (from the death of Nero to the death of
Domitian:
68-96 AD), and his Germania. He also composed a Dialogue on
Oratory
(De oratoribus) [c. 77-100 AD], where he defends poetry and the older
rhetoric.
DIALOGUE ON ORATORY
(c. AD
77-100):
Aper dialogues with Maternus and states that
there is something sacred and august about every department of literary
expression. However, Aper wants Maternus to leave the
lecture-hall
and get to the forum and “to the real contests of actions-at-law”
(concern
for utility. Maternus replies that he owes his fame to his
poetry,
not his speeches (poetry, not rhetoric: the superfluous arts, not the
useful
ones). He prefers peace, bliss, the quiet life, seclusion,
serenity,
the groves, and the woods of the poet; not the bustle of the city,
numerous
clients, accused persons waiting in line, shabbily dressed and with
tearful
faces, and the unrest, fear, and anxiety of the orator’s (rhetor’s)
career.
Poetry is the language of the oracles; rhetoric the product of a
depraved
condition of society. The Golden Age knew nothing of accusations
or accusers. He prefers to praise those who do well (a poetic
activity)
than to defend evil-doers (the province of forensic rhetoric) [Cf.
Horace’s
“Beatus ille . . .” & Kant’s purposelessness of art].
***
PSEUDO-LONGINUS (First
Century AD):
The author of On the Sublime (Peri
hupsos) is unknown; however, it was long attributed to Dionysius
Cassius
Longinus, a third century AD Greek philosopher. “Pseudo-Longinus”
poses the issue of how poetic inspiration is best expressed. He
uses
the rhetorical devices, but not for gain (to persuade) but demonstrate
how the sublime is reached in expression, in part by intuition, in part
by imitation and emulation of great writers (theory of imitation, as
influence).
The sublime has the power to transport us. Five elements help to
create elevated language, the first two being innate (poetic,
inspired),
the last three acquired (artistic, rhetorical, studied,
imitated):
- The innate power of the author to form great
conceptions,
- Vehemence and inspired passion,
- The due formation of figures,
- Noble diction, and
- Dignified and elevated composition. Truth and the
real are to be
preferred to the fabulous. Grandeur with some faults is
preferable
to moderate, correct success. The “sublime” was a hit in the 18th
century (Addison, Kant, Burke, Schopenhauer), with its interest on the
effects of nature and art on the perceiving mind (an early form of
Rezeptionaesthetik).
For Pseudo-Longinus, sublimity is in the author and his expression.
ON THE SUBLIME (the
10th century
MS became available in 1554):
The author addressed a certain Postumius
Terentianus.
In every systematic treatise two things are required:
- A Statement of the subject and
- A Methodology to attain one’s ends.
Sublimity is a certain distinction and
excellence
in expression. The effect of elevated language upon an audience is not
persuasion but transport. The influence of the sublime is
irresistible.
One can usually notice and appreciate the rhetorical devices of
persuasion,
but sublimity hits like a thunderbolt and at once displays the power of
the orator in all its plenitude.
A lofty tone is innate and does not come by teaching. At
times the sublime must be curbed. The sublime is a form of
elevation
(hence, puerility would be its opposite). One should be carried
away
by the nature of the subject, not by purely personal emotion.
Tumidity,
puerility, frigidity, triviality, and the pursuit of novelty are
faults.
The judgment of style is the last and crowning fruit of long
experience.
What is truly and genuinely great (sublime, lofty, elevated) bears a
repeated
examination, is not easily forgotten, and pleases all and always (cf.
Kant).
There are five main sources of elevated language. Beneath these
lies
the gift of discourse, which is indispensable. The five sources
are
as follows:
- The power of forming Great Conceptions (innate),
- Vehement and Inspired Passion (innate),
- The due formation of Figures of thought and expression
(artistic),
- Noble Diction (choice of words, use of metaphors,
elaboration of
language)
[artistic], and
- A dignified and elevated Composition (artistic).
“There is no tone so lofty as that of genuine
passion, in its right place, when it bursts out in a wild gust of mad
enthusiasm
and as it were fills the speaker’s words with frenzy” (98; 8).
ELEVATION OF MIND. This is the
most important source of the sublime. Our souls must nurture
sublime
thoughts. Sublimity is the echo of a great soul. At
times
even a great silence may be sublime. The truly eloquent must be
free
from low and ignoble thoughts. Men with mean and servile ideas
and
aims cannot produce anything admirable or worthy of immortality.
Stately speech comes naturally to the proudest spirits. For
instance,
Ajax asks Zeus for light (to fight), not for the preservation of life
(an
ignoble thought for a warrior). Declining poets engage in the
marvelous,
the narrative, the absurd, the delineation of character, comedy of
manners,
the Odyssey instead of the Iliad (the latter, written earlier by
“Homer,”
being fuller of spirit and action).
Nothing should be frivolous, mean, or trivial (in a great and
lofty style).
Amplification: elevated expressions follow, one after the other,
in an unbroken succession and in an ascending order.
Intensification
is achieved by an orderly arrangement of facts or of passions.
Clearness
should be concise.
Sublimity consists in elevation, while amplification embraces
a multitude of details. Sublimity is often comprised in a single
thought, while amplification embraces a multitude of details and is
associated
with a certain magnitude and abundance. Amplification is an
aggregation
of all the parts of a subject, lending strength to the argument by
dwelling
upon it, and differing herein from proof.
Another way that leads to the sublime is the imitation and
emulation
of previous great poets and writers (theory of imitation, as
influence).
Many are carried away by the spirit of others, as if inspired (a form
of
madness, as in Plato’s Ion?). The effluences of the great men of
old possess the souls of those who emulate them. This is not
plagiarism
but merely a taking of an impression from beautiful forms or figures or
other works of art (this idea functioned well until the 19th century,
when
Romanticism stressed the “personal”).
We should elaborate in our minds not only lofty thoughts and
elevated conceptions but, also imagine how Homer would have said this
very
thing or how Plato would have made it sublime (Bloom’s “anxiety of
influence”?).
These old authors inflame our ardor and illuminate our path, carrying
our
minds in a mysterious way to the high standards of sublimity.
They
should function as our judges (justification for the literary
critic).
Think also what future generations would think of one’s writings
today.
This will ensure a futurity of fame.
Images contribute greatly to dignity, elevation, and power as
a pleader. They are mental representations. Imagination is
applied to every idea of the mind which gives birth to speech.
The
design of the poetical image is enthrallment; of the rhetorical, vivid
description. Both, however, seek to stir the passions and the
emotions.
Oratorical imagery infuses vehemence and passion into spoken
words.
When combined with the argumentative passages, it persuades the hearer
and makes him into a slave. We always attend to what possesses
superior
force. A combination of (verbal) demonstration and (visual)
imagery
is most effective.
The sublime in thought is produced by greatness of soul,
imitation,
and imagery.
THE
FIGURES: Run over a few only that
produce elevation of diction. The sublimity depends upon the
place,
the manner, the circumstances, and the motive. Sobriety is also
required.
By a sort of natural law, figures bring support to the sublime.
