In this essay, I particularly appreciated the quote from Nietzsche, “I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you,” and this gloss on it: “It is not the lie itself that damns them; it is the corruption of meaning.”
So much to contemplate in these last two cantos. So much I would miss without your help. So much of this in our world today. No wonder so many numb themselves to life. But then they miss the good, the beauty. I am actually looking forward to the 'less interesting' assent. As a matter of fact, I think I will need it!
Quite the distasteful Canto, testing the limits of our olfactory imaginations; a testament to the (dare I say pungent) power of Dante’s imagery.
With trepidation, I’m throwing the “yellow card” on Dante’s treatment of Thaïs, and the light acknowledgement here of his error. I know, I know, don’t fight the poet! But the likelihood of a misquote that falsely convicted her, is, to me, exculpatory. I know he’s using her to make an exaggerated point about flattery, but (IMHO) he is abusing his poetic privileges. Even the “Supreme Poet” can stumble when he doesn’t have the “benefit” of fact checkers and Community Notes. (I’m being facetious). Her “cold case” should be resurrected.
First, let’s flesh her out a bit. The Thaïs in XVIII is an altered and shallow rendition of a woman with a truly remarkable story, whose larger-than-life persona cemented her placement in numerous literary works (like Terence’s Eunuchus). From [infallible] Wikipedia: “She accompanied Alexander the Great on his military campaigns…the Greek rhetorician Athenaeus writes that Alexander liked to "keep Thaïs about him" without directly classifying the nature of their relationship as intimate; this may simply have meant that he enjoyed her company, as she is said to have been very witty and entertaining. Athenaeus also states that after Alexander's death in 323 BCE, Thaïs married Ptolemy and bore three of his children.” The “harridan” we encounter in XVIII is a severely distorted approximation of the historical Thaïs.
Second, she was a clever and resourceful courtesan (Hetaira) — an artist, entertainer, and conversationalist (in addition to providing sexual services). She was educated and cultured (music, dance, conversation, and intellectual pursuits) and thus in an exclusive and elite status. Hetairai had more legal and social freedom in Greek society than married women. I think of her as a much more empowered equivalent of the Japanese Geisha of the Edo and Meiji periods (although no Geisha would have accompanied Tokugawa Ieyasu on his military campaigns!)
If you read Eunuchus (The Eunuch), you’ll see a morally complex character. Although she schemed and deceived, she acted in a just cause (to free a young girl who was taken as a captive and whom Thaïs wants to return to her family). That puts her in the same morally ambiguous category as other confounding classifications of sinners we’ve questioned.
The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, would, I think, make an excellent defense witness on her behalf: “How much evil we must do in order to do good…this, I think, is a very succinct statement of the human situation.” Is her sin — scheming and deceiving to accomplish a noble end — so egregious to warrant this ignominy? In contrast to Dante’s harsh portrayal, the original Eunuchus depicts her as a woman using her wit and influence to achieve her (laudable) objective. Why did Dante treat her so obscenely?
As you note, some experts believe Dante erred in ascribing lines in the play to her when they were in fact spoken by Gnatho, her servant. Cicero's commentary emphasized her insincere flattery rather than her intelligence and wit. Hollander notes: “In Terence she is the one flattered, not the flatterer.”
Perhaps Dante was more concerned with emphatically depicting the sin of flattery than accurate attribution. 🤔 Some critics think he simply melded the character of Thaïs and Gnatho’s line into this “besmirched, bedraggled harridan” to create his exemplar for false flattery.
Society, her environment, and circumstances put her in a role where she had to rely on wit, wile and charm. If Dante did misread her tale, that resulted in unjust verdict of savage disparagement and obscene imagery. So, ladies and gentlemen of the reading jury, I rest my case for acquittal.
———————
Regarding the first “Philosophical Exercise” question, this will obviously come to the fore in XIX with the incandescent rage Dante has for simony. He saw it as the most “perverted and virulent form of cupidity since it produced a clergy that poisoned not only the clerical Church but also the whole world.” (Lectura Dantis, Inferno). I think the Deists had an apt and intensely deragatory term for this sordid thievery — “priestcraft” — manipulation by clergy and church authorities done for personal gain, abusing positions of power over the laity for the benefit and class interests of the priesthood.
———————
Speaking of someone who deserves especially harsh treatment, the example of Venedico Caccianemico strengthens the points I made in previous canto comments about “fama” and shaming. (Fama refers to the concept of reputation or public standing in Dante’s time — particularly how individuals were perceived in their community — how honor, gossip, public opinion, idle talk, rumor, and social dynamics influenced a person's reputation.) Bona fama (good reputation) or mala fama (bad reputation) shaped one’s public persona. In a 1988 lecture, Dr. H. Wayne Storey touched on the consequences of breaking bad:
“…in Dante's day the ruination of a family's name and reputation was accomplished by officially sanctioned graffiti painted on public buildings. These paintings were explicit effigies of criminals usually convicted of fraudulent activities (bankruptcy, extortion, treason) and murder, and often accompanied by legal sanctions. Notably, these graffiti usually contained ‘bubbles’ with short rhymes on the crime committed and the condemned man's name.”
The flatterers, literally and eternally immersed in sh*t, is a pretty genius invention.
In this essay, I particularly appreciated the quote from Nietzsche, “I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you,” and this gloss on it: “It is not the lie itself that damns them; it is the corruption of meaning.”
