The GOAT is Dante. Some repetitive love sonnets are not GOAT material.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Petrarch‘s command of the language is both more advanced and has a measurably greater impact (unless one counts Dante‘s influence through Petrarch) as well as a more versatile use of form, broader range of topicality, and a more elaborate influence of classical learning.
11 months ago
Anonymous
It's fine to love Petrarch, he's a timeless poet. What is not fine is to dislike the Divine Comedy.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I‘m still in progress of my first reread since I was in school so maybe the later parts will grow on me but so far it‘s been a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former.
11 months ago
Anonymous
moronic gaythiest redditor or larpagan
11 months ago
Anonymous
>a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former
Bruh I'm a euphoric fedora-wearing science-worshipping Sovietaboo of an atheist and I say that you're a baiting fruity homosexual Black person.
This seems to be implying that I should love this judaizing of classical art with middling application and philosemitism on some inexplicable intrinsic basis.
> I'm just saying that by definition a later author will tend to be more advanced in terms of the language they actually use, even if they are standing on the shoulders of giants, just like a mathematician now will be far more advanced than Pythagoras or Euclid even if they will never have a fraction of their significance.
This kind of reddit view of progress does not apply to art. homosexual redditors want to sciencify everything. Not how it works. Rupi Kaur is not better and more advanced than Shakespeare just because she’s more recent.
You’re comparing apples and oranges. A sonneteer vs an epic poet. Nothing this sonneteer made is better than the Comedy. Get it through your head as soon as you can. I have read both in Italian. It’s not my problem you read an inferior adaptation by some moronic israelite.
If you had read both, much less in their original form, you‘d be aware of how moronic it is to try to reduce Petrarch‘s profound interweaving of various forms, with wide applications and topical continuity of subjects ranging the humanities, to „sonneteering“ with the some bizarre implication that the common building block with which he revolutionized the function of art and use of language throughout Europe were either the end of his body of work or otherwise reducible to some common building block.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Boy I fumbled my words there in revision. Embarrassing. Ah well it‘s early and the point remains.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former
Bruh I'm a euphoric fedora-wearing science-worshipping Sovietaboo of an atheist and I say that you're a baiting fruity homosexual Black person.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Literally wrong about every single thing. What the frick.
11 months ago
Anonymous
First two points and the last point seem like they're right almost by default, speaking as one who's never read Petrarch, given that he was part of (or even the initiator of) the Renaissance, whereas Dante was still medieval. But criticizing Dante's "range of subjects" seems to betray a pretty shallow understanding.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Dante created modern Italian. No one in Italy has his level of influence. Petrarch is a sonneteer. Not a single work of Petrarch can be compare to the Comedy, one most beautiful architectures in all of literature. A fully fledged and complete masterpiece. We are very lucky to have it. Pearls before the fricking swine. Frick this board.
No and it was still miles better than everyone else, imagine if I read it in Greek
11 months ago
Anonymous
So you've read Dante and Homer in your native language which is not Italian or Greek?
11 months ago
Anonymous
Don't post again moronic tourist
11 months ago
Anonymous
If you don't know Greek and Italian, you don't have an opinion, you're a pseud
11 months ago
Anonymous
YOU are the pseud you idiot. The rest of us can judge works just fine because we don't judge the choice of words and the rhythm. You haven't even read the books let alone learned any of the relevant language, you're literally just a moronic pseud parroting shit you heard on IQfy to make up for not reading.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not even that anon, but you acted foolishly when you answered this
So you've read Dante and Homer in your native language which is not Italian or Greek?
Upon what principles? There's so many different aims and different strengths among these authors, none of whom were born within less than 300 years of one another. Let's start small, just give me one metric on which you think one of them surpasses another.
If you don't know Greek and Italian, you don't have an opinion, you're a pseud
Let's just say we're suspending judgment on prosody and focusing on macro structure, general patterns in the use of language, etc. If you demand too much on IQfy you'll just get nothing at all. But that's preferable, you might say, and you'd be right, however I am very bored so I don't care.
I‘m still in progress of my first reread since I was in school so maybe the later parts will grow on me but so far it‘s been a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former.
>read Christian work >"eww, why is it Christian!!" >no attempt at making an aesthetic judgment >"""mid"""
You couldn't be any duller if you'd been hit over the head with an anvil. But just by virtue of being about an actual book the thread is still better than most. Really says a lot about our society.