The
cunning use of figures is peculiarly subject to suspicion, and produces
an impression of an ambush, a plot, a fallacy. A figure is at its
best when the very fact that it is a figure escapes attention.
Sublimity
and passion form an antidote and a wonderful help against the mistrust
which attends upon the use of figures. Light stands out and seems
nearer to us than darkness. Likewise, the manifestations of
passion
and the sublime are nearer to our minds and always strike our attention
before the figures, whose art they throw into the shade and as it were
keep in concealment. Figures make language more elevated and also
more convincing (a rhetorical quality). An exhibition of passion
is most effective when it seems to be inspired by the occasion (not
when
it seems to have been an object of study). Questions/answers
stated
by the same person simulate a natural outburst of passion.
Some figures:
ASYNDETON
(the omission of conjunctions
in a series): The process of hurrying along produces the
impression
of an agitation which interposes obstacles and at the same time adds
impetuosity.
Very effective.
A powerful effect is created when two or three figures are
combined
(e.g., asyndeton, anaphora, and diatyposis [vivid description]).
The orator assails the mind of the judge by a swift succession of blow
on blow. Asyndeton gives a sense of disorderliness, which is
tantamount
to passion, which cannot be shackled (by means of conjunctions, for
instance).
HYPERBATON:
Inversions. They are departures
from the order of expression or ideas from the natural sequence.
They bear the stamp of vehement motion. By means of hyperbata
imitation
approaches the effects of nature. A statement with hyperbata
seems
not to be premeditated but to be prompted by the necessities of the
moment.
One disjoins by means of transpositions things that are by nature
intimately
united and indivisible. A hyperbaton makes a great impression of
vehemence and of unpremeditated speech. The thought is left in
suspense.
It creates anxiety until the end. Its use is bold and hazardous.
POLYPTOTON:
Accumulations, variations,
and climaxes are excellent weapons of public oratory. Sometimes
the
use of the plural instead of the singular produces a more imposing
effect
(by the sense of magnitude it conveys). Also, the addition of
names
(e.g., in epic catalogues) can be very imposing but the use of
enumerations
should be done with material that admits of amplification.
Sometimes
the use of the singular instead of the plural gives the statement a
lofty
appearance, for the compression of the number from multiplicity into
unity
gives more fully the feeling of a single body. Introducing what
is
past as present is no longer a narration but an actuality. The
interchange
of persons (switching from indirect [narrated] to direct [dramatic]
speech)
produces a vivid impression and often makes the hearer that he is
moving
in the midst of perils. “You will make your hearer more excited
and
more attentive, and full of active participation, if you keep him on
the
alert by words addressed to himself” (109; 26). A writer who
starts
talking about someone and then converts himself into that person
suggests
an outburst of passion by this switch.
PERIPHRASIS:
It amplifies the
conception. The verbosity should be musical, rhythmical,
melodious.
But, periphrasis can fall flat with its odor of empty talk and swelling
amplitude.
All the above figures lend additional passion
and animation to style.
DICTION: The choice of proper and
striking
words attracts and enthralls the hearer. When using metaphor,
choose
between one and three in the same passage. No more.
Figurative
language possesses great natural power, and metaphors contribute to the
sublime. We should prefer grandeur with some errors to moderate
success
free of error. Invariable accuracy incurs the risk of
pettiness.
In the sublime there must be something which is overlooked. Low
and
average natures remain free from failing and are in greater safety
because
they never take the risk to scale a height; while great endowments
prove
insecure because of their very greatness. Errors in the sublime
are
not willful errors but oversights of a random and casual kind, due to
neglect
and introduced with all the heedlessness of genius.
Nature implants in our souls the love of
whatever
is elevated and more divine than we. By a sort of natural impulse
we admire not the small stream, useful and pellucid (clear) though it
may
be, but the Nile, the Danube, or the Rhine, and still more the
Ocean.
What is useful and necessary men regard as commonplace, while what is
astounding
is to be admired (Kant). In writers, immunity from errors
relieves
from censure, but grandeur excites admiration. In art, the utmost
exactitude is admired, grandeur in the work of nature. In
statues,
likeness to man is the quality required; in discourse we demand that
which
transcends the human.
HYPERBOLE:
An overshooting of the mark
can ruin a hyperbole, and such expressions, when strained too much,
lose
their tension, and sometimes swing around and produce the contrary
effect.
Those hyperboles are best in which the very fact that they are
hyperboles
escapes attention. A hyperbole, to be effective, must spring
naturally
from the event.
THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE WORDS IN A CERTAIN
ORDER: Harmonious arrangement is not only a source of persuasion
and
pleasure but also a wonderful instrument of lofty utterance and of
passion.
The building of phrase upon phrase raises a sublime and harmonious
structure.
Thought expressed in dactylic hexameters (the heroic Greek meter) is
most
noble and producing of sublimity. Phrases must be harmoniously,
melodiously,
stated, to be sublimely effective. Additions or subtractions
might
change the effect of the sublime (e.g, Gen. 1.3: "dixitque Deus fiat
lux
et facta est lux" [Latin Vulgate Bible]; “And God said, Let there be
light:
and there was light” [King James Version]; “And God saith, 'Let light
be;'
and light is” [Young’s Literal Tranlsation]). Broken and agitated
rhythms (pyrrhics [ _ _ ], trochees [‘_ ] , and dichorees [ ‘_ ‘_ ])
more
appropriate to dancing would be seen as affected and would not produce
a sublime effect. Also, excessive concision of expression tends
to
lower the sublime. Triviality of expression is also apt to
disfigure
sublimity. Democracy is the nursing-mother of genius, for
freedom
has the power to feel the imagination of the lofty-minded and inspires
hope. There should be prizes for orators to compete for and thus
exercise their mental excellences. No slave ever becomes an
orator,
“For the day of slavery takes away half our manhood,” as Homer states
(Odyssey
17.322).
***
PLUTARCH (c. AD 46-c.120):
Plutarch’s most famous work is his Parallel
Lives, in which he compares the lives of the noble Greeks and
Romans.
His Moralia is a collection of 78 essays that deal with education,
ethics,
metaphysics, and philosophy. He admired Plato and was influenced
by Aristotle. He attacked the Epicureans [hedonists] and the
Stoics
[impassive people]. For Plutarch, poetry, which contains the good
and the bad, is part of a youth’s ethical training and a good
preparation
for future philosophical studies. Youths should discern the good from
the
bad and not be gullible. Plutarch distinguishes between imitating
something beautiful (or ugly) and imitating something beautifully
(Formalism).
MORALIA: “How the
Young Man
Should Study Poetry”:
In the art of poetry there is much that is pleasant and nourishing
for the mind of a youth, and much that is disturbing and
misleading.
Their judgment should be guarded so that they are not carried away by
pleasure.
Philosophy should be introduced and blended with poetry (e.g., myths
and
fables). Learning will then be light and agreeable for the
young.
Hence, poetry should not be avoided by those intending to pursue
philosophy.
Poetry should serve as an introductory exercise in philosophy.
Poetry
that contains nothing profitable should be combated. Poets tell
many
lies intentionally to give pleasure and gratify the ear. It shuns
truth if it is disagreeable or painful. But truth does not
deviate
from its course (i.e., it does not hide its painful aspects by means of
pretty language). The art of poetry is not concerned with the
truth.
