So, I finished reading Dante's Inferno the other day. I enjoyed it very much (definitely heading out to look for Purgatorio tomorrow), but my edition isn't very heavily annotated, so I felt like I was missing a lot of context, and wondered if any of you could give me your thoughts.
As you likely know, the very deepest pit of Hell at the bottom of the ninth circle (traitors) is home to Lucifer. He has three heads, and each mouth is chewing a traitor: Judas, Cassius, and Brutus.
"That soul up there who has to suffer most,"
my master said: "Judas Iscariot--
his head inside, he jerks his legs without.
Of those two others, with their heads beneath,
the one who hangs from that black snout is Brutus--
see how he writhes and does not say a word!
That other, who seems so robust, is Cassius.
But night is come again, and it is time
for us to leave; we have seen everything."
Dante doesn't go into very much detail here about the sinners or their torment, which I imagine is because it isn't necessary -- we know what they did, and we can guess at the severity of the punishment by extrapolating from what we know of the fates of lesser sinners. The brevity lends the scene a certain horrific solemnity.
Would it have been Plutarch's version of the assassination story that Dante was familiar with? If so, it seems that a point is being made that intent has no bearing on the guilt of the soul; Plutarch is very clear that Brutus thought he was doing right.
But doesn't that point contradict what Dante tells us earlier on about Limbo? If a worthy soul born before Christianity is spared punishment (in large part), what is that but a reward for having good intentions?
It's actually the point about Limbo that strikes me as the more puzzling; credit for good intent seems to be a more modern invention. Shakespeare makes Brutus a sympathetic figure, of course... and for that matter, "Jesus Christ Superstar" makes Judas a sympathetic figure, postulating that his motive was not greed, but fear for his people. I can't imagine Dante appreciating either of those portrayals, or understanding how they'd make any difference in ultimate punishment, or our perception of it. Maybe I'm just not getting what I'm supposed to get out of the Limbo episode.
Also, is Cocytus considered part of Judecca (traitors to benefactors)? I ask because whether or not Caesar was a benefactor to Cassius is somewhat debatable.
On another point, I was intrigued by the description of Lucifer: "He wept out of six eyes; and down three chins, / tears gushed together with a bloody froth." So Lucifer takes no pleasure in the torture he inflicts; he's suffering himself. Is the implication that his punishment is even greater than that of Judas? Judas betrayed the son, and Lucifer betrayed the father?
As you likely know, the very deepest pit of Hell at the bottom of the ninth circle (traitors) is home to Lucifer. He has three heads, and each mouth is chewing a traitor: Judas, Cassius, and Brutus.
"That soul up there who has to suffer most,"
my master said: "Judas Iscariot--
his head inside, he jerks his legs without.
Of those two others, with their heads beneath,
the one who hangs from that black snout is Brutus--
see how he writhes and does not say a word!
That other, who seems so robust, is Cassius.
But night is come again, and it is time
for us to leave; we have seen everything."
Dante doesn't go into very much detail here about the sinners or their torment, which I imagine is because it isn't necessary -- we know what they did, and we can guess at the severity of the punishment by extrapolating from what we know of the fates of lesser sinners. The brevity lends the scene a certain horrific solemnity.
Would it have been Plutarch's version of the assassination story that Dante was familiar with? If so, it seems that a point is being made that intent has no bearing on the guilt of the soul; Plutarch is very clear that Brutus thought he was doing right.
But doesn't that point contradict what Dante tells us earlier on about Limbo? If a worthy soul born before Christianity is spared punishment (in large part), what is that but a reward for having good intentions?
It's actually the point about Limbo that strikes me as the more puzzling; credit for good intent seems to be a more modern invention. Shakespeare makes Brutus a sympathetic figure, of course... and for that matter, "Jesus Christ Superstar" makes Judas a sympathetic figure, postulating that his motive was not greed, but fear for his people. I can't imagine Dante appreciating either of those portrayals, or understanding how they'd make any difference in ultimate punishment, or our perception of it. Maybe I'm just not getting what I'm supposed to get out of the Limbo episode.
Also, is Cocytus considered part of Judecca (traitors to benefactors)? I ask because whether or not Caesar was a benefactor to Cassius is somewhat debatable.
On another point, I was intrigued by the description of Lucifer: "He wept out of six eyes; and down three chins, / tears gushed together with a bloody froth." So Lucifer takes no pleasure in the torture he inflicts; he's suffering himself. Is the implication that his punishment is even greater than that of Judas? Judas betrayed the son, and Lucifer betrayed the father?