Ariosto and Tasso are both better than Milton
Haven't read either of those two but I will assume they're roughly equivalent to Spenser. I find Spenser a lot more enjoyable than Milton sometimes, but Milton is pretty unique and obviously there's a bit more weight and substance to what he's doing.
Anon, I hate to break it to you, but people who go to the trouble of learning Greek and Italian to read these books are far more likely to discuss it with their academic colleagues than with the likes of you and I. Your standards are a bit out of line with anything resembling reality. But if you have no other way to reply to anon ranking these works in a way that you don't like, go ahead and keep pursuing this point I guess.
Although now that I see
I'm not even that anon, but you acted foolishly when you answered this [...]
Anon was just asking a question.
I get the sense you're not even that anon. Are you the OP? If you're the OP, you should shush. If anyone wants your opinion, it could easily be supplied by some sort of generic IQfy user soundboard.
[...]
This reply is spot on. I m currently reading the English translation, and this book is amazing so far.
[...]
Have you read The Aeneid, and if so how is it? I plan on reading it after Im done with The Iliad and The Odyssey.
I'm halfway through it, it's the most aesthetically polished of all of those works, the plot and characters are pretty straightforward, its greatest value thus far imo is as a vehicle for poetic imagery/language and individual dramatic scenes.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>plot
lol
11 months ago
Anonymous
Not really sure what you're getting at with this one, would be nice if you'd elaborate.
>of you and I
Why do midwits try to discuss literature when they should be studying basic grammar?
Alas, I have been hoisted by my own petard...
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Alas, I have been hoisted by my own petard...
Just study basic grammar, mr. redditor.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Y-yes sir, I will go subscribe to r/grammar, r/grammarporn and r/grammarisbeautiful right away.
Dante created modern Italian. No one in Italy has his level of influence. Petrarch is a sonneteer. Not a single work of Petrarch can be compare to the Comedy, one most beautiful architectures in all of literature. A fully fledged and complete masterpiece. We are very lucky to have it. Pearls before the fricking swine. Frick this board.
Hey, I love Dante, I'm just saying that by definition a later author will tend to be more advanced in terms of the language they actually use, even if they are standing on the shoulders of giants, just like a mathematician now will be far more advanced than Pythagoras or Euclid even if they will never have a fraction of their significance.
As for influence, I can't speak for the internal dynamics in Italy, but the sonnet was picked up across Europe due to Petrarch, whereas Dante was more eccentric/harder to imitate, and his aesthetics was informed by a medieval taste that went out of fashion when the Renaissance came.
But I know you were just mad and I'm being unnecessarily pedantic.
11 months ago
Anonymous
> I'm just saying that by definition a later author will tend to be more advanced in terms of the language they actually use, even if they are standing on the shoulders of giants, just like a mathematician now will be far more advanced than Pythagoras or Euclid even if they will never have a fraction of their significance.
This kind of reddit view of progress does not apply to art. homosexual redditors want to sciencify everything. Not how it works. Rupi Kaur is not better and more advanced than Shakespeare just because she’s more recent.
You’re comparing apples and oranges. A sonneteer vs an epic poet. Nothing this sonneteer made is better than the Comedy. Get it through your head as soon as you can. I have read both in Italian. It’s not my problem you read an inferior adaptation by some moronic israelite.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Any pursuit with an element of technique, including the use of language, accrues layers of sophistication over time. It is very much "how it works". More "advanced" or "sophisticated" should not be taken to mean "better" in an absolute sense, that is the part that resists scientific analysis, but the claim that Dante created modern Italian is itself implicitly accepting the "sciencifying" premise you claim to reject. Not gonna dignify the rest because your swarthy southern-European temperament is getting a little too heated and you just want to defend Dante from strawmen. I hope someday your countrymen will return to dueling over authors like picrel, 'twould be based.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Whoopsie, forgot image
11 months ago
Anonymous
It is not how it works. There is no progress in art. If there were progress, without any excuses, the last novel ever published would be better than Don Quixote and the last play ever published would be better than King Lear. We both know that is not the case. A writer could read the entire western canon and still not write something superior. A masterpiece could’ve been written at any point in history. It’s not the same like science which does have progress. Science and art have different dynamics and function on different dimensions. You’re trying to claim Petrarch is better than Dante based on misguided misconceptions of literature.