A youth must distinguish between the subject of imitation (content) and
the way it is imitated (form). When poetic art is divorced from
truth,
it employs variety and diversity. One should cherish the belief
that
poetry is an imitation of character and lives, and of men who are not
perfect
or spotless, but who change their ways to the better. One must
not
admire anything (one reads); otherwise one would become gullible.
The combination of philosophical content in artistic form can train a
youth
to later accept harsh philosophical truth without fear or
suspicion.
They will be less confused and disquieted upon hearing at the lectures
of the philosophers that “Death is nothing to us.” “The young man has
need
of good pilotage in the manner of reading.” Familiarity with
philosophical
themes at an early age will prepare him to deal with philosophy at a
later
age [cf. old and modern cartoons or fairy tales].
***
FLAVIUS PHILOSTRATUS (c.
170-c.
245):
Philostratus came from the island of Lemnos
(near Athens), entered the Syrian court presided then by Empress Julia
Domna [wife of Roman emperor Septimius Severus], and later lived in
Athens,
where he composed the Lives of the Sophists (230-238). He held
Roman
citizenship. Sophists were influential as educators.
Philosophers
seek knowledge (arrived at dialectically); Sophists proceed from
assumed
knowledge and, in the “Second Sophistic” period use rhetoric, oratory,
and improvisation to deal with any topic (not just philosophical
topics,
the province of the older rhetors). In his Life of Apollonius of
Tyana, Philostratus suggests that the mind of someone looking at an
object
produces an imitation. Hence, any theory of art must take into
consideration
the activity of the beholder (Reception Aesthetics).
LIVES OF THE SOPHISTS
(230-238):
Book I: The ancient sophistic
art was philosophic rhetoric. The sophist of the old school
assumes
knowledge of that whereof he speaks. The method of the
philosophers
resembles the prophetic art of the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and the
Indians.
The sophistic method resembles the prophetic art of soothsayers and
oracles.
The ancient sophistic propounded philosophical themes like justice,
courage,
etc. The new or Second sophistic sketched the types of the poor
man
and the rich, the princes and tyrants, and handled arguments that are
concerned
with definite and special themes. Gorgias founded the art of
extempore
oratory. He would discuss any theme and claim omniscience. The
Athenians
shut them out of the law-courts, afraid they could defeat a just
argument
by an unjust, since sophists used their power to warp men’s
judgments.
Even the word “sophist” became suspect in the eyes of the jury.
The
men of former days applied the name “sophist” not only to orators whose
surpassing eloquence won them a brilliant reputation, but also to
philosophers
who expounded their theories with ease and fluency.
***
PLOTINUS (205-c. 262):
The philosopher Plotinus was a native of Egypt
and was probably of Roman descent. He studied philosophy in
Alexandria
at age 28. In the year 244, in Rome, he founded a school of
Neo-Platonism.
His Enneads (6 sets of 9 essays each) were edited and arranged by his
pupil
Porphyry, who wrote a biography of him. For Plotinus, the world
is
an “emanation” from the ultimate idea or One (also called the First),
and
everything seeks to return to It. The One expresses itself in a
Triad:
1) the Intellectual Principle or Being (the realm of Ouranus [the sky
god,
son and husband of Gaia, earth; hides his children in Tartaros]]), 2)
The
Reason-Principle or the higher reasoning soul (the realm of Kronos [a
Titan,
later king of the gods; he castrates Ouranos on his mother Gaia’s
suggestion];
he likes to eat his children [Saturn]), and 3) the Vegetal Lower-Acting
Soul, or Third (the realm of Zeus [dethrones Kronos with mother Rheia’s
help and fights the Titans for supremacy; he establishes Olympus with
his
brothers and sisters]). The more beautiful a thing is the closer
it is to the One, identified with pure light. The further away
from
the One, the more it is embedded in darkness and matter. Art (as
in the case of sculpture), is the freeing of form or idea from matter,
a bringing of the Idea to some degree of light. The beauty of the
work of art is not in the material or the object but in the Idea or
form
that the artist imposes on his materials. The Idea comes from or
through the artist’s mind and is derived from intellect and ultimately
from connection with the One. The Idea is imposed on the mass of
exterior matter. In this process the indivisible One is exhibited
in diversity. Hence, the artist for Plotinus is a creator of
valuable
spiritual insight by virtue of his attention to form. Art for
Plotinus,
however, is never a perfect incarnation of beauty, which never fully
appears,
for art always remains to some extent material.
ENNEADS (written in
260,
ordered, edited, and published by Porphyry in 300-305):
BEAUTY: Beauty addresses itself to
1) sight, although there is a beauty in 2) sounds (words, music,
melodies,
cadencies) and a beauty 2) above the realm of sense. There must
be
One Principle from which all take their grace. Beauty (as sight)
appeals to symmetry of parts towards a whole; what is symmetrical and
patterned
is beautiful. Beauty is a compound, but composed of beautiful
details.
Symmetry owes its beauty to a remoter principle. This Principle
bestows
beauty on material things. The Soul recognizes it, its knowledge,
welcomes
it, and comes into unison with it (like a mystic union of the finite
and
the infinite).
The Soul, by its nature and affiliation to
the noblest Existents in the hierarchy of Being, thrills when it sees
anything
of that kin (anything beautiful, patterned, symmetrical). All the
loveliness in the world comes by communion in Ideal-Form. All
shapelessness,
as long as it remains outside Reason and Idea, is ugly and separated
from
the Divine-Thought. This is the Absolute-Ugly. What is ugly
has not been mastered by pattern, by Reason. Matter has not
yielded
to Ideal-Form.
When Ideal-Form enters matter, it maintains
a co-operation of the diversity of parts into the creation of a
(patterned)
whole. This is harmonious coherence. The material thing becomes
beautiful
by communicating in the thought (Reason, Logos) that flows from the
Divine.
Fragments are gathered into unity and presented to the Idea-Principle
to
become beautiful (patterned, “whole”).
Lovers are those who feel the keener wound
and feel love outside of sense (that is, they apprehend the pattern of
Ideal-Form). Souls under the spell of love want to free
themselves
from the material world and fly upward, as in a Dionysian frenzy.
One admires loftiness of spirit, righteousness of life, disciplined
purity,
courage, gravity, modesty, and god-like Intellection. On the
other
hand, the ugly Soul is dissolute and unrighteous, lustful, torn by
internal
discord, envious and cowardly, thinking only of the perishable and the
base, perverse in all its impulses, living a life of abandonment to
bodily
sensation and delighting in its deformity. It seeks the outer,
the
lower, the dark; it is sunk in manifest death. It is occupied
only
in Matter (it cannot transcend to Spirit). A Soul becomes ugly
through
a fall, a descent into body, into Matter, in the same way that gold is
degraded when it is mixed with earthly particles. One needs moral
discipline, purification, disdain of the material, to become
intellectual.
Intellection is the Soul’s beauty (what one
strives for).When the Soul becomes a good and beautiful thing it
becomes
like God, for from the Divine comes all the Beauty and all the Good in
beings. Beauty is the Authentic-Existents; Ugly is primal evil.
