The Pope's Erotic Novel

One of the most popular books of the 15th century was the Historia de duobus amantibus or the Story of two lovers, written by Enea Silvio Piccolomini from Siena in 1444. It was first published in Cologne in 1468 and then in Rome in 1476, whereupon it followed a meteoric increase in publication. One reason for its popularity could be that it is one of the first notable erotic novels, only preceded by Petronius Arbiter's Satyricon and Boccaccio's Decameron, and the first epistolary erotic novel. Another reason could be that Piccolomini went on to become Pope Pius II in 1458.

Piccolomini in his older, more frumpy times

The novel follows the adulterous love of Lucretia, a married woman in Piccolomini's native Siena, and Euryalus, companion of Sigismund, the visiting Duke of Austria. Their relationship progresses from the search for reciprocal affection following a chance meeting, through love letters and secret meetings to a tragic finale. This plot has often been likened to that of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, and the popularity of the novel might have made it available to Shakespeare 153 years later.

Euryalus and Lucretia meeting on the title page of
an edition from 1500 (click the image to zoom)

Interestingly, the novel is in many ways highly transitional. It occured at a time of budding Renaissance, including a topic and imagery which, save for Boccaccio, had been taboo in Medieval times. Whereas modern readers might find that the relative absence of sex and the poetically introspective and psychological approach to love remind them more of romance than of erotica, contemporary ones would relish in the novel's deviance from the religious rigidity of a waning era.

Euryalus delivers a love letter. 
The illustration breaks with standards of Medieval illumination. 
These were kept alive in Venice, but the Florentine printers 
developed this style because they were printing for
a larger, less wealthy public. (click the image to zoom)

No one exemplifies this change more distinctly than the author himself, albeit in unexpected ways. As a young Poet Laureate of Gaspar Schlick, the Chancellor of the Holy Roman Emperor (Sigismund of Austria...), Piccolomini seems to have embraced the ideals of the Renaissance. In the novel, one of Euryalus' last resort for gaining access to Lucretia, her husband's cousin Pandalus, points out that "Why, she is so changed by love, you would not think her the same person. Alas for piety, alas for grief! No one, until this happened, in all the city was chaster than she, no one more modest. It is indeed amazing that nature has given to love so much power over men’s thoughts." (i). Nature, as Fransesco de Sanctis points out, and in particular human nature, is now what is right (ii). Lucretia and Euryalus are clearly meant to be together, while the laws of society, which were the prevailing good in Medieval texts and the authority behind Lucretia's faltering marriage, is now what is wrong. While Dante viewed nature as evil and Medieval literature tended to view love as something granted by external, supernatural powers, Piccolomini places love in human nature. This Renaissance humanism which focuses on man and nature rather than religion and religious concepts saturates the novel and rules of society and honour which causes the tragic end to their relationship confirms this attitude.

The lovers, in a fond embrace, are being warned by a servant that
Lucretia's husband is at the door. The print is probably 
re-used from some other work. (click  the image to zoom)

However, Piccolomini soon became Pope, resulting in a remarkable volte-face. As Pope Pius II, he famously stated "Aeneam rejicite, Pium suscipite!" ("Reject Aeneas, accept Pius!"). He distanced himself from the favourable descriptions of nature, and particularly that of Lucretia, as well as the success of his younger self, albeit unsuccessfully. In this sense, upon ascending to the top of the Holy See, Aeneas returned to pre-Renaissance sentiments, luckily for us, to no avail.

The erstwhile poet had already made his mark, providing posterity with lyrical and heartfelt descriptions of love and the experience of it. The English translation, introduced by the below paragraphs, makes for a delightful read and a story which remains as engaging and vivid today as it did almost six hundred years ago.

"

THE city of Siena, your native town and mine, did great honour to the Emperor Sigismund on his arrival, as is now well known; and a palace was made ready for him by the church of Saint Martha, on the road that leads to the narrow gate of sandstone. As Sigismund came hither, after the ceremonies, he met four married ladies, for birth and beauty, age and ornament, almost equal. All thought them goddesses rather than mortal women, and had they been only three, they might have seemed those whom Paris, we are told, saw in a dream. Now Sigismund, though advanced in years, was quick to passion; he took great pleasure in the company of women, and loved feminine caresses. Indeed he liked nothing better than the presence of great ladies. So when he saw these, he leaped from his horse, and they received him with outstretched hands. Then, turning to his companions, he said: ‘Have you ever seen women like these: For my part, I cannot say whether their faces are human or angelic. Surely they are from heaven.’ 

They cast down their eyes, and their modesty made them lovelier. For, as the blushes spread over their cheeks, their faces took the colour of Indian ivory stained with scarlet, or white lilies mixed with crimson roses. And chief among them all, shone the beauty of Lucretia. A young girl, barely twenty years of age, she came of the house of the Camilli, and was wife to Menelaus, a wealthy man, but quite unworthy that such a treasure should look after his home; deserving rather that his wife should deceive him or, as we say, give him horns. 