If your feminine Anglo sensibilities are too fragile for hot discussions maybe avoid saying incendiary nonsense about authors you read in israeli translations.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I don't think this argument is worth our time. Dante is obviously a genius, I am rereading the Comedy right now and enjoying it even more since I was pretty young and ignorant when I started reading it the first time around. I tried to follow/understand every word in the original that time and I am doing the same now, which is also more fruitful on the second attempt since I'm more familiar with Romance languages in general. The conception and structure are sublime, the language is beautiful, the progression and resolution are wonderfully soul-uplifting.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>of you and I
Why do midwits try to discuss literature when they should be studying basic grammar?
you read it in English, so you did not even read it at all. Congrats you cucked yourself and read 900 pages of some literary professor's rewritten interpretation of the book. Go read it in the original Italian if you want the actual book, or will you stay a cuck and let professors do the reading and interpretation for you?
What tragedy must befall a man during his life to make him think reading this kind of work in anything but the original language could be little more than a tedious waste of time?
The one thing that lots of you do not understand, is that the Divine Comedy is everything that literature could ever be.
You have all the possible linguistic registers, from profanity to sacred hymns, from vulgar to lofty language, from brutal vernacular to plain Latin; you get to experience funny goofy moments as well as tear-inducing drama; you get the chance to visit the lowest and dirtiest parts of the universe as well as the skies, with the whole subtle complexity of Purgatorio in between. And everything is descripted with maximum realism, though shortly. It's comedy and tragedy and philosophy all together, from the individual experiences that are typical of novel and theatrical literature, to the inmost emotional reactions of the narrator which are typical of lyric poetry; and then science, astronomy, geology, geography, economy, politics, psychology, philosophy, theology: the highest theology. You're put in front of a compedium of 2000 years of history and knowledge, from Pagan antiquity to Christian middle ages. But it's not enough: under the surface lays an entire web of allegorical meanings, esoteric symbols, alchemic-hermetic notions, astrological correspondences, all interwined with Biblical esotericism and Catholic dogmas. It's the supreme summary of Western-Roman Tradition up to the times of Dante. BUT: not enough. History of the popes, history of Italy, with all the city-states and wars, history of literature, history of the territory: the Commedia is also all of this. Natural descriptions, abstract imagery, land and sky, sea and mountain. Humans and monsters, angels and mythological creatures. Above all of this, the omnipresent tribute to friendship and love. Imagine being able to frame all of this, the entire universe known to man, inside rhyming triplets of unerring hendecasyllables. With a newborn language. Dante truly is the greatest writer of all time. Anglos can seethe.
What's everyone's preferred translation? I did Mark Musa for Inferno but it didn't seem to have the emotional impact I was expecting. A common problem with translations though....
Yeah
Filtered angloids
Petrarch is amazing though. Probably the GOAT.
The GOAT is Dante. Some repetitive love sonnets are not GOAT material.
Petrarch‘s command of the language is both more advanced and has a measurably greater impact (unless one counts Dante‘s influence through Petrarch) as well as a more versatile use of form, broader range of topicality, and a more elaborate influence of classical learning.
It's fine to love Petrarch, he's a timeless poet. What is not fine is to dislike the Divine Comedy.
I‘m still in progress of my first reread since I was in school so maybe the later parts will grow on me but so far it‘s been a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former.
moronic gaythiest redditor or larpagan
This seems to be implying that I should love this judaizing of classical art with middling application and philosemitism on some inexplicable intrinsic basis.
If you had read both, much less in their original form, you‘d be aware of how moronic it is to try to reduce Petrarch‘s profound interweaving of various forms, with wide applications and topical continuity of subjects ranging the humanities, to „sonneteering“ with the some bizarre implication that the common building block with which he revolutionized the function of art and use of language throughout Europe were either the end of his body of work or otherwise reducible to some common building block.
Boy I fumbled my words there in revision. Embarrassing. Ah well it‘s early and the point remains.
>a pretty mid recitation of how much better he likes israelite folklore than classical antiquity with a lot of pithy deference to the former
Bruh I'm a euphoric fedora-wearing science-worshipping Sovietaboo of an atheist and I say that you're a baiting fruity homosexual Black person.