Beauty is the Good. The Good must be
posed as the First. Directly deriving from this First is the
Intellectual-Principle,
which is pre-eminently the manifestation of Beauty. We must
ascend
towards the Good, the Apart, the Unmingled, the Pure, that from Which
all
things depend: the Source of Life and the Intellection and of Being.
The graceful shapes of the body are merely
copies. To commune with those shadows would be tantamount to
Narcissus
falling unto death in pursuit of his own reflected image. One
must
transcend form to reach the Fatherland, which is There (not
Here).
The Soul must be trained to appreciate noble
pursuits, works of beauty, and the souls of those who have shaped these
beautiful forms. One must withdraw into oneself and look for this
inner beauty. “Never cease chiseling your statue” (p. 132) until
you see the perfect goodness. A Soul tainted with vice has
diminished
vision of the Beautiful. One must become god-like to see God and
Beauty. The Soul then “ascends” first to the
Intellectual-Principle,
the Intellectual-Cosmos, where one becomes cognizant of forms, ideas,
beauty.
Divine contemplation.
ON THE INTELLECTUAL BEAUTY: Beauty
exists not in matter but in the art of the artist, where the Form truly
is. Hence, matter only participates in Beauty but cannot ever be
Beauty itself (Pheidias’ statue of Zeus). Every primal
cause
is more powerful than its effects. Beauty lies in the wisdom of
the
maker of a beautiful object (is it a “gift” or does one discipline
oneself
to achieve this artistry?).
There (where pure Idea resides) is pure
Intellect,
Repose, Being, and Wholeness. “Here” (the material world of sense
perception) everything is partial (not whole) and thus incomplete (an
image,
a shape, a ghost). Wisdom primal is not reasoning (from a to z)
but
pure intellect (it intellects immediately and completely without having
to reason through things). All that comes to be (whether by
nature
or art) some wisdom has made. The artist works from some Unity as
s/he “creates” (finds the form or idea?) something from matter.
True
Wisdom is Real Being. Ideas or Forms are Beings or
Essentials.
The Egyptians created pictograms instead of sounds and thus displayed
an
absence of discursiveness in the Intellectual Realm (wow!) [words are
incomplete
and are made up of parts: letters, syllables]. “For each
manifestation
of knowledge and wisdom is a distinct image, an object in itself, an
immediate
unity, not an aggregate of discursive reasoning and detailed willing”
(136).
Since there is a Source, all the created must
spring from it and in accordance with it. All-Unity. This
then
is Beauty primally: it is entire and omnipresent as an entirety.
To admire a representation is to admire the original upon which it was
made. Beauty sprung from this world is, itself, a copy from
That.
Being is desirable because it is identical with Beauty. To see
the
divine as something external is to be outside of it; to become it is to
be most truly in beauty (hence one is possessed by the gods). We
are most completely aware of ourselves when we are most completely
identified
with the object of our knowledge.
- OURANOS: The Absolute or One [realm of the
Intellectual Principle]
- KRONOS: The Intellectual-Principle. The Titan
dethroned by Zeus
[realm of the Reason-Principle]
- ZEUS: The All-Soul. Soul also has beauty but
is
less beautiful
than Intellect [realm of the Vegetal or lower acting Soul]
- We ourselves possess beauty when we are true to our own
being; our
ugliness
is in going over to another order; our self-knowledge, that is to say,
is our beauty; in self-ignorance we are ugly.
SAINT AUGUSTINE (354-430):
Saint Augustine is a Doctor of the
Church (one
of 33 in all), a Saint, and a figure respected even among the Reformed
religions (by Lutherans and Calvinists). He was born in Africa,
in
present day Algeria, the son of a catholic mother, Saint Monica, and
Patricius,
a pagan father. He also wrote The Confessions, known as
the first
Western autobiography, as well as The City of God, written
after the
Vandals
sacked Christian Rome, and wherein St. Augustine makes a case for
Christianity
being not of this world (spiritual instead of earthly). He also
elaborated
a theory of signs and allegory to interpret Scripture that was later
followed
by St. Thomas Aquinas and secular writers like Dante. For St.
Augustine,
signs are things used to signify something (like the Cross would be a
sign
for the Resurrection) and words serve to signify (the word “cross”
signifies
the Cross). A sign is important because it points to something
else
(ultimately the Trinity for St. Augustine). The sign is thus not
valuable as pleasurable in itself but only in its movement of
signification
towards God (in the same way that matter for the Platonic pagans is not
valuable or pleasurable in itself, even when it takes a definite form
[the
statue of Zeus, for instance]; what matters is the Form it points out
to
[or God, for Christians]). Allegory in the Middle Ages hides,
then
yields, a depth of intellectual beauty. Also, what is discovered
with difficulty gives pleasure, according to St. Augustine. St.
Augustine’s
distinction between the natural and the conventional sign leads in
language
theory to the arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign (as in Saussure).
ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
(396-426):
BOOK ONE: Things are learned
by signs. A thing is that which is not used to signify something
else, like wood, stone, cattle, etc. But some things are used as
signs of other things (like the beast that Abraham sacrificed instead
of
his son Isaac, which is a pre-figuration of Christ [the “lamb” of
God]).
There are other signs whose whole use is in signifying, like words, for
no one uses words except for the purpose of signifying something.
Signs are things used to signify something. Thus, every sign is
also
a thing (for what is not a thing is nothing at all); but not every
thing
is also a sign.
Some things are to be enjoyed; others to be
used. The things to be enjoyed are the Father, the Son, and the
Holy
Spirit (the Trinity). In the Father is unity, in the Son
equality,
and in the Holy Spirit a concord of unity and equality; and these three
qualities are all one because of the Father, all equal because of the
Son,
and all united because of the Holy Spirit. One may fail to
understand
Scripture and thus be deceived, although Scripture does not lie.
All knowledge and prophecy struggle for three things: a) Faith, b)
Hope,
and c) Charity (the theological Gifts of the Holy Spirit).
Between
temporal and eternal things there is a difference: 1) a temporal thing
is loved more before one has it, and it begins to grow worthless when
one
gains it, for it does not satisfy the soul; 2) eternal things are more
ardently loved when acquired than when merely desired.
BOOK TWO: Things signify nothing beyond
themselves. Signs have value beyond themselves since they signify
something else. A sign is a thing that causes us to think of
something
beyond the impression the thing itself makes upon the senses (e.g., a
cross,
a six-pointed star, and a crescent are things that stand as signs of
the
three Semitic and monotheistic religions: Christianity, Judaism, and
Islam).
Among signs, some are 1) natural, others 2) conventional. A sign
is natural when it unwillingly or unintentionally signifies something
else
(like smoke, which signifies fire). Conventional signs are
those which living creatures show to one another for the purpose of
conveying
something. In this way, the person who makes the sign conveys to
another the action of the mind of the first person (the maker of the
sign).
Signs given by God and contained in Scripture are of this type also
(for
by them God purposefully means to convey His mind to others).