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 02:13 am (UTC)However, I do have at least three versions of it floating around at home. The untranslated one with Italian footnotes is probably a dead loss nowadays, since I've forgotten most of the Italian I ever knew. :-) But I do have a nice fat academic text and the Dorothy L Sayers version as well, which might shed some light on the matter. I'll dig them out and have a look.
Which translation are you reading, BTW? I can see at a glance that it's not the Sayers version (no terza rima) but I'm unfamiliar with it.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 06:19 am (UTC)The point about Limbo, though, is very, very interesting.
Always thought the Brutus/Cassius/Judas thing was terribly unfair, though. I found out, and went, "Huh? Wah! But Brutus! Nooo!" and then thought, "Surely there must be more people in all of time who have betrayed each other more horribly than old Brutus and Cassius". And, what can I say, JCS Judas just rocks the house.
I have a friend who wants to read the Dante books - are they interesting to read through? Do you have a good translation?
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 07:27 am (UTC)I mean, yes. Judas betrayed Christ. But when you think about it, that had to happen for Jesus to go on and die and be resurrected and the whole lot. Without the actions of Judas, whatever the reasoning behind them, Jesus would have just been another guru with a few thousand followers.
That Judas did what was so central to the whole point of sending Jesus to earth, and was punished for it? So incredibly unfair.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 10:19 am (UTC)If you could take a look at what you'd have, I'd really appreciate it.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 10:42 am (UTC)I'm searching for my Dorothy L. Sayers version (translated bluntly as "HELL") but as yet no joy. I can only assume that Dante had a thoroughly medieval mind which clung to the belief that rebellion against one's superior was the first and worst of sins, as evidenced by the Bible, and thus could only be dismissed as "treachery". The conspiracy against Caesar must have seemed particularly shocking to the *Italian* medieval mind when one considers Caesar's achievement in extending the Roman Empire; added to which, the conspirators have never had a great public image due to the hypocrisy needed to get close to Caesar and the violence of his actual assassination. (There's a reason why "backstabbing" is a popular term for a political takeover bid, and the term was much in use during the recent shift in power in the UK Conservative Party).
So I agree with you that Brutus and Cassius had very good reasons, but we're looking at it as moderns, not as a medieval Italian whose primary reason for writing the DIVINE COMEDY was to establish the infalliable correctness of God's design both on Earth and afterwards.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 11:44 am (UTC)And the notes for my other version (John D Sinclair) say:
And it does strike me that the whole Caesar/Brutus/Cassius story is a very much more local concern for a fellow Italian anyway, and a very big deal in the history of that part of the world, so I can entirely see why Dante might view it as the prime example of the betrayal of state. Most of his examples are sweeping and iconic rather than examining the motives and deeds of the sinner too closely. As you've already observed, he doesn't tend to go into a great deal of detail; assuming rather that his audience will already know the personages he's referring to well enough to get his drift.
Neither editor/translator refers to Dante's likely sources; the footnotes are generally more concerned with trying to tune into the mindset of a 13th/14th century Florentine. :-) But if I'm not misinterpreting the Italian footnotes in my third version of the book, they're giving Plutarch - and also Cicero - a namecheck.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 11:48 am (UTC)Hee. In case you haven't found your Dorothy L Sayers version yet, she translates that line as "And strong-thewed Cassius is his fellow thrall." No comment whatsoever on whether strong thews are dangerous. Or even caused by eating too much, although I'd imagine that a certain amount of busyness and activity helps. Probably caused by lots of pacing and plotting rather than going to the gym, I suspect. :-)
Thews?
Date: 2003-11-12 12:49 pm (UTC)1. A well-developed sinew or muscle.
2. Muscular power or strength. Often used in the plural.
Thank you dictionary.com! Yes, "sinewy" is far more how I picture Cassius. This made me wonder about the original Italian, so I found these two stanzas online:
De li altri due c'hanno il capo di sotto,
quel che pende dal nero ceffo e Bruto:
vedi come si storce, e non fa motto!;
e l'altro e Cassio, che par si membruto.
Ma la notte risurge, e oramai
e da partir, che' tutto avem veduto.
"Cassio, che par si membruto". Cassius, who appears so... membruto. Babelfish translation engine was no help, but I found this Italian gloss on "membruto":
membruto mem|brĂ¹|to
BU dotato di membra sviluppate e vigorose [quadro 1]
(http://www.demauroparavia.it/68469)
"Equipped with limbs which are developed and vigorous." Goodness me, I'd previously pictured Cassius as Twig Man but this version sounds pretty damn sexy! And it certainly confirms that Sayers's translation is the closer to the original Italian; "robust" is a rather sloppy rendering. But then we can argue that with "membruto" Dante was just looking for a rhyme with "Bruto" (Brutus) and thus the whole discussion on Cassius's appearance is irrelevant anyway :-)
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 10:28 pm (UTC)I really appreciate your typing that out for me!