This lady was taller than the others. Her hair was long, the colour of beaten gold, and she wore it not hanging down her back, as maidens do, but bound up with gold and precious stones. Her lofty forehead, of good proportions, was without a wrinkle, and her arched eyebrows were dark and slender, with a due space between. Such was the splendour of her eyes that, like the sun, they dazzled all who looked on them; with such eyes she could kill whom she chose and, when she would, restore the dead to life. Her nose was straight in contour, evenly dividing her rosy cheeks, while nothing could be sweeter, nothing more pleasant to see than those cheeks which, when she laughed, broke in a little dimple on either side. And all who saw those dimples longed to kiss them. A small and well-shaped mouth, coral lips made to be bitten, straight little teeth, that shone like crystal, and between them, running to and fro, a tremulous tongue that uttered not speech, but sweetest harmonies. And how can I describe the beauty of her mind, the whiteness of her breast?

"

The remaider of the novel can be found by clicking here.

What do you think?

What is your opinion of the about-face of Pius the poet pope? He could have distanced himself from his earlier work either because of the requirements of office, because of old age and changed values but also for a number of other reasons. What do you think these might be and can you sympathise with his choices?

Also, an erotic novel more or less without sex: is that a contradiction in terms? Is it an erotic novel at all or would you classify it as something else? If so, what and why?

Finally, the personal aspect. Love, romance and sexuality are highly personal themes. Could this be the reason for the novel's popularity back then? What is your personal reaction to the novel? Who deserves your personal sympathy, Aeneas or Pius?

Comments on The Tale of Sir Bob are always welcome! 

Further reading: A quick but good introduction, a thorough analysis, a look at illustrations and a young literate's reactions

Sources: (i), (ii), Pic1, Pic2, Pic3, Pic4

The Quality of Copies

I have a question for you. If availability and price were not an issue, which would you choose:

1. An original painting or a reproduction?
2. A concert with your favourite band or a local cover band?
3. The Twilight/ Lord of the Ring trilogy or the films based on them?
4. An Armani suit/ Louis Vuitton bag or a Chinese copy?
5. Attending Woodstock in August 1969 or hearing your parents talk about it?

My guess is you chose the first alternative more often than not. Also, I wager your argument for doing so was that the first is better, but why is that? What makes an original better than a copy, and is the original really what you think it is?

Original and Copy

When a painting is being made, it represents reality. When your local cover band performs, they play already existing songs. The films adapt the readily available books, the Chinese copies mimic the originals and your parents tries to present reality as it was in 1969. The arts' role in representing reality emphasises the distinction between original and copy and Graham Allen, professor of literal and cultural theory at University College Cork, examines the nature of this relationship in Intertextuality in reference to Walter Benjamin's seminal essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction:

In an age before the mass publication of books, possession of an individual text was extremely rare and of enormous value. The prices still paid for original classic paintings also attest a residual attachment on contemporary society to the aura of the original work of art. Technological society, however, is dominated by reproductions of original works. The signed copy of the novel may be preferable to the unsigned copy, an original painting by Van Gogh may seem priceless, attendance at a dance performance may seem preferable to viewing it on video, but in contemporary society our experience of these and all other arts are generally of their technological reproductions. New artistic media of the twentieth century such as film, video and television, are, indeed, based on technological methods of reproduction. The aura which surrounds The Mona Lisa or the eight-century Book of Kells in Trinity College Library, Dublin, is unavailable to, and indeed an irrelevance for, these kinds of art forms (i). 

Allen, of course, neglects to mention that by their very nature the original painting by Van Gogh, the Mona Lisa, the Book of Kells and even the dance performances are themselves reproductions. Each of them mimics either natural entities, persons, stories probably already in existence, a dance script or an earlier performance.

Not original

With licence to copy (©)

Dance, by accompanying and illustrating originals such as music, narration or in hunter gatherer societies the movement of animals, necessarily has to imitate an original through body movement (ii). The hunter gatherer would accompany the rhythm of a primitive drum and dance to give a representation of his genesis myth through body movement. He might also dance to mimic the hare which he caught earlier. In these cases, the hunter gatherer tries to adapt cultural expressions like music into another art form, reproducing music and myth narration as dance, or he is imitating the world, reproducing the movement of its animals.

Still not original

The signed copy of a novel is arguably just that, a copy. The Mona Lisa is a static reproduction of the visage of a real person and the Book of Kells is a reproduction of Christian sacred documents and a summing up of contemporary religious discourse.

The basic argument still stands, though, because in the original-reproduction dichotomic relationship the original is the source from which the reproduction borrows and as such truly original within that relationship. Likewise, by being a part of a cultural context, the original appears as a segment of reality, however many earlier sources it may have imitated. Thus, art is always to some extent a copy of reality and it is this copy which is generally encountered in contemporary society.