Literally wrong about every single thing. What the frick.
First two points and the last point seem like they're right almost by default, speaking as one who's never read Petrarch, given that he was part of (or even the initiator of) the Renaissance, whereas Dante was still medieval. But criticizing Dante's "range of subjects" seems to betray a pretty shallow understanding.
Dante created modern Italian. No one in Italy has his level of influence. Petrarch is a sonneteer. Not a single work of Petrarch can be compare to the Comedy, one most beautiful architectures in all of literature. A fully fledged and complete masterpiece. We are very lucky to have it. Pearls before the fricking swine. Frick this board.
This reply is spot on. I m currently reading the English translation, and this book is amazing so far.
Have you read The Aeneid, and if so how is it? I plan on reading it after Im done with The Iliad and The Odyssey.
Another corrupt soul filtered
Homer > Dante > Virgil > Milton
Ariosto and Tasso are both better than Milton
This but
Homer >>> Dante > Virgil >> Milton
Have you read Homer in Greek?
No and it was still miles better than everyone else, imagine if I read it in Greek
So you've read Dante and Homer in your native language which is not Italian or Greek?
Don't post again moronic tourist
If you don't know Greek and Italian, you don't have an opinion, you're a pseud
YOU are the pseud you idiot. The rest of us can judge works just fine because we don't judge the choice of words and the rhythm. You haven't even read the books let alone learned any of the relevant language, you're literally just a moronic pseud parroting shit you heard on IQfy to make up for not reading.
I'm not even that anon, but you acted foolishly when you answered this
Anon was just asking a question.
Holy reddit
Upon what principles? There's so many different aims and different strengths among these authors, none of whom were born within less than 300 years of one another. Let's start small, just give me one metric on which you think one of them surpasses another.
Let's just say we're suspending judgment on prosody and focusing on macro structure, general patterns in the use of language, etc. If you demand too much on IQfy you'll just get nothing at all. But that's preferable, you might say, and you'd be right, however I am very bored so I don't care.
>read Christian work
>"eww, why is it Christian!!"
>no attempt at making an aesthetic judgment
>"""mid"""
You couldn't be any duller if you'd been hit over the head with an anvil. But just by virtue of being about an actual book the thread is still better than most. Really says a lot about our society.
Haven't read either of those two but I will assume they're roughly equivalent to Spenser. I find Spenser a lot more enjoyable than Milton sometimes, but Milton is pretty unique and obviously there's a bit more weight and substance to what he's doing.
Holy pseud
Anon, I hate to break it to you, but people who go to the trouble of learning Greek and Italian to read these books are far more likely to discuss it with their academic colleagues than with the likes of you and I. Your standards are a bit out of line with anything resembling reality. But if you have no other way to reply to anon ranking these works in a way that you don't like, go ahead and keep pursuing this point I guess.
Although now that I see
I get the sense you're not even that anon. Are you the OP? If you're the OP, you should shush. If anyone wants your opinion, it could easily be supplied by some sort of generic IQfy user soundboard.
I'm halfway through it, it's the most aesthetically polished of all of those works, the plot and characters are pretty straightforward, its greatest value thus far imo is as a vehicle for poetic imagery/language and individual dramatic scenes.
>plot
lol
Not really sure what you're getting at with this one, would be nice if you'd elaborate.
Alas, I have been hoisted by my own petard...
>Alas, I have been hoisted by my own petard...
Just study basic grammar, mr. redditor.
Y-yes sir, I will go subscribe to r/grammar, r/grammarporn and r/grammarisbeautiful right away.
Hey, I love Dante, I'm just saying that by definition a later author will tend to be more advanced in terms of the language they actually use, even if they are standing on the shoulders of giants, just like a mathematician now will be far more advanced than Pythagoras or Euclid even if they will never have a fraction of their significance.
As for influence, I can't speak for the internal dynamics in Italy, but the sonnet was picked up across Europe due to Petrarch, whereas Dante was more eccentric/harder to imitate, and his aesthetics was informed by a medieval taste that went out of fashion when the Renaissance came.
But I know you were just mad and I'm being unnecessarily pedantic.
