1. Celestina's actions towards Areusa lend much insight into her character. First, we can see that Celestina still has desires and feelings towards women. This sequence of events begins with Celestina commenting on Areusa's bed. She says that her bad smells sweet, and then she even gets into bed with Areusa. Then, even thought it is not implicitly stated, we can assume that Celestina molests Areusa. The dialogue includes Celestina saying that she will feel Areusa to attempt a diagnosis of the illness, and then is followed by Areusa telling Celestina that the pain is farther up, over her stomach. Finally, Celestina comments on Areusa's breasts and her youth, and advises her to enjoy it while it lasts. While I feel that this conveys a sense of lust towards Areusa, I also believe that Celestina is jealous of Areusa and her youth. She gets frustrated when Areusa talks of having only one lover, and I think it is because she cannot have any lovers, and she detests Areusa's waste of this advantage.
One thing that puzzles me about this act is Areusa's illness. I cannot guess it's exact nature, but I can only imagine what type of illness it might be.We are only given a few clues about it. The first is that Celestina is familiar with it, and that this familiarity is due to her sins. Then, we know that Celestina's prescription for a cure is sex. She also says that after Areusa is done having sex with Parmeno she will wake up pale, but be cured. The only guess that I can fathom as to Areusa's illness, is that perhaps Areusa is menstruating. We know that Areusa is rather young, due to a remark that Celestina made a little earlier in the act. If Parmeno sleeps with, and impregnates, Areusa, she will miss her period the next month. While this inference may be far off-kilter, it is the only one I have.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Celestina- Day 2
1. At the end of act three it is easy to see Celestina's uncertainty about how Melibea will respond to her ministrations. First, she finds it necessary to create a talisman of sorts to use on Melibea. This is in the form of the thread that she anoints with oil and the prayer she says to Pluto. This becomes even more obvious with the final words she says; "or so I think." I think that Melibea has good cause to be hesitant about the success of her plan. She certainly realizes that the "love" between Calisto and Melibea is merely lust. She would also realize how capricious lust can be. This can be seen in the very essence of the story, when Calisto wanders into Melibea's garden and suddenly falls in love with her.
2. Throughout the novel, Celestina's fame seems to proceed her wherever she goes. Interestingly enough, the only person who doesn't know who she is is Calisto, and as a result he is the only person that genuinely trusts her. Celestina's reputation is one that can be a double edged sword. In the case of Lucretia, it helped her cause, because Lucretia is related to one of Celestina's prostitutes. In the case of Melibea, Celestina's reputation, compounded with the discovery of her true goal, almost caused Celestina's demise. I find that this says a lot about individual interpretation. First, due their different backgrounds, Lucretia and Melibea both interpret Celestina's reputation differently. Lucretia is more favorably inclined to Celestina because of her upraising. As a cousin of the one prostitute, it can be assumed that Lucretia is the female counterpart to Parmeno, at least in the sense that she most likely came from the underbelly of the city and is striving to better herself. Melibea's response was far from favorable though. I believe this is due to the fact that Melibea was raised in a different world, and sees no place for Celestina in it.
2. Throughout the novel, Celestina's fame seems to proceed her wherever she goes. Interestingly enough, the only person who doesn't know who she is is Calisto, and as a result he is the only person that genuinely trusts her. Celestina's reputation is one that can be a double edged sword. In the case of Lucretia, it helped her cause, because Lucretia is related to one of Celestina's prostitutes. In the case of Melibea, Celestina's reputation, compounded with the discovery of her true goal, almost caused Celestina's demise. I find that this says a lot about individual interpretation. First, due their different backgrounds, Lucretia and Melibea both interpret Celestina's reputation differently. Lucretia is more favorably inclined to Celestina because of her upraising. As a cousin of the one prostitute, it can be assumed that Lucretia is the female counterpart to Parmeno, at least in the sense that she most likely came from the underbelly of the city and is striving to better herself. Melibea's response was far from favorable though. I believe this is due to the fact that Melibea was raised in a different world, and sees no place for Celestina in it.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Celestina- Day 1
1. I found the discussion that Calisto and Sempronio have at the beginning of Act 1 to be quite amusing. As a matter of fact, I have been entertained throughout the entirety of the first two acts. The characters and their dialogue is so funny, that I find myself chuckling out loud. Anyway, I digress. When Calisto and Sempronio are talking, I do not interpret Calisto's illness to be one of love. Perhaps it is one of lust, but I would favor another theory over that one. I believe that Calisto is merely bored with his life. The reason I discard love as the cause of his melancholy stems from his reaction to a joke that Sempronio made about the people of Sodom. In response to this joke Calisto says:
"Damn you! You've made me laugh, a thing I hadn't expected to do this year."