Copy of Kells

This, in a simple and applicable form, is exemplified by news media. As soon as we do not experience an event first hand, we miss reality because any other way of becoming aware of the event after its passing has to be through a reproduction. This could be in terms of someone having experienced the original event and then reproducing it by narrating his or her experience. Alternatively, it could be in terms of a newscast reporting a real event, its content and form edited and adapted in order to be presentable through a different medium, film (iii). As representative for an age of multi-media, this latter case is symptomatic for the emergence of the field of adaptation where narratives are adapted into new technological modes of expression.

"Do I have an original thought in my head?"

So if everything is inspired by something and nothing is original, does that mean that everything is of poorer quality than some mythical source?

Well, it depends on how you look at it.

A pessimist would say that you cannot create anything new and original and by borrowing, willingly or unwillingly, you make a patchwork which is less coherent and less consistent and therefore of lower quality. Since you cannot help drawing your inspiration from your experience, you are doomed to reproduction and, at best, repetition. The pessimistic approach is expertly exemplified in the opening monolgue of Adaptation:

The pessimist would say that the film takes what you read in the book, leaves out the bits it finds irrelevant and adds bits it thinks should be there, like music or moving images. The chances of these corresponding with what you would think appropriate are slim to none and the rest of the audience faces similar odds. Because of this gap between priorities and between expectations, any new cultural product would in fact be a poorer one.

An optimist, on the other hand, would argue that the novelty is in the combinations. By combining cultural products, like film music, moving images and a story from a novel, the new film could be so much more than each individual product could. You would understand the book differently, listening to the song would never be the same again and seeing that actor play out his part would modify the way you look at both him and other films in which he has appeared.

The optimist would say that because everything is a copy and because you cannot do anything without copying several other copies, you make something original. There are so many elements which inform your creation process, that the likelihood of all those elements having been put together before is as small as the pessimist's priority odds.

An original copy

Let us revisit the list we started with.

1. The reproduction would be more than a poorer imitation of the painting. It would include all the colours, all the interpretations and experiences of the reproducing painter and all the history of the original painting.
2. The cover band concert would update the original song and give it a local flavour. It would reflect not only each musician, but also the musical tradition of the area in addition to what were there "originally".
3. The trilogies could only communicate through symbols or the occasional static image. The films, on the other hand, can tell you things through the sequence of images, through what's in these images and through sound (which includes music, noises, dialogue, voiceover etc.). These would give you experiences you could never create based on just the text.
4. The Chinese imitations would use different materials, different techniques and would probably be more affordable and available. This combination would greatly expand the impact and implications of all these products.
5. By combining the Woodstock experience with all their history after the event, nostalgia and modern sensibilities, your parents will have created a new Woodstock, one which is different from the one they actually experienced. In time, you might tell your children about Woodstock and your story will, with almost complete certainty be a different one.

Oh no! That cannibal from Sin City, Jonathan Safran Foer, has got the ring!

The copy, therefore, is original because it is a combination which did not exist before. Considering it as a poorer version just because it is based on something else might have more to do with the psychological fear of being wrong, of having backed the wrong thing. Psychologist Elliot Aronson wrote:

Far from being a sign of intellectual inferiority, the capacity to err is crucial to human cognition. Far from being a moral flaw, it is inextricable from some of our most humane and honorable qualities: empathy, optimism, imagination, conviction, and courage. And far from being a mark of indifference or intolerance, wrongness is a vital part of how we learn and change. Thanks to error, we can revise our understanding of ourselves and amend our ideas about the world (iii).

So next time you catch yourself thinking that someone has destroyed your favourite book or piece of music, keep Aronson's words in mind and then ask yourself what you have lost, why it was precious and what you have gained.

What do you think? 

How do you react to copies like a film adaptation of your favourite book? Is a copy always poorer than the original? Does the knowledge that you probably are not creating anything new as such take the fun out of creative work? If so, why? Is the alternative that we stop producing cultural expressions or should we open the floodgates and create for the lowest common denominator? Make your contribution to the discussion!

Comments on The Tale of Sir Bob are always welcome!

Sources: (i): Graham Allen: Intertextuality, 2nd edn (Oxford and New York: Routledge, 2011): 176
(ii): Ann C. Albright and Ann Dils (eds.): Moving History/ Dancing Cultures: A Dance History Reader (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 2001): 119-120
(iii): Elliot Aronson: The Social Animal (New York: Worth, 2012)
Pic1, Pic2, Pic3, Pic4

A Philosopher, an Economist, a Psychologist and a Physicist Walks into the Unknown - Four Takes on Souls and Soul Mates

With my background from the arts and particularly literature studies, I have been fascinated with the soul. Remember, this is what Faust sold to Mephistopheles or the devil in Marlowe's The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus and Goethe's Faust. It is also what Dorian Gray pledges in order for Basil Hallward's picture of him to age and be marred instead of him in Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray. Most religions recognise some sort of human spirit and many major philosophies as well. I follow neither, but I am curious about how the soul works if it exists. Is it, for instance, possible to sell one's soul, making a deal with the devil and what about soulmates? Do they exist or is it true what Emily Dickinson wrote, that "the soul selects her own society, then shuts the door"?