> I'm just saying that by definition a later author will tend to be more advanced in terms of the language they actually use, even if they are standing on the shoulders of giants, just like a mathematician now will be far more advanced than Pythagoras or Euclid even if they will never have a fraction of their significance.
This kind of reddit view of progress does not apply to art. homosexual redditors want to sciencify everything. Not how it works. Rupi Kaur is not better and more advanced than Shakespeare just because she’s more recent.
You’re comparing apples and oranges. A sonneteer vs an epic poet. Nothing this sonneteer made is better than the Comedy. Get it through your head as soon as you can. I have read both in Italian. It’s not my problem you read an inferior adaptation by some moronic israelite.
Any pursuit with an element of technique, including the use of language, accrues layers of sophistication over time. It is very much "how it works". More "advanced" or "sophisticated" should not be taken to mean "better" in an absolute sense, that is the part that resists scientific analysis, but the claim that Dante created modern Italian is itself implicitly accepting the "sciencifying" premise you claim to reject. Not gonna dignify the rest because your swarthy southern-European temperament is getting a little too heated and you just want to defend Dante from strawmen. I hope someday your countrymen will return to dueling over authors like picrel, 'twould be based.
Whoopsie, forgot image
It is not how it works. There is no progress in art. If there were progress, without any excuses, the last novel ever published would be better than Don Quixote and the last play ever published would be better than King Lear. We both know that is not the case. A writer could read the entire western canon and still not write something superior. A masterpiece could’ve been written at any point in history. It’s not the same like science which does have progress. Science and art have different dynamics and function on different dimensions. You’re trying to claim Petrarch is better than Dante based on misguided misconceptions of literature.
If your feminine Anglo sensibilities are too fragile for hot discussions maybe avoid saying incendiary nonsense about authors you read in israeli translations.
I don't think this argument is worth our time. Dante is obviously a genius, I am rereading the Comedy right now and enjoying it even more since I was pretty young and ignorant when I started reading it the first time around. I tried to follow/understand every word in the original that time and I am doing the same now, which is also more fruitful on the second attempt since I'm more familiar with Romance languages in general. The conception and structure are sublime, the language is beautiful, the progression and resolution are wonderfully soul-uplifting.
>of you and I
Why do midwits try to discuss literature when they should be studying basic grammar?
Who the frick is Milton?
A rapper from Engerland
Homer > Milton > Virgil > Dante
Shakespear >
I didn't laugh once
You didn't laugh at the demon growing a trumpet from his ass?
I'm pretty sure that passage refers to fartinng loudly, not actual trumpets.
You’ve really summed up the ego of the age.
Paradise Lost is so much better
you read it in English, so you did not even read it at all. Congrats you cucked yourself and read 900 pages of some literary professor's rewritten interpretation of the book. Go read it in the original Italian if you want the actual book, or will you stay a cuck and let professors do the reading and interpretation for you?
I am not christian, european or white. Infact I am esl. Is there any value for me to be derived from reading this.
Yes because it's objectively a great work of art that transcends locality.
What tragedy must befall a man during his life to make him think reading this kind of work in anything but the original language could be little more than a tedious waste of time?
The one thing that lots of you do not understand, is that the Divine Comedy is everything that literature could ever be.
You have all the possible linguistic registers, from profanity to sacred hymns, from vulgar to lofty language, from brutal vernacular to plain Latin; you get to experience funny goofy moments as well as tear-inducing drama; you get the chance to visit the lowest and dirtiest parts of the universe as well as the skies, with the whole subtle complexity of Purgatorio in between. And everything is descripted with maximum realism, though shortly. It's comedy and tragedy and philosophy all together, from the individual experiences that are typical of novel and theatrical literature, to the inmost emotional reactions of the narrator which are typical of lyric poetry; and then science, astronomy, geology, geography, economy, politics, psychology, philosophy, theology: the highest theology. You're put in front of a compedium of 2000 years of history and knowledge, from Pagan antiquity to Christian middle ages. But it's not enough: under the surface lays an entire web of allegorical meanings, esoteric symbols, alchemic-hermetic notions, astrological correspondences, all interwined with Biblical esotericism and Catholic dogmas. It's the supreme summary of Western-Roman Tradition up to the times of Dante. BUT: not enough. History of the popes, history of Italy, with all the city-