This shows that Calisto doesn't care to cure his "love sickness", but that he would rather mope around and garner sympathy from his servants. This is similar to Romeo's reaction to Rosalind's scorn, where he locks himself away and makes people worry about him.
As to their discussion about women, I believe I found a reason for Sempronio's misogynistic view. In his discourse on the topic he says that women can't stop lusting for men and that this is their great weakness. I think that the reason he believes this is because he is in love with one of Celestina's whores. I do not think he realizes exactly what she is though, and because of this he finds all women to be like Elicia.
"Damn you! You've made me laugh, a thing I hadn't expected to do this year."
This shows that Calisto doesn't care to cure his "love sickness", but that he would rather mope around and garner sympathy from his servants. This is similar to Romeo's reaction to Rosalind's scorn, where he locks himself away and makes people worry about him.
As to their discussion about women, I believe I found a reason for Sempronio's misogynistic view. In his discourse on the topic he says that women can't stop lusting for men and that this is their great weakness. I think that the reason he believes this is because he is in love with one of Celestina's whores. I do not think he realizes exactly what she is though, and because of this he finds all women to be like Elicia.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Decameron- Day 6
9.3- While at face value it may seem that Calandrino's friends are at fault for Calandrino's foolish behavior, I would beg to differ. The root of the problem is really Calandrino's foolishness, and this makes him guilty. First, he is foolish to keep Bruno and Buffalmacco as close friends. They continually torment him and cause problems between him and his wife. Due to his ignorance, he doesn't realize this though.
Further proof of this is the fact that Bruno and Buffalmacco face no consequences for their actions against Calandrino. One motif common throughout these stories is the idea of justice and people getting what they deserve. It seems like the worthy always come out on top. For example, in the story about the monk bringing a girl into the monastery, he ends up "winning" over the prior because the prior was wrongfully punishing him, even thought the prior made the same mistakes. In the stories about Calandrino, Bruno and Buffalmacco always come out on top because Calandrino is the real fool.
10.10- I believe that neither Gualtieri or his wife deserve each others love. He is unworthy of her love because of all the hoops he made her jump through for no reason. There are certainly other ways to test her loyalty besides making her believe that her children were murdered and pretending to divorce her. I do not find her worthy of his love, because throughout the whole story she showed nothing but indifference to the things he was doing to her. If she truly loved him, she should have been more passionate about what he was doing to her, especially when he pretended to have their marriage annulled.
Further proof of this is the fact that Bruno and Buffalmacco face no consequences for their actions against Calandrino. One motif common throughout these stories is the idea of justice and people getting what they deserve. It seems like the worthy always come out on top. For example, in the story about the monk bringing a girl into the monastery, he ends up "winning" over the prior because the prior was wrongfully punishing him, even thought the prior made the same mistakes. In the stories about Calandrino, Bruno and Buffalmacco always come out on top because Calandrino is the real fool.
10.10- I believe that neither Gualtieri or his wife deserve each others love. He is unworthy of her love because of all the hoops he made her jump through for no reason. There are certainly other ways to test her loyalty besides making her believe that her children were murdered and pretending to divorce her. I do not find her worthy of his love, because throughout the whole story she showed nothing but indifference to the things he was doing to her. If she truly loved him, she should have been more passionate about what he was doing to her, especially when he pretended to have their marriage annulled.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Decameron- Day 5
7.3
How does Rinaldo trick Madonna Agnesa's husband into trusting him with Agnesa? What Classical structure does Madonna Agnesa and her child become?