"thews and limbs like unto our ancestors"
Date: 2003-11-12 10:32 pm (UTC)Hee! I went through this same train of thought when I read that "robust". Actually, since it comes on the heels of the reference to Brutus' silence in the face of torture, I wondered if it was a metaphorical description of a similar toughness in Cassius. However, that isn't a particularly good match with what Plutarch tells us of Cassius either -- as Shakespeare reinforces, he's very much not the type to suffer quietly, though Brutus in fact is.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 10:41 pm (UTC)Could it possibly be a sort of negative image of Jesus' suffering? He, too, suffered to fulfil God's plan. It's almost as though Judas' eternal punishment serves as an eternal continuation of that idea. Have you ever read the short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas"? It rather reminds me of that... the child suffering indefinitely to sustain the prosperity of the people. Judas isn't a child, but he's naive compared to Jesus -- he lacks the acute knowledge that what's happening is for a cause.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-12 10:51 pm (UTC)It does make sense, but it struck me as interesting because it goes against our pop culture image of the Devil, as essentially a sadist -- the gleeful slavedriver, instead of the meanest slave of them all, as Dante implies. It's really not Lucifer dishing out the punishments in Inferno, it's God.
The fact that it's a pit of *ice* was interesting too. Again, not at all our cartoon-stereotyped version of Hell.
I have a friend who wants to read the Dante books - are they interesting to read through? Do you have a good translation?
I enjoyed Inferno, and it was an interesting read, though I wouldn't call it a page-turner. I read it pretty slowly, usually one Canto at night before bed. I haven't read Purgatorio or Paradiso yet, nor have I looked at other translations of Inferno, so I couldn't give advice on that. As I said to
no subject
Date: 2003-11-13 01:01 am (UTC)You said your version was sparse with the helpful commentary - it just occurred to me now - but all I know about that is that, apparently, Dante meets all these people on his journey who are actual real people he knew, as a really rather rude mockery. Perhaps annotations would be useful in that respect.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-13 06:24 am (UTC)If you do decide to look out for it, the Sayers version was published by Penguin in the UK. They've since released a different translation by someone else, but I think the Sayers one may still be available.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-13 10:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 03:13 pm (UTC)Off-topic I know, but tell me... what did you think of the two lovers (Paolo and Francesca) that were swirling around in the first level of the Inferno? Jorge Luis Borges thought they were "emblems" of the joy that Dante couldn't obtain with Beatrice. Do you have any particular interpretations?
Hi, I'm new here. Hope you don't mind me barging in from the Snape Support Community-- I loved your comments there. ::sheepish grin::
no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 03:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 07:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 07:54 pm (UTC)Hi, I'm new here. Hope you don't mind me barging in from the Snape Support Community-- I loved your comments there. ::sheepish grin::
Not at all! You're perfectly welcome here. And at
no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 08:05 pm (UTC)And Borges wrote a really beautiful series of essays about the relationship between Dante and Beatrice in "The Inferno," and devoted one to Paolo and Francessa. I think both you and he were really onto something when you made the same connection between Dante's hopeless love for Beatrice, and his sympathy for that pair.
Er, I also realize that I am taking great liberties with your person right now, but, em... mind if I friend you as well?
no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 08:16 pm (UTC)http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0811200124/qid=1068869481/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/103-5094746-2104667?v=glance&s=books
A short selection from that story:
"God made Himself totally a man, but a man to the point of infamy, a man to the point of reprobation and the abyss. To save us, He could have chosen any of the destinies which make up the complex web of history. He could ahve been Alexander or Pythagoras or Rurik or Jesus; He chose the vilest destiny of all: He was Judas."
The essays on Dante can be found in Borge's Selected Fictions:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140290117/qid=1068869361/sr=1-10/ref=sr_1_10/103-5094746-2104667?v=glance&s=books
I loved that book so much that I actually photocopied some essays from it at the library, after wanting to keep something of it with me for prosperity. Hell, I think I still have those essays somewhere...
no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 08:17 pm (UTC)But it seemed to me that delighting in God's punishments was the *expected* reaction, so whenever he felt pity instead, it was noteworthy. I found it interesting that even though Dante doesn't seriously doubt God's justice, he allows himself such a wide range of emotional reactions, depending on whom he's seeing. The fate of a particular soul can be simultaneously piteous and just.
Er, I also realize that I am taking great liberties with your person right now, but, em... mind if I friend you as well?
Not at all, go ahead. :)
no subject
Date: 2003-11-14 08:19 pm (UTC)