Among the signs by means of which we express
our meaning to others, some pertain to sight, others to hearing, and
very
few to the other senses. Some signify many things through the
motions
of their hands. Banners and military standards visibly indicate
the
will of the captains. More signs pertain to the ears, and most of
these consists of words (NB: in the Middle Ages, and practically up to
the nineteenth and early twentieth century, even books were read aloud
in public, since few people could read). But because vibrations
in
the air pass away and remain no longer than they sound, signs of words
have been constructed by means of letters. Thus words are shown
to
the eyes, not in themselves but through certain signs which stand for
them.
Many and varied obscurities and ambiguities
deceive those who read casually, understanding one thing instead of
another.
This situation was provided by God to conquer pride by work and to
combat
disdain in our minds (for what is facile is deemed worthless).
St.
Augustine expresses greater pleasure in deciphering metaphors (as in
the
Song of Songs) than in understanding plain language. Things are
perceived
more readily through similitudes and that which is sought with
difficulty
is discovered with more pleasure. Holy Scripture is at times
difficult
to entice to hunger (of understanding) and to deter a disdainful
attitude
(by the presentation of obscure passages which require additional
effort
to decipher). This was done on purpose.
There are two reasons why things written are
not understood: they are obscured either by unknown or by ambiguous
sings
(for signs are either literal or figurative). The sign bos (“ox”)
is literal, for it refers to the animal of a herd. Figurative
signs
occur when that thing which we designate by a literal sign is used to
signify
something else (when the sign “ox” refers not to the [literal] animal
but
to one of the four evangelists [St. Luke]). [NB: St. Matthew
<a
man >, St. Mark <a lion>, St. John <an eagle>].
A. St. John
(eagle)
B. St. Matthew (man)
<>
C. St. Luke (ox)
D. St. Mark
(lion)
<>
***
ANICUS MANLIUS SEVERINUS BOETHIUS
(ca. 480-524 or 525):
Boethius was a Roman statesman and
philosopher,
as well as the author of a treatise, De Trinitate. He
wrote the Consolation
of Philosophy in prison under sentence of death on the grounds
of
treason
(disloyalty against the Ostrogothic ruler) and sacrilege (for his
practice
of astrology). He was a philosopher and Roman statesman under
King
Theoderic, an Ostrogoth and an Arian Christian, but fell out of favor
and
was savagely executed. His book became very popular in the Middle
Ages and was translated into English by Geoffrey Chaucer.
Boethius
regarded poetry as dangerous because it fed the passions.
Moreover,
the Muses were pagan and the arts catered to sensual and earthly
interests.
From a Christian ascetic tradition, the arts would be considered
trivial
when compared to theological pursuits. Boethius’ attack here is
one
of the best known after Plato. He makes no mention in this book
of
Christianity.
THE CONSOLATION OF PHILOSOPHY
(ca. 523): Philosophy, in the form of a woman whose countenance is full
of majesty, approaches a pondering and sickly Boethius. Her
attire
contains the Greek letters ? <pi: P>
and ? <theta: Th>,
which stand
for Practical and Theoretical philosophy. She
rebukes the Muses,
who are consoling Boethius, calling them sirens and seductive mummers,
and the poor gals leave sadly and ashamed. The Muse of Poetry
(Calliope)
was giving Boethius words to his lamenting. However, Philosophy
rebukes
her because Poetry can offer no remedy but only poisonous sweets.
Poetry stifles reason with passion. Poetry seduces to
perdition.
Poetry does not free man from disease but accustoms him thereto.
Besides, Boethius has been nurtured in the lore of the Eleatics (a
Pre-Socratic
school that maintained that pure being alone is real; the information
of
the senses is illusory) and Academics
(Platonists). He needs the
Muses Philosophy has to offer to care for him and heal him.
NB: The nine muses, born of Zeus
and Mnemosyne (goddess of
memory and time) are inspiring goddesses (of the arts, poetry, and
science) who live in Olympus: 1) Calliope
(epic poetry), 2) Clio
(history), 3) Euterpe (lyrical
poetry), 4) Thalia (bucolic
poetry and comedy), 5) Melpomene
(tragedy), 6) Terpsichore
(dance), 7) Erato (erotic
poetry), 8) Polyhymnia (sacred
song), and 9) Urania
(astronomy). See Hesiod's Theogony.
| 1) Clio |
2) Thalia |
3) Erato |
4) Euterpe |
5) Polyhymnia |
6) Calliope |
7) Terpsichore |
8) Urania |
9) Melpomene |
History
|
Comedy, Bucolic Poetry
|
Erotic Poetry
|
Lyrical Poetry
|
Sacred Song
|
Epic Poetry
|
Dance
|
Astronomy
|
Tragedy
|
Scroll
|
Comic mask, ivy
wreath, shepherd's staff
|
Maller lyre
|
Double flute
|
Veiled and pensive
|
Wax tablet
|
Lyre
|
Celestial globe
|
Tragic mask, ivy
wreath
|
***
SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS
(1225-1274):
St. Thomas Aquinas, the “Angelic Doctor,”
studied in Paris and is the greatest of the Scholastic
Philosophers.
He is also one of the Doctors of the Church. The system of his Summa
Theologica was declared the official philosophy of the Roman
Catholic
Church
in 1879, under Pope Leo XIII. St. Thomas’s work was Aristotelian
rather than Platonic. He sought the marriage of reason and
faith.
Scholasticism lasted between 1100 and 1500, with revivals in Spain and
Austria (Neo-Scholasticism) as late as the early 1800s and early
1900s.
St Thomas, in the selection below, presents a theory of allegorical
interpretation
of Scripture that developed early in the Christian era.
Allegorical
interpretation of Homer can be found as early as the sixth century BC
and
was still being practiced in the third century AD by Porphyry (a
Phoenician
[Lebanese] neo-Platonist, student of Plotinus). Christian
interpretation
probably began with the methods of Philo Judaeus, an Egyptian
philosopher
(a Hellenized Jew) of the first century AD who tried to fuse Greek
philosophy
and Judaism by means of allegory, and by the churchmen Origen, Clement,
Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory [all but Clement Fathers of the
Church].
The system that St. Tomas sets forth was probably first worked out in
the
fifth century. It reflects the fundamental idea that world
is itself a symbol subject to interpretation as the work of God.
According to Hermes Trismegistus, things below copy things above.
St. Thomas is interested only in Scripture. St. Thomas argues
that
spiritual truths are properly and naturally taught by figures taken
from
corporeal things; these veiled truths are the cause of beneficial
exercise
of the mind (and, therefore, not harmful or dissimulative). He
has
a twofold system of interpretation:
1) The Literal
(wherein the Parabolic
is contained) under which he subsumes
a) The Historical,
b) The Etiological (causes), and
c) The Analogical (comparative) ; and
2) The Spiritual, under which he subsumes
a) The Allegorical
or Typological (prophetic)
b) The Tropological
or Moral,
and
c) The Anagogical (foreshadowing,
prefiguration).
SUMMA THEOLOGICA
(1256-1272):
“The Nature and Domain of Sacred Doctrine”:
NINTH ARTICLE: “Whether Holy Scripture
Should Use Metaphors?: To proceed by the aid of various similitudes and
figures is the proper domain of the poetic science (science being a
true
branch of learning that proceeds by rational principles). To put
forward anything by means of similitudes is to use metaphors.