The trickery in this story focuses on Brother Rinaldo using Madonna Agnesa to trick her husband into trusting him . To do so, Brother Rinaldo becomes the godfather to their child. This gives him a plausible excuse for spending time with Madonna Agnesa. Throughout the stories in the Decameron there are two types of tricksters, cautious ones and incautious ones. The cautious ones, such as Rinaldo and the woman who used the monk to convey messages to her lover, always seem to succeed in their goal. In this case, Rinaldo comes close to being discovered, but the precautions he took earlier saved him from his demise. The incautious ones, however, always get caught. For example, the woman with the gay husband was caught because she took few precautions to hide her relationships with the young men.
In using Madonna Agnesa and her child as a means to infiltrate her household, Brother Rinaldo essentially turns her and her child into a Trojan Horse. He uses the pregnant woman as an excuse to spend time in their house, and spend time with her. This would be valid if he truly wanted to be the child's godfather, but in this case he merely wants to have an affair with Madonna Agnesa without getting caught.
8.3
What fable does this story remind you of? How does the trickery involved differ.
The man in this story is quite reminiscent of the emperor in the fable "The Emperor's New Clothes". In both stories foolishness leads to the main character being tricked into thinking something is different than it really is. In E.N.C., the emperor is tricked into thinking he has splendid new clothes, when in reality he has no clothes at all. In this story the main character is tricked into believing that he is invisible, when he really is not.
The largest difference between these two stories are their outcomes. In the story about the emperor, the story concludes with the emperor learning from his mistakes and becoming less gullible. In the story from the Decameron, the main character learns nothing from his mistake, and he continues a life of ignorance. I believe that this holds true to the motif of plausibility thazt is so prevalent throughout the text. It is much more likely for a foolish person not to change after one event than it is for them to have some great epiphany.
How does Rinaldo trick Madonna Agnesa's husband into trusting him with Agnesa? What Classical structure does Madonna Agnesa and her child become?
The trickery in this story focuses on Brother Rinaldo using Madonna Agnesa to trick her husband into trusting him . To do so, Brother Rinaldo becomes the godfather to their child. This gives him a plausible excuse for spending time with Madonna Agnesa. Throughout the stories in the Decameron there are two types of tricksters, cautious ones and incautious ones. The cautious ones, such as Rinaldo and the woman who used the monk to convey messages to her lover, always seem to succeed in their goal. In this case, Rinaldo comes close to being discovered, but the precautions he took earlier saved him from his demise. The incautious ones, however, always get caught. For example, the woman with the gay husband was caught because she took few precautions to hide her relationships with the young men.
In using Madonna Agnesa and her child as a means to infiltrate her household, Brother Rinaldo essentially turns her and her child into a Trojan Horse. He uses the pregnant woman as an excuse to spend time in their house, and spend time with her. This would be valid if he truly wanted to be the child's godfather, but in this case he merely wants to have an affair with Madonna Agnesa without getting caught.
8.3
What fable does this story remind you of? How does the trickery involved differ.
The man in this story is quite reminiscent of the emperor in the fable "The Emperor's New Clothes". In both stories foolishness leads to the main character being tricked into thinking something is different than it really is. In E.N.C., the emperor is tricked into thinking he has splendid new clothes, when in reality he has no clothes at all. In this story the main character is tricked into believing that he is invisible, when he really is not.
The largest difference between these two stories are their outcomes. In the story about the emperor, the story concludes with the emperor learning from his mistakes and becoming less gullible. In the story from the Decameron, the main character learns nothing from his mistake, and he continues a life of ignorance. I believe that this holds true to the motif of plausibility thazt is so prevalent throughout the text. It is much more likely for a foolish person not to change after one event than it is for them to have some great epiphany.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Decameron- Day 4
5.8-
What myth does Boccaccio use as a plot device in this story?
In the eighth story of day five Boccaccio uses the myth of Prometheus as a plot device to advance the story. In this myth Prometheus is punished for stealing fire from the gods and giving it to man. The punishment that he must endure is to have his liver eaten by an eagle every day for the rest of eternity. Boccaccio takes this story and modifies it for his purposes. In his version there are two people being punished, a suicidal knight, and the maiden who he loved. The knight is doomed to hunt the woman that he loved as punishment for him commiting suicide, and she is being hunted as punishment for her scorn. Ultimately, the girl ends up being slayed by the knight and her organs are fed to a pair of dogs. This process goes on every day.