The reason I am writing about this now is that I recently came up with a plan. Atheists do not believe in a soul because it cannot be scientifically proven to exist. So, I figured taking inspiration from the Freakonomics podcast, what's to stop me from buying it off one of them and selling it on in a crossroads at midnight like blues guitarists like Robert Johnson claimed to have done? Imagine, I could get Faust's knowledge and pleasures of the world, Dorian Gray's eternal life and beauty and Johnson's guitar skills and not lose my own soul (if it exists)!

The plan proved trickier than I thought. I couldn't find any Atheists willing to sell their supposedly non-existent souls. I thought it would be like getting money for nothing for them, but no, they seemed reluctant to part with it.

Cue the philosopher and the economist:

The Philosopher and the Economist:

Michael Sandel and Stephen Dubner

Michael Sandel

Sandel: Well, it strikes me…The first thing that strikes me about it is that it’s a very old idea. It’s not new. Think of the indulgences of the medieval period. And it was after all the sale of indulgences, which is pretty close. Is there a difference between selling your soul and buying salvation? If you can buy a person’s soul, it’s pretty closely akin to buying salvation, which was, you remember that was the practice that was carried out in the Catholic Church at the time that Martin Luther rose up against indulgences, against the buying and selling of salvation.


In the above mentioned podcast, economy journalist Stephen Dubner co-author of the Freakonomics blog and books, talked to Sandel, a political philosopher at Harvard University. The background was a case where someone had actually managed to buy another person's soul for $50.

Stephen Dubner

Dubner: [...] if I offered to buy your soul for fifty dollars what would you say? [...]Let’s say that I feel that you are not exercising it properly, that you are not taking seriously enough for my taste and my moral code the responsibility of this spiritual entity known as a soul, and I therefore am willing to pay dollars in order to better curate that soul because I do believe in the sanctity of the soul, and rather than see you not tend yours properly I’m willing to pay the price to take over that responsibility.

The two ponders this for a while. If it is possible to buy one soul, why not buy many? I could, for instance, buy a great amount of souls and sell them on to a religious church for a profit. As Sandel pointed out, medieval Christians bought abstract products like salvation. We buy the feeling of safety when we buy insurance and a feeling of self when we buy new clothes or other items. Dubner suggests that when a church converts followers of different faiths, they should pay a fee for each follower's soul.

Sandel: A market economy is a tool; it’s a valuable tool. It’s an instrument for achieving economic wealth, affluence, and prosperity. It’s a tool that we use, that we put to our purposes. But as markets and market thinking come to inform all aspects of life, as everything becomes available for sale, we become a market society, which is a way of thinking and being, an unreflective way of thinking and being that just assumes that all the good things in life can in principle be up for sale. And that, I think diminishes a great many moral and civic goods that markets and market relations don’t honor, and that money can’t or shouldn’t buy.

So, the morality of buying and selling on a soul would be problematic. What, then, if I knew someone really lonely and wanted to give him or her a soulmate? Imagine I had bought a guy's soul and I found someone who I thought would go really well together with him. Could I make him fall in love?

Cue the psychologist:

The Psychologist

Jeremy Nicholson

Jeremy Nicholson, M.S.W., Ph.D, is a doctor of social and personality psychology who focuses on persuasion and dating and calls himself "The Attraction Doctor". He writes for Psychology Today:

Jeremy Nicholson

Nicholson: [...]according to a January 2011 Marist poll, 73% of Americans believe that they are destined to find their one, true, soul mate. The percentage is a bit higher for men (74%) than women (71%). The notion is also higher among younger individuals, with 79% of those under 45 believing in soul mates (as opposed to 69% of those over 45).

Nicholson refers to the researcher Knee, who found that people who believe in romantic destiny or soul mates almost never finds what they are looking for. They think they do, though, and for a while all is well.

Nicholson: In all relationships, however, disagreement, conflict, and incompatibility will arise. Ultimately, no one is perfect - or a perfect fit for a partner. It takes work, growth, and change to keep a relationship going and satisfying over time. When that happens, soul mate believers often become upset, disillusioned, and uncommitted.

They then break off the relationship and goes on in search for the next, "real" soul mate. In other words, I wouldn't have much luck pairing them up, at least based on the idea of soul mates. This idea is beginning to look more and more like a fallacy. Maybe the Atheists are right and the soul doesn't exist, or perhaps souls just don't match.

Nicholson: People who believe in romantic growth primarily look for someone who will work and grow with them, resolving conflicts as they arise. [...]they are motivated to solve them and stay committed to their partner. As a result, their relationships tend to be longer and more satisfying over time. Rather than rejecting a partner for minor disagreements, they work together, evolve, and grow a satisfying relationship. In the end, it is a bit of a cruel joke. A belief in soul mates may prevent individuals from finding the very relationships they think they are destined to have.

In any case, what is the likelyhood of finding two souls to match? Are the soul mate fans really doomed?