Scripture
uses metaphors. It befits Holy Scripture to put forward divine
and
spiritual truths by means of comparisons with material things. It
is natural to man to attain to intellectual truths through sensible
things
because all our knowledge originates from sense. Hence, in Holy
Scripture,
spiritual truths are fittingly taught under the likeness of material
things.
Thereby, even the simple that are unable to grasp intellectual things
may
be able to understand. Sacred doctrine makes use of metaphors as
both necessary and useful. The very hiding of truth in figures is
useful for the exercise of thoughtful minds, and as a defense against
the
ridicule of the unbelievers. Divine truths are (by metaphor)
better
hidden from the unworthy.
TENTH ARTICLE: Whether in Holy
Scripture
a Word May Have Several Senses?: Objection 1: In Scripture, a word
cannot
have several senses: 1) Historical or
Literal, 2) Allegorical,
3) Tropological
or Moral, and 4) Anagogical.
Objection 2: St. Augustine says that
the Old Testament has a fourfold
division according to 1) History, 2)
Etiology
(cause), 3) Analogy (comparison), and 4) Allegory. Objection 3:
There
is also the Parabolic (later seen as part of the Literal sense).
On the contrary, Gregory says that Scripture describes a fact and
reveals
a mystery simultaneously. Hence, the Holy Scripture was authored
by God to signify His meaning, not by words only but also by things
themselves.
In other sciences, things are signified by words, but in Scripture, the
things signified by the words have themselves also a
signification.
The first signification, whereby words signify things, belongs to the
first
sense, I. The Historical or Literal. That signification whereby
things
signified by words have themselves also a signification is called II.
The
Spiritual sense, which is based on the literal, and presupposes
it.
This Spiritual sense has a threefold division: A. The Allegorical
(Typological
[prophetic]) sense (so far as things of the Old Law signify things of
the
New Law [and hence preserve the Bible’s historical nature]); B. The
Moral
sense (things done in Christ are signs of what we ought to do); and C:
The Anagogical sense (things signify what relates to eternal glory
[foreshadowing]).
Reply Obj. 1: The multiplicity of
these
senses does not produce equivocation, for all the senses are founded on
one, the Literal. Reply Obj. 2: History (what is simply related),
Etiology (when its cause is assigned), and Analogy (whenever the truth
of one text of Scripture is shown not to contradict the truth of
another
[comparisons]) are grouped under the Literal sense. Allegory
alone
stands for the three Spiritual senses. Hugh of St. Victor (a
mystic
philosopher) includes the Anagogical (foreshadowing) under the
Allegorical
sense, hence, having only three senses: the Historical, the
Allegorical,
and the Tropological (Moral). Reply Obj. 3: The Parabolic sense
is
contained in the Literal.
***
DANTE ALIGHIERI
(1265-1321):
Florentine Dante is the author of the Commedia
(an otherworldly epic poem) and De monarchia (a treatise on
the need
for
monarchical rule in secular affairs). He was politically allied
with
the Guelfs, a pro-Pope group
opposed to the Ghibellines, a
pro-emperor
group. He developed a two- actually fourfold scheme of
interpretation
in his letter to the tyrant Can Francesco Grande della Scala, the
Ghibelline
Lord (imperial Vicar) of Verona, and in Il Convivio. The
world in
the Middle Ages was seen as an allegory full of symbolic meaning.
For Dante, the work of art was like the world, an allegory. He
applied
a hermeneutic system meant for Scripture to secular writings.
THE BANQUET (Il
Convivio)
[1304-1308]: Writings can be expounded chiefly in four senses: I.
The Literal (the [historical]
sense that does not go beyond the limits
of the letter); II. The Allegorical
(by means of which a truth is
hidden
under a beautiful fiction); III. The Moral
(by means of which teachers
go through writings to watch for their own [moral] profit and that of
their
hearers); and IV. The Anagogic
(what is above the senses, that is, the
spiritual sense by which even in the literal sense the things signified
give an intimation of higher [eternal] matters).
LETTER TO CAN GRANDE DELLA SCALA
(1318): There are six things that must be inquired into at the
beginning
of any work of instruction: 1) The Subject
(at the literal level, “the
state of souls after death”; at the allegorical level, how human
agents,
by exercising free will, become liable to reward or punishment) 2) The Agent (e.g., Dante Alighieri), 3)
The Form (I. Of the treatise:
A)
Parts:
1. Inferno, 2. Purgatorio, 3. Paradiso. B) Cantos, and C)
poetic
lines.
II. Of the Treatment: A.
Poetic, fictive, descriptive, digressive,
transumptive;
B. Proceeding by definition, division, proof, refutation, and setting
forth
of examples), 4) The End (to
remove those living in this life from the
state of misery and lead them to the state of felicity). 5) The Title
of
the Work (e.g., the Commedia),
and 6) The branch of Philosophy
it
concerns
(5. Aesthetics? <art,
life> [the other branches would be:
1. Metaphysics
<existence> [Theology
would fit here], 2. Epistemology
<knowledge>,
3. Ethics
<action>, Politics
<force> [Politics may be
a subdivision
of Ethics], Axiology <value
judgments [subsumed under ethics and
aesthetics]>,
and 4. Logic
<reasoning>]) [NB: The main branch of philosophy is Metaphysics.
Closely related to it would be Epistemology.
Ethics is dependent
on Epistemology. Politics is a subdivision of Ethics. Aesthetics
depends on Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Ethics].
The sense of the Commedia is not simple but
varied (of more senses than one), or polysemous, for it is 1) one sense
(the Literal) that we get through the letter, and 2) another which we
get
through the thing the letter signifies (the Allegorical or Mystical
sense).
Allegory derives from Greek alleon
(Latin alienum or diversum).
***
GIOVANNI BOCCACCIO
(1313-1375):
Boccaccio, a Florentine humanist and a
bastard,
author of The Decameron,
uses the interpretative methods that St.
Thomas
Aquinas uses for Scripture and Dante Alighieri for scriptures for
secular
purposes. Poetry makes fictions, while theology always tells the truth
directly. Boccaccio defends poetry by stating it does not lie but
tells allegorical (hidden) truths. Meaning acquired by toil
should
ultimately be of more pleasure and better retained. The truth of
poetry often comes in the form of a generalization about life and
manners
expressed in a fiction. Boccaccio defends the pagan poets by
saying
they clothe many physical and moral truths in their inventions.
Boccaccio,
like other medieval theorists and Renaissance critics, insisted that a
hidden moral meaning redeemed poetry’s “lies.”
LIFE OF DANTE (Vita
di
Dante) [1364, pub. 1477]:
Ch. 9: “Digression Concerning Poetry”:
The ancient poets, by a certain revelation of the Holy Spirit, “under a
veil” or “beneath a mask” of certain fictions, revealed to future
generations
their highest secrets or truths. The two forms of writing (the literal
and the allegorical) discipline the wise and strengthen the
foolish.
Children and the wise may be nourished by the same waters.