This modification of the Prometheus myth is used by Boccaccio as a way to show the implications of love. In the story, the knights love is like the fire that Prometheus stole. In this case, however, the girl stole the knight's love. That is why her punishment is the same as Prometheus'. The modification to the myth really shows when the knight is being punished as well. I believe that his punishment stems from the fact that he foolishly gave his love. Because of this, Boccaccio is using him as an example to show the dangers of loving too readily.
What myth does Boccaccio use as a plot device in this story?
In the eighth story of day five Boccaccio uses the myth of Prometheus as a plot device to advance the story. In this myth Prometheus is punished for stealing fire from the gods and giving it to man. The punishment that he must endure is to have his liver eaten by an eagle every day for the rest of eternity. Boccaccio takes this story and modifies it for his purposes. In his version there are two people being punished, a suicidal knight, and the maiden who he loved. The knight is doomed to hunt the woman that he loved as punishment for him commiting suicide, and she is being hunted as punishment for her scorn. Ultimately, the girl ends up being slayed by the knight and her organs are fed to a pair of dogs. This process goes on every day.
This modification of the Prometheus myth is used by Boccaccio as a way to show the implications of love. In the story, the knights love is like the fire that Prometheus stole. In this case, however, the girl stole the knight's love. That is why her punishment is the same as Prometheus'. The modification to the myth really shows when the knight is being punished as well. I believe that his punishment stems from the fact that he foolishly gave his love. Because of this, Boccaccio is using him as an example to show the dangers of loving too readily.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Decameron- Day 3
3.3-
In this story the lady, who is unnamed, uses a friar to communicate with the man she is in love with. I find it interesting to note that the lady's name is hidden from the viewer. This presents the lady in the story with a level of anonymity that allows her to act as more than an individual. In a sense, she becomes representative of all women, and of the ways that women were forced to get what they wanted at the time. She also serves to show the intellect of women in a time period where that fact was often overlooked.
The way in which the lady used the friar as a means of communication was quite amusing. This way reminds me of the concept of self fulfilling prophesies in psychology. A self fulfilling prophesy is when the results of a test are false because they are expected, and therefore, unbeknownst to the researcher or not, actions are taken to create them. In this case the lady knew what she was doing and she fabricated stories about how she would like her lover to act. Once relayed to the friar, he unknowingly informed the man of what he should do to please the woman.This trickery is one that is designed to show the ignorance of the clergy at the time. This goal is one that Boccaccio might have taken due to the clergy's arrogance. I think that another reason for this is the rigid school of thought known as Scholasticism. During the Italian Renaissance this school was opposed by a school called Humanism. As a humanist, Boccaccio would have enjoyed portraying the clergy, who were Scholastics,as ignorant and clueless.
In this story the lady, who is unnamed, uses a friar to communicate with the man she is in love with. I find it interesting to note that the lady's name is hidden from the viewer. This presents the lady in the story with a level of anonymity that allows her to act as more than an individual. In a sense, she becomes representative of all women, and of the ways that women were forced to get what they wanted at the time. She also serves to show the intellect of women in a time period where that fact was often overlooked.
The way in which the lady used the friar as a means of communication was quite amusing. This way reminds me of the concept of self fulfilling prophesies in psychology. A self fulfilling prophesy is when the results of a test are false because they are expected, and therefore, unbeknownst to the researcher or not, actions are taken to create them. In this case the lady knew what she was doing and she fabricated stories about how she would like her lover to act. Once relayed to the friar, he unknowingly informed the man of what he should do to please the woman.This trickery is one that is designed to show the ignorance of the clergy at the time. This goal is one that Boccaccio might have taken due to the clergy's arrogance. I think that another reason for this is the rigid school of thought known as Scholasticism. During the Italian Renaissance this school was opposed by a school called Humanism. As a humanist, Boccaccio would have enjoyed portraying the clergy, who were Scholastics,as ignorant and clueless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