Cue the physicist:

The Physicist

Randall Munroe

Looking for a soul mate

Munroe: For starters, is your soul mate even still alive? A hundred billion or so humans have ever lived, but only seven billion are alive now (which gives the human condition a 93% mortality rate). If we’re all paired up at random, 90% of our soul mates are long dead.

Randall Munroe is an introvert physics graduate from CNU who used to work for NASA. He figures that in addition to most of your soul mates being dead, many of them aren't born yet, not of your sexual preferance or in your target age group. Munroe calculates that that leaves you with around half a billion potential matches. Then, of course, you will have to meet.

Munroe: Let’s suppose you lock eyes with an average of a few dozen new strangers each day. (I’m pretty introverted, so for me that’s definitely a generous estimate.) If 10% of them are close to your age, that’s around 50,000 people in a lifetime. Given that you have 500,000,000 potential soul mates, it means you’ll only find true love in one lifetime out of ten thousand.

 So, you will need a lot of time to find the soul mate. In addition, they will need a lot of time to find you. Therefore, if you believe in soul mates, the chance of finding yours before you die is 1: (10.000*10.000) or ONE IN 100 MILLION! 

What to do with insubstantial property?

This means that if I bought a soul, assuming it exists and assunimg has a mate, I would have to try to pair it with a hundred million times more souls that I would ever meet in a lifetime. It seems that the idea of a soul mate is fundamentally flawed, unhealthy and should be buried. No use in buying a number of souls and setting up a dating agency. In the end, it turns out that Wilde and Goethe were right. It seems it's only the good and bad forces of religion and their representatives here on Earth who would find any value in a soul. If I ever get a few to spare, it seems I would be best off selling or donating them on to whichever I find most deserving.

Rembrandt's Faust having a bad idea

The danger is that if there should happen to be an afterlife and I would get there after I die, I would be saddled with whatever souls I couldn't sell off for all eternity. 

Alternatively, if reincarnation is the thing....

I might get merged!

Cue dramatic suspense music.

What do you think? 

Do you believe in souls and soul mates and do you think belief is a central element here? If souls do exist, should we have moral qualms in buying and selling them like Sandel suggests? Also, soul mates aside, both the psychologist and physician are fairly dismissive of short, frequent relationships. Are they right in being so? 

Comments on The Tale of Sir Bob are always welcome!

Sources: 1, 2, 3, images as given

Some Interesting Online Reference Sites

There are lots of interesting reference sites on the web, freely available for use. These are just a few of them.

Brewter's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable
Although the hardcover version is updated and thus more extensive, it is also more expensive. The online version is based on the 1898 original but still of great use. Did you for instance know that:

• Most phrases involving Dutch mean the opposite of what is indicated. Thus, a Dutch concert is noise, Dutch courage is not really courage and a Dutch auction is an auction where bidders decrease their bids towards the minimum price.
• To whistle down the wind is to defame someone.
• To nurse an omnibus is to send a bus from a rivalling before and after another bus in order to pick up its passengers.

Myth Encyclopedia While the Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology is probably the best printed encyclopedia of myths and gods, this online Myth Encyclopedia does a pretty decent job on the digital arena.

The Phrase Finder

Wondering where you have got "once more unto the breach" from or who first said "at one fell swoop"? The Phrase Finder is a good place to look up phrases, idioms, sayings and expressions.

Urban Dictionary

Although it is a bit silly, the Urban Dictionary is useful for looking up slang. And funny wordplay of course. What, for instance, is Deja Moo? The feeling that you've heard this bull before...

and while on the subject of words...

The Online Etymology Dictionary

Etymology means the study of the true sense of words. It comes from Greek etymon which means "true sense" and logos which, of course, means "word". The word entered English via Old French. This, I found with a quick search in the Online Etymology Dictionary.

Sources as given

The Cockney Bible, Innit?

In April 2001 Mike Coles, a teacher in a secondary school in Stepney, London published his Cockney Bible (or bits of it anyway). Coles had found that translating texts into Cockney rhyming slang made them more appealing and accessible for students. He translated nine stories from the Bible and had them published as the Cockney Bible, which was later endorsed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Originally intended as a code language to keep information from the authorities, Cockney substitutes words for rhyming alternatives or pairs. Bear this in mind while reading and enjoying the following excerpts.

"

The Lord's Prayer

Hello, Dad, up there in good ol’ Heaven,

Your name is well great and holy, and we respect you, Guv.

We hope we can all ‘ave a butcher’s at Heaven and be there as soon as possible: and we want to make you happy, Guv, and do what you want ‘ere on earth, just like what you do in Heaven.

Guv, please give us some Uncle Fred, and enough grub and stuff to keep us going today, and we hope you’ll forgive us when we cock things up, just like we’re supposed to forgive them who annoy us and do dodgy stuff to us.

There’s a lot of dodgy people around, Guv; please don’t let us get tempted to do bad things.

Help keep us away from all the nasty, evil stuff, and keep that dodgy Satan away from us, ‘cos you’re much stronger than ‘im.