Ch. 10: “On the Difference Between
Poetry and Theology”: Holy Scripture (theology), under the form of
history,
designs to reveal to us the high mystery of the Incarnation. In
like
manner, poets in their works (poetry), under fictions of various gods,
reveal to us the causes of things, the effects of virtues and vices,
what
we ought to flee and what follows, to attain by virtuous actions the
end
(deferred in their case until the coming of Christ), our
salvation.
Hence, Saturn (Kronos in Greek) devouring his children is a cloak for
the
concept of the passing of time, etc. Their Elysian Fields and
City
of Dis correspond to our concepts of Heaven and Hell. Hence,
theology
and poetry agree in their method of treatment. In their subject
matter
they differ, for the subject of theology is divine truth, while that of
ancient poetry is the men and gods of the pagans. Theology
presupposes
nothing unless it be true; while poetry puts forth certain things as
true
that are surely false, misleading, and contrary to the Christian
religion.
Anything acquired by labor has more sweetness
than that which comes without effort. What is acquired by labor
is
retained better and pleases more than what is grasped quickly.
The
ancient chose fables to draw with their beauty those not easily
persuaded
even by philosophical demonstrations. The ancient poets were
people
of profound understanding.
Theology is the poetry of God, for God uses
poetic fictions (allegories) to refer to Christ as a lion, a lamb, a
serpent,
a dragon, a rock. Poetry here is theology, in the same way that
theology
is here poetry. Aristotle affirmed that poets were the first
theologians
(Metaphysics
3.4).
GENEALOGY OF THE GENTILE GODS
(De Genealogiis) [1366]:
Book 14. Ch. 7. “The
Definition
of Poetry, Its Origin, and Function.” Poetry is a fervid and
exquisite
invention, with fervid expression, in speech or writing, of that which
the mind has invented. Its originator is God. Few have
received
the gift of poetry. Poetry is sublime in its effects. It
impels
the soul to utterance. It brings forth strange creations of the
mind.
It arranges mediations in a fixed order. It adorns compositions
with
unusual words and thoughts. It veils truth in a fair and fitting
garment of fiction. It can arm kings to war. It can serve
to
praise great men (a Platonic echo). The poetic impulse, however,
needs the guidance of grammar and rhetoric, as well as knowledge of the
other liberal arts to possess a strong and abundant vocabulary.
One
must memorize the history, monuments, and geography of other nations
too.
One must also have peace of mind and desire for worldly glory, and be
of
the ardent age (young). Poetry is a practical art. It is
composed
“as under a veil” and thus is exquisitely wrought.
Ch. 9. “It Is Rather Useful than
Damnable
to Compose Stories.” The word “fable” (fabula) derives from for,
faris, “conversation” (confabulatio), “talking together”
(collocutio).
If it is a sin to compose stories, then it is a sin to converse.
Nature has not granted us the power of speech unless for purposes of
conversation
and the exchange of ideas. Fiction is a form of discourse, which
under the guise of invention illustrates or proves an idea, and as its
superficial aspect is removed, the meaning of the author is
clear.
There are four kinds of fictions: I. The first superficially lacks all
appearance of truth (as in Aesop’s fables, where brutes or inanimate
things
converse; but also Judges 9.8-15: the conference of the trees in order
to choose a king). II. The second kind at times superficially
mingles
fiction with truth, clothing in fiction divine and human matters alike
(as in Ovid’s Metamorphoses,
and also most of the Old Testament, which
is a pre-figuration of the New). III. The third kind is more like
history than fiction (as in Virgil’s Aeneid or Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey),
and in their heroic verse there lies a hidden meaning (Ulysses is bound
to the mast to escape the lure of the Sirens’ song [e.g., one must be
“restrained”
to avoid temptation]). Even in the comedies of Plautus and
Terence
there is a portrayal of the sundry varieties of human nature and some
sort
of teaching as to what to avoid (e.g., cupidity). Also, Christ
used
parables and exempla to teach. IV. The fourth kind contains no
truth,
either superficially or hidden (old wives’ tales).
Fiction has been the means of quelling minds
aroused to rage, and of subduing them to gentleness. By fiction,
men have been strengthened and given valor. Fiction furnishes
consolation.
“Through fiction, it is well known, the mind that is slipping into
inactivity
is recalled to a state of better and more vigorous fruition”
[162].
Fiction pleases the unlearned by its external appearance, and exercises
the minds of the learned with its hidden truth; and thus both are
edified
and delighted with one and the same perusal.
Ch. 13. “Poets Are Not Liars.”
Poetic fiction has nothing in common with any variety of falsehood, for
it is not a poet’s purpose to deceive anybody with his
inventions.
A poet, however he may sacrifice the literal truth in invention, is not
a liar, since his function is not to deceive, but only by way of
convention.
They use figures.
Poets do say there are many gods instead of
One, but they should not be charged with falsehood since they neither
believe
nor assert this as a fact, but only as a myth or fiction. The
multitude
of other gods they look upon as members or functions of the Divinity on
account of their veneration for the particular function. Pagan
poets
had an imperfect sense of the true God.
There are two kinds of liars: 1) those who
knowingly and willingly lie, and 2) those who have told a falsehood
without
knowing. Such was the case with the pagan poets, who with all
their
knowledge of the liberal arts, poetry, and philosophy, could not know
the
truth of Christianity. Only the Israelites were granted the true
knowledge of God. But they never shared this knowledge with
anyone
else or admitted the Gentiles at their doors. Hence, the pagan
poets
could not write the entire truth concerning God; thusly, their
ignorance
is to be excused and they should not be called liars.
Poets are not like historians, who start their
account at some convenient beginning (ab ovo [the term comes from
Horace’s Ars Poetica])
and describe events in the unbroken order of their
occurrence
to the end. Poets, by a far nobler device, begin their proposed
narrative
in the midst of the events (in
medias res [the term comes from Horace’s Ars Poetica]), or sometimes
even near the end (in
extremas res), and
thus
they find excuses to tell preceding events which seem to have been
omitted.
Homer’s Odyssey and
Virgil’s Aeneid start
near the end. Virgil is
not a liar in his rendition of the Dido story (which is anachronistic
with
respect to the Aeneid),
for he wished to demonstrate the consequences
of
concupiscence (Dido’s), to extol Aeneas (founder of Latium), and to
glorify
the name of Rome (who would later fight the Carthaginians).
Ch. 17. “That Poets Are Merely Apes
of the Philosophers.” The destination of both poets and
philosophers
is the same. Yet, they do not arrive there by the same
road.
I. The philosopher, by the process of syllogizing, disproves what
he considers false. And in this fashion proves his theory, and does
this
as obviously as he can. Also, he does not embellish language,
which
would be distracting. He also uses prose. He disputes in
the
lecture room (the forum, the academy, the university). II. The
poet
conceives his thought by contemplation and without the help of
syllogisms
he veils it as subtly and skillfully as he can under the outward
semblance
of his invention. The poet uses meter (poetry), writes with
scrupulous
care, and in a style of exquisite charm. The poet sings in
solitude.
Being so different one from the other, it would be inappropriate to
call
the poet the ape of the philosopher.
