I’m looking for a factual answer here, more-or-less, but it’s about a work of literature. So here it is in Cafe Society.
Inspired by the recent thread: What Is Your Favorite Depiction of Hell?
Needless to say, Dante’s Inferno is among the literature cited. This reminds me of a question I’ve wondered about from time to time:
To what extent, and in what details, was Dante’s description of Hell based on established Church doctrine, or on accepted “scientific” thought, of the day? To what extent was his description built from his own imagination?
I know that at least some of the detail was derived from Dante’s own life-and-times, as his Hell was populated by some major local political figures and events of his own time.
But at least in the overall layout (Hell as a hole in the ground; multiple concentric levels, and the assignment of which kinds of sins got you stuck at which levels, etc.), was all that mostly standard doctrine in Dante’s day? Were the ruined ancient cities and bridges in Hell part of established belief, or did Dante make all that up?
Similarly, to what extent were his descriptions of Purgatory and Heaven derived from commonly accepted thought of the day, and to what extent were his descriptions coming from his own imagination?
Dante’s categorization of sins and their relative badness is apparently heavily based on writings from Aristotle and Cicero (and a bit of Augustine) rather than a coherent tenet of the Church, although Limbo (as the edge of Hell where the virtuous unbaptized ended up) was a thing in medieval Catholic theology.
I believe the actual physical division of Hell (and Purgatory and Paradise) into nine main sections each (plus subsections and a final Boss level for each) is Dante’s own doing.
IIRC, Purgatory didn’t have a Big Boss at the summit, but St. Peter At The Gate was positioned about half-way up. Kind of an odd place to put the Boss.
And the next big contributor to our current view of Hell was John Milton, writing three and a half centuries later.
No, he got a pageant while he was waiting for Beatrice to show up. From what I recall it was a lot of tedious allegorical nonsense and a lot less interesting than all the stuff before.
Did Dante originate the idea of St. Pete as the Gatekeeper (commonly portrayed today as being at the very Gate of Heaven)? Even if Dante didn’t actually place him at the Gate of Heaven?
Divine Comedy did get less interesting (read: lurid) as Dante moved from Hell to Purgatory and on to Heaven. Inferno was a riot of creative grotesquerie, elaborate torments tailored to the sins of the damned, flakes of fire and ice, ancient ruins, monsters from ancient lore (IIRC Kerberos was there, and that dragon creature (Geryon?)), and (did I mention?) ancient ruins. (Who built those?)
Purgatory was much more tame. The torments were milder and less imaginative, and the spirits there much more passive and acquiescent of their temporary punishments.
Paradise was mostly a snooze. Sweetly smiling angels dancing choreographed formations, forming the stars of the galaxies for all eternity. Philosophical debates over why the Moon is dense and rare. The Host Of Angels gathered around THE THRONE strumming their harps and singing praises forever. Yawn.
Even Dante ran out of imagination to think of something to write. At least twice he writes things to effect “Such was the beauty of their words that I can no longer remember what they said.”
Also, ISTR that the closer you get to God, the fewer women there are (not counting Beatrice, Virgin Mary and assorted saints). Lots of nuns in the First Sphere and some assorted lovers in the Third but that’s it. Most of Heaven is a total sausage party.
This reminds me of the Islamic vision of Heaven, where the most righteous martyrs will find a large number of nubile virgins awaiting them. (What they never seem to mention is that those virgins, once in heaven, have to remain virgins.) ETA: But we digress . . .
I’ve long wanted to read Dante. But, I have had great trouble in finding a translation that’s faithful, complete and not dry. For fans of Dante, I recommend Satan- His Psychotherapy And Cure. It’s a great book filled with references to the Divine Comedy. I also recommend Inferno Joe! 1989: Inferno Joe |
I read an English version in a hard copy dead-tree book from a library, somewhat before the Internet was full of such stuff. I’ve briefly peeked at several on-line versions since, no two of which are quite the same. It’s a real trick to translate such a work, keeping the meanings and connotations and subtleties intact, while also maintaining the poetic meter of the verses.
I remember the opening verse of the version I read, which I have not seen exactly duplicated since: “Midway through life’s journey I found myself in a deep wood, where the right way was lost.”
It’s possible the best you can find is two out of those three. The text is heavily interspersed with lengthy philosophical digressions, which are tedious to read. Much of that is stuff relating to the events and politics of his time, which are uninteresting to a modern non-Italian.
Produce an abridged Readers’ Digest version that eliminates much of that but retains the main story, and you’ll have a much more interesting read. But not complete.
As for the translations, Dante is so heavy with allegory and metaphor, it’s a considerable feat to translate that all without losing something. ETA: And to be sure, literary scholars debate endlessly over just what Dante meant to be saying in the first place, leading to different flavors of interpretation and translation – just as in all those translations of the Bible.
I’ve enjoyed the John Ciardi translation. I’m not a Dante scholar, and can’t speak to the completeness of his version, but I can attest that it’s not dry. Ciardi preserves some of the rhyme, which may damage the faithfulness, but it’s well footnoted and between the two it covers the ground pretty thoroughly.