Your the Boss, God, and will be for ever, innit?

Cheers, Amen.

"

Jesus Calms the Storm

One evening, Jesus said to his chinas, “Let’s go to the other side of this ‘ere lake.”

So they left all the people, and the disciples got into the nanny and set orf. There were quite a few other nannies there too.

And then, would you Adam and Eve it, a huge wind started to blow up, and the waves got so bloomin’ big that they began to spill into the nanny. It got to the stage where the nanny was almost gonna fill up with fisherman’s.

Despite all this, Jesus was at the back of the nanny ‘aving a feather, lying there with his loaf on a pillow. The disciples woke him up and said, “Teacher, we’re about to die. Don’t you care?”

Jesus got up from his little feather and shouted at the wind, “Oi, be quiet!” and he said to the waves, “Oi, be still!” The wind suddenly died dahn, and it became really calm. Jesus then said to his chinas, “What is it with you lot? Why were you all so frightened? Do you still not have faith?”

But the disciples were in a right ol’ two and eight.

Source

Literary Characters - The Country Gentleman

Just as the rake and the fop were seen as dichotomies of masculinity, the Country Gentleman formed a dichotomy with the Cit. In addition the country gentleman became the object of an "internal dichotomy" where two representations highlighted the conflicts in an increasingly partisan political milieu.

The country gentleman first appeared in Horace and Virgil and was equated with the "good man" in Renaissance and 17th century literature. He embodied qualities like independence, freedom, moderation and earnestness. He is a character fundamentally in opposition to the city; he resents the fashions, customs, characters of and foreign influence on the city and, most significantly, is opposed to centralised politics. Whereas the character stays much the same throughout the 17th and 18th century, its use and the nature of its traits changes depending on which party is in power.

The Whig party in the making embraced the qualities of the country gentleman. They were opposed to the Stuart court and its Catholic, foreign affiliates. They conservatively and nationalistically celebrated country gentleman's Englishness (later representing him as Addison and Steele's Sir Roger de Coverley and John Bull) and saw him as a representative of the landed gentry whose ancestors made King John sign the Magna Charta. In Whig literature, like Buckingham and Howard's The Country Gentleman, the country gentleman visits the city, finds faults with city politics and particularly with the fops and their French excesses and returns to the country to avoid the corruption of the city.

The court, soon-to-be-Tory, party on the other hand supported the Stuarts, a hierarchical understanding of society and embraced foreign impulses (which neatly tied in with the Stuarts' inclination towards Catholicism). The Tories saw the country gentleman as a failed man; a rustic, cowardly, uncouth "booby" who failed to participate in society. He was clearly linked to the then vanquished roundhead Puritans in Aphra Behn's The Rover and The Roundheads. Here, the country gentleman is subjected to the wit and masculinity of the cavalier rake and fails to avoid being bested in all respects.

The Whig country gentleman's oppositional aspect did complicate matters following the Glorious Revolution and the protestant succession, however. To oppose the new government became synonymous with supporting the ousted Stuarts and so the Whigs washed their hands of the country gentleman. Fielding's Tom Jones features Squire Western, a brutish country gentleman in contrast to the polite de Coverley. As the Whigs switched sides, the country gentleman became more of a threatening Tory figure.

There is a further twist to this confusing story. The decline of the Tories was followed by a fragmentation of the Whig party. Robert Walpole's absolutist tendencies met with opposition from members of his own party who saw these as Tory characteristics. Thus, the negatively depicted country gentleman would simultaneously be used to criticise Walpole's government (as Fielding did) and to criticise those political elements in the city which were in opposition to this government. (Colley Cibber's country gentleman's central characteristic, as portrayed in The Provok'd Husband; or a Journey to London, is wrongheaded opposition to politics and politicians).

Towards the end of the 18th century, with the rise of the cult of sensibility, saw a softening in the treatment of the country gentleman. In Henry Mackenzie's The Man of Feeling, the he is presented in a more favourable light. In a number of tableaux, the country gentleman Ben Stilton and later Harvey, the eponymous protagonist, are more in tune with morality and virtue than city characters they encounter. Although this corresponds to the properties of sensibility it also destroys the country gentleman or leaves him at a consistent disadvantage.

John Bull - the francophobic country gentleman

In addition, a more masculine, active, rough and ready country gentleman rises to prominence towards the end of the century. The John Bull character became an oppositional response to threatening developments in France and this form of the country gentleman would become the precedent for many of the country gentlemen of the 19th century. From Austen to Wilde, the happy completion of a plot would often involve settling in the country and becoming a country gentleman.

Source: Elaine M. McGirr, Eighteenth-Century Characters: A Guide to the Literature of the Age (Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007)

Books Ablaze - What is Book Burning?

In August, Rev. Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center in Florida announced his church's plans to burn copies of the Qu'ran in what they called "International Burn the Koran Day" on the 11th of September. To the horror of bibliophiles and sensible people around the world, Jones was claiming to want to send a message to the followers of "the religion of the Devil". In this capacity, he prepared to add a new chapter to a shameful history which has had unknown, damning consequences for our cultural heritage. Jones' plans were thwarted after urgings from the President and, in his own words, God. However, after such a close encounter with the horrible spectre of libricide we should take pains to familiarise ourselves with this phenomenon. Below is a bibliophile´s introduction to the nature and psychology of book burnings exemplified by three historic cases.

Rev. Terry Jones

Nature of Book Burnings
One of the benefits of civilisation is that its inherent safety of subsistence allows its members to transfer their efforts into creating expressions of culture. Thus, society and culture has always had a reciprocally reliant relationship. However, this relationship has never been a tranquil one and all too often disputes between the political or religious leadership and the cultural element have flared up, sometimes literally.

The Ancient Roman practice of damnatio memoriae could serve as an introduction to the mechanics and motivations of libricide. If a member of Roman public life had been considered as tainting the state, its leadership, be it Senate or Emperor, could decide to have every memory or mention of the individual erased. They would have his memory condemned, as it were. Following such a decision, statues would be destroyed or resculpted, property would be confiscated, mention of his name or deeds would become punishable and any written records of their existence would be obliterated. The political and religious leaders wished to remove any threat to their hegemony, and as cultural expressions such as scrolls and books are the sole conveyors of such threats the removal of these would be most expedient.

The same recognition that prompted leading political figures like Augustus, Churchill and Kissinger to have their histories recorded thus offering invaluable historical source material also led Diocletian to burn Christian texts, Torquemada to burn Islamic ones and Nazis to burn "Entartete Texte". Thus, Jones follows up a tradition with inglorious forefathers whose actions contribute more to demonising his own position than the one he wants to fight.

Diocletian

Tomàs de Torquemada

Nazi Book Burnings

What these leders saw was the importance of any physical representation of ideas.Although ideas can be preserved in the human mind or transmitted by word of mouth no extended existence can be guaranteed until the ideas are encoded in some physical medium. This is the reason for the Church's hegemony in Post-Roman times and the tremendous significance of the printing press. Today's internet constitutes a similar manifestation. By suppressing such media, the authorities would be able to suppress the ideas.

Psychology of Book Burnings
Psychologically, the destruction of such media serves a significant purpose. It establishes or maintains a social hierarchy. This can be done either by safeguarding or elevating one's own position or by degrading or dominating the other's and libricide falls into the second category. As with personal relationships, destroying what is personally central to others effectively belittles and harms these individuals' self esteem, social standing and cause. Heinrich Heine tapped into a psychological truth when he in his 1821 play Almansor commented on the above mentioned burning of the Qu'ran by Torquemada through the now familiar phrase "Where they burn books, so too will they in the end burn human beings."

"Where they burn books..." 
(Nazi book burnings of 1933)

"... so too will they in the end burn human beings." 
(The furnaces of Auschwitz)

The responses to such tactics are limited but often as drastic as the tactics themselves and the effects are invariably regressive. Either the target is destroyed, like Senator Aulus Cremutius Cordus who had his History of the Roman people destroyed in 25 AD and was forced to commit suicide or some reaction is occasioned, like the reactions to Rev. Jones. In these latter instances, libricide tends to polarize whatever discourse it is part of.

Three Cases of Book Burnings
To illustrate, I will present three cases of libricide; how these were the result of intolerant, misguided zeal and their destructive effects. For a good essay on the context of the case at hand, click here.

Fra Girolamo Savonarola
I have earlier written on Renaissance Florence as the birthplace of Humanism. However, in 1494 the most influential patrons of the arts, the Medici, were ousted by the invading French. The Dominican Friar Girolamo Savonarola assumed leadership of Florence and proclaimed a republic. Tapping into fears of the supposedly apocalyptic turn of the half millenium, the arrival of syphilis (with the French) and discontent with the ousted Medici rulers and the Papacy Savonarola urged a return to a simpler and more morally correct life. In pursuit of this he instigated the Falò delle vanità, the "Bonfires of Vanity". In 1495 he

Statue of Savonarola in Ferrara

"organised [the children of Florence] into bands, with standard-bearers and officers like the time-honored city companies with ther gonfaloniers, and sent them round the city to seize vanities, forcibly stop gambling, to collect alms for the poor, and even to exercise a supervision over the ladies' dresses."

The vanities; books, paintings, instruments were all burnt most notably in the early days of 1497. By this time the violent upheaval in Northern Italy following the French incursion, pestilence, famine and internal discontent in Florence gave this, the largest bonfire this far, an omnious atmosphere. As priceless works of antiquity like the works of Ovid and Renaissance art were consumed by the flames a resentment within the Fiorentine population was about to bring matters to a head. Later that year Savonarola was excommunicated by the Pope and several groups started a riot which became a full scale revolt. The Signoria, the government of Florence, joined this revolt and with their sanction Savonarola was burnt in the same place as his largest bonfire of vanities on May 23rd 1498. Savonarola was an influential character who in part inspired the Reformation but whose suppression of ideas through libricide heralded the end of the Fiorentine golden age.

Fray Diego de Landa
In Spanish historiography there is a tradition called "La Layenda Negra", "The Black Legend". This tries to depict Spanish colonialism as a thoroughly destructive and shameful. Although the tradition itself is somewhat discredited some of its examples are controversially extreme enough to astonish even the soundest historian.

Page from the Relación de las cosas de Yucatán

Fray Diego de Landa was the Fransiscan Bishop of Yucatan from 1573 to his death in 1579. As a monk he travelled extensively in the newly conquered lands of the Yucatan and became quite an authority on Maya culture. De Landa was a millenarist, which meant that he believed that the second coming of Christ would coincide with the turn of the century, much like Savonarola did in the preceding century. Thus, he had to fight Maya religion and culture as effectively as possible and convert the population to Catholic Christianity before the turn of the century.

On the 12th of July 1562 he ordered an inquisition in the Mayan town of Mani. In what is called an auto de fé, an act of faith, he had more than 40 Maya books and 20.000 Maya images burnt, dramatically reducing our source material of this culture. In addition, de Landa´s fanatical paranoia made him disregard both the decree that forbid religious persecution of indigenous peoples and the formal requirements of the inquisition. This lead to an excessive use of torture which appalled and dismayed even inquisition authorities.

The Black Legend is however counterweighed by the White Legend´s attention to a consolatory poetic justice. Like Savonarola, de Landa wrote a number of texts where he tried to justify his actions. Ironically, one of these, the Relación de las cosas de Yucatán ("Account of the matters of Yucatán"), became vital for the preservation and study of Maya language and culture.

The Nazis
The spectre of cultural "cleansing by fire" arose several times between de Landa and the 20th century, but the most famous case of book burning is undoubtedly the Nazi book burnings of May and June 1933. Based in a number of extreme theses and an initiative from the German Student Association Jewish, anti-nationalistic and "un-German" literature was gathered. More than 25.000 books were burnt accompanied by speeches by Nazi officials like Goebbels. Only interrupted by rain, the book burnings marked the beginning of a period of state control with culture and censorship.


The books deemed fit for the fires were surprisingly diverse. Books the Nazis defined as "products of Jewish intellectualism" were obvious choices (once more exemplifying how book burnings target humans as much as literature itself), as were literature by socialists. Helen Keller, Jack London and Ernest Hemingway, on the other hand, might seem like odd targets for the Nazis. Helen Keller, of course, was an example of a successful multi-handicapped author which did not sit well with Nazi ideology. Hemingway and London were simly deemed un-German because they represented foreign influence and literary success. Most noteworthy was perhaps Heinrich Heine, the 19th century German Jew who foresaw the atrocities to come.



 

The book burnings were broadcast to the rest of Germany

It should be noted that although it did not lead to genocide, the Allies followed up with a libricide of their own after the war. As related in TIME Magazine, the Allies targeted "undemocratic, militaristic and Nazi" literature for destruction. While the ideological motivations for this action can be understood from its contemporary context, the soundness of it was also contested by contemporary observers who "condemned the order as a piece of unenforceable foolishness which would only increase interest in the verboten books, and martyrize Germany's nationalistic spirit". This highlights two issues of libricide. Firsly how justifiable book burnings can seem in an athmosphere of fear and power struggle and secondly the sensitivity of the issue the closer we get to our own context.  

The Lessons of History - a Conclusion Book burings seem to be one of the extreme alternatives to responsible literacy and cultural sensitivity. When the multi-faceted nature of literature with its roles and effects is not responsibly assessed it can become the target of irresponsible and dangerous actions which may have serious consequences. Heine´s link between literature and humanity is obvious. Sadly, acts of libricide as acts against human identity has too often preceded acts of violence against humanity itself. The line between destroying elements central to human identity and conseption of self and the destruction of humans is dangerously easy to cross once the first act has been commited. No matter the religious or ideological motivation, no good can come from book burnings. Not only do they push the extremes of human interaction for those who burn books; they also provoke reactions of an excessively extreme nature in the targets of these actions. Of course, these target groups should ascertain whether these crude acts are representative of the societal structures to which the book burner belongs and adjust their reactions accordingly, but the extent of the reaction does not justify the provocation. Book burnings show a contempt for humanity, a cultural ignorance and a lack of cultural sensitivity which is unfitting a member of modern society. The case of the Florida pastor has shown that the world is ready to bury the spectre of libricide.  
Sources:

As given

Blom, Frans: The Conquest of Yucatan, Cambridge 1936

Clendinnen, Inga: Ambivalent Conquests: Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan, 1517–1570, (2nd ed.), New York 2003

Gardner, Edmund G.: The Story of Florence, London 1928

Goldstein, Cora: Purges, Exclusions and Limits: Art Policies in Germany 1933-1949, link (last visited 17.9.2010)

Wikipedia