Book 15. Ch. 8. “The Pagan
Poets of Mythology Are Theologians.” The pagan poets are
theologians.
St. Augustine, quoting Varro [a learned Roman scholar] (City of God
6.5),
holds that theology is threefold in its divisions: a) Mythical
[“Fabulous”]
Theology (from the Greek mythicon, a “myth.”
This form of
literature
is obscene [cf. the sequestration of Proserpina by Hades, a myth that
explains
Winter and the change of the seasons; or that of Ganymede by Zeus, to
show
the soul’s ascent to the Divine]), b) Physical [“Natural”] Theology
(this
is natural, moral, and useful, for the poets clothe many physical and
moral
truths in their inventions), and c) Civil or Political Theology
(the
theology
of state worship [cf. the deification of emperors in imperial
Rome]).
Boccaccio and Augustine lean towards the second kind of theology
only.
The old theology can sometimes be employed in the service of the
Catholic
Church (an example of Physical or Natural Theology is the fable of the
trees choosing a king, in Judges 9.8-15).
JULIUS CAESAR SCALIGER
(Giulio Cesare
Della Scala) [1484-1558]:
Scaliger was an Italian philologist,
physician,
and natural scientist, and a very arrogant man. In his Poetics
(Poetices)
[1561], written originally in Latin, he meant to make a defense of the
Roman poets Virgil (epic) [whom he considered superior to Homer] and
Seneca
(drama) [whom he considered superior to the Greek dramatists].
His
commentary on Aristotle had an impact on neo-classical authors.
He
was influenced by Horace, Cicero and Quintilian. Scaliger
attempted
to fuse poetics and rhetoric, with rhetoric being the dominant
partner.
Hence, he maintains that poetry delights and teaches, but he stresses
persuasion
and moral purpose. He also seems to equate poetry with
verse.
He likes classifications, at times for their own end.
POETICS (Poetices)
[1561]:
Everything pertaining to mankind is
necessary, useful, or pleasure-given. Man’s development depends
on
learning. Early speech (speech acts) was necessary to give
commands,
get things done, make prohibitions. Later speech added rules of
language
(grammar), embellishment and harmony, and a figurative sense.
Necessity
demanded a certain kind of language for philosophers to search for
truth,
utility demanded the language of statesmanship, and pleasure demanded
the
language of the theater. Hence, 1) Philosophical language [the
language
of necessity], aiming at truth, is exact, logical, rational, and
concise.
2) The language of statesmen (oratory) [the language of utility], used
in the forum or the camp, is less precise and governed by the subject,
the place, the time, and the audience (the court of law, the assembly
of
the realm). 3) The third kind of language (speech) [the language
of pleasure] employs narration and uses much embellishment: a) one kind
records the fixed truth and employs a simpler (prose) style of
composition
(history); b) another kind (poetry) adds a fictitious element to the
truth
or imitates the truth by fiction, using greater elaboration (and verse,
usually). The basis of all Poetry (Making) is imitation.
The end of poetry is to give instruction
[notice
the priority] in pleasurable form, for poetry teaches and does not
simply
amuse. It seems that it amuses because originally poetry was
sung.
Poetry imitates that it may teach. The merit of the poet,
according
to Aristophanes’ Euripides (in Frogs), is to impress adroitly upon
citizens
the need of being better men. Assuredly,1) philosophy, 2)
oratory,
and 3) drama have one thing in common: persuasion [notice the emphasis
placed on rhetoric]. Whenever language is used it expresses a
fact
or the opinion of the speaker. The end of learning is
knowledge.
Persuasion means that the hearer accepts the words of the
speaker.
The soul of persuasion is truth. Its end (of persuasion) is to
convince
(of the truth). Hence, eloquent speech is not the end of oratory
(it is a means); persuasion is. If a man does not persuade, it is
due to no fault of the art but of the issue (which might be beyond the
power of the orator to control), the orator (who might be a defective
speaker),
or the cause he espouses (which may be unjust).
There are two kinds of art: a) Practical arts
that attain the ends in and of themselves (shoemaking, carpentry) and
b)
Conjectural arts (since they proceed by conjecture, not by fixed
principles),
like oratory, medicine, or navigation. The orator speaks 1) in
the
forum so that good men are meted to good men, and punishment to evil
men
(forensic or legal oratory relying on the past actions of men), hence,
his aim is justice; 2) in assemblies and councils to advice (in the
future)
on public affairs (deliberative or political oratory), hence his aim is
utility; and 3) elsewhere (in the present) to praise or censure men
(epideictic
oratory), hence, its aim is honesty. All speeches (judicial,
civic,
or encomiastic) are of a hortatory nature since they attempt to
persuade
an audience of the truth (of a legal case, of a deliberation, or of the
honesty of someone’s praise or condemnation).
The Poet is a Maker and almost a second
deity.
Poets may be classified according to I) Poetical inspiration (A. Those
inspired by the Muses, like Homer and Hesiod, or by B. Wine, like
Horace,
Aristophanes, and Aeschylus), II) Age (A. The coarse age of Apollo, B.
The venerable period of religion and the mysteries [Orpheus, Musaeus],
and C. The [Heroic?] age of Homer and Hesiod), or III) Subject matter
(A.
The religious poets [Orpheus], B. The philosophical poets: 1. Natural
[Empedocles,
Lucretius] and 2. Moral [Solon, Hesiod, Pythagoras]).
Comedy and Tragedy are of the same genus and
share in common the name drama (“action”). Comedy is a dramatic
poem
filled with intrigue, full of action, happy in outcome, and written in
a popular style (it also contains danger situations [although the
outcome
is tame] and violence). Tragedy is the imitation of the adversity
of a distinguished man: it employs the form of action, presents a
disastrous
dénoument, and is expressed in impressive metrical language (but
not every subject produces purgation).
The early orators had only one end in view,
to persuade and move their hearers (hence, their language was
necessarily
rude). The poets sought only to please by means of alluring
songs.
Eventually the orator and the poet secured from each other what they
lacked
respectively (Isocrates). Poetry (drama) moved from the country
to
the city and provided plots to furnish warning examples and sometimes
to
furnish precepts.
Horace was right when he said that the useful
and the pleasing are the two ends of poetry. Poems must 1) be
deeply
conceived (by having insight and foresight, or prudentia), 2) have
variety
(varietas), 3) have vividness (efficacia: a certain potency and force
in
thought and language which compels one to be a vivid listener), and 4)
have winsomeness (suavitas) [charm], to temper the harshness of
vividness.
These are the supreme poetic qualities.
For objects of every kind, there exists one
perfect original. In poetry, the standard is heroic poetry (the
epic).
The precepts for a good heroic poem are as follows: 1) Start in medias
res (not ab ovo) [to stimulate interest from the beginning]; 2) Do not
repeat incidents, hence becoming tedious [NB: epics tend to repeat
battles];
3) Hold your hearer captive by means of suspense (the principal theme
should
not be placed at the beginning [although there should be wondrous
interruptions]),
and 4) Divide the book in chapters (as in Virgil’s Aeneid), each to its
proper place, in imitation of nature, which subdivides into parts of
parts,
all so related that they constitute an organic body [is this an
ontological
or an epistemological observat |