So much to contemplate in these last two cantos. So much I would miss without your help. So much of this in our world today. No wonder so many numb themselves to life. But then they miss the good, the beauty. I am actually looking forward to the 'less interesting' assent. As a matter of fact, I think I will need it!
Pleased to support your valuable work here.
Thank you. Den
To: ExcessDeathsAU
I gave up my 22 year career at Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA USA for refusing the shot. No regrets. Den
See you like Genius and Ink also. Great site. We need more of that!
Den
Quite the distasteful Canto, testing the limits of our olfactory imaginations; a testament to the (dare I say pungent) power of Dante’s imagery.
With trepidation, I’m throwing the “yellow card” on Dante’s treatment of Thaïs, and the light acknowledgement here of his error. I know, I know, don’t fight the poet! But the likelihood of a misquote that falsely convicted her, is, to me, exculpatory. I know he’s using her to make an exaggerated point about flattery, but (IMHO) he is abusing his poetic privileges. Even the “Supreme Poet” can stumble when he doesn’t have the “benefit” of fact checkers and Community Notes. (I’m being facetious). Her “cold case” should be resurrected.
First, let’s flesh her out a bit. The Thaïs in XVIII is an altered and shallow rendition of a woman with a truly remarkable story, whose larger-than-life persona cemented her placement in numerous literary works (like Terence’s Eunuchus). From [infallible] Wikipedia: “She accompanied Alexander the Great on his military campaigns…the Greek rhetorician Athenaeus writes that Alexander liked to "keep Thaïs about him" without directly classifying the nature of their relationship as intimate; this may simply have meant that he enjoyed her company, as she is said to have been very witty and entertaining. Athenaeus also states that after Alexander's death in 323 BCE, Thaïs married Ptolemy and bore three of his children.” The “harridan” we encounter in XVIII is a severely distorted approximation of the historical Thaïs.
Second, she was a clever and resourceful courtesan (Hetaira) — an artist, entertainer, and conversationalist (in addition to providing sexual services). She was educated and cultured (music, dance, conversation, and intellectual pursuits) and thus in an exclusive and elite status. Hetairai had more legal and social freedom in Greek society than married women. I think of her as a much more empowered equivalent of the Japanese Geisha of the Edo and Meiji periods (although no Geisha would have accompanied Tokugawa Ieyasu on his military campaigns!)
If you read Eunuchus (The Eunuch), you’ll see a morally complex character. Although she schemed and deceived, she acted in a just cause (to free a young girl who was taken as a captive and whom Thaïs wants to return to her family). That puts her in the same morally ambiguous category as other confounding classifications of sinners we’ve questioned.
The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, would, I think, make an excellent defense witness on her behalf: “How much evil we must do in order to do good…this, I think, is a very succinct statement of the human situation.” Is her sin — scheming and deceiving to accomplish a noble end — so egregious to warrant this ignominy? In contrast to Dante’s harsh portrayal, the original Eunuchus depicts her as a woman using her wit and influence to achieve her (laudable) objective. Why did Dante treat her so obscenely?
As you note, some experts believe Dante erred in ascribing lines in the play to her when they were in fact spoken by Gnatho, her servant. Cicero's commentary emphasized her insincere flattery rather than her intelligence and wit. Hollander notes: “In Terence she is the one flattered, not the flatterer.”
Perhaps Dante was more concerned with emphatically depicting the sin of flattery than accurate attribution. 🤔 Some critics think he simply melded the character of Thaïs and Gnatho’s line into this “besmirched, bedraggled harridan” to create his exemplar for false flattery.
Society, her environment, and circumstances put her in a role where she had to rely on wit, wile and charm. If Dante did misread her tale, that resulted in unjust verdict of savage disparagement and obscene imagery. So, ladies and gentlemen of the reading jury, I rest my case for acquittal.
———————
Regarding the first “Philosophical Exercise” question, this will obviously come to the fore in XIX with the incandescent rage Dante has for simony. He saw it as the most “perverted and virulent form of cupidity since it produced a clergy that poisoned not only the clerical Church but also the whole world.” (Lectura Dantis, Inferno). I think the Deists had an apt and intensely deragatory term for this sordid thievery — “priestcraft” — manipulation by clergy and church authorities done for personal gain, abusing positions of power over the laity for the benefit and class interests of the priesthood.
———————
Speaking of someone who deserves especially harsh treatment, the example of Venedico Caccianemico strengthens the points I made in previous canto comments about “fama” and shaming. (Fama refers to the concept of reputation or public standing in Dante’s time — particularly how individuals were perceived in their community — how honor, gossip, public opinion, idle talk, rumor, and social dynamics influenced a person's reputation.) Bona fama (good reputation) or mala fama (bad reputation) shaped one’s public persona. In a 1988 lecture, Dr. H. Wayne Storey touched on the consequences of breaking bad:
“…in Dante's day the ruination of a family's name and reputation was accomplished by officially sanctioned graffiti painted on public buildings. These paintings were explicit effigies of criminals usually convicted of fraudulent activities (bankruptcy, extortion, treason) and murder, and often accompanied by legal sanctions. Notably, these graffiti usually contained ‘bubbles’ with short rhymes on the crime committed and the condemned man's name.”
And we think social media is bad?
2025 is also a Jubilee year.
Bravo Vashik and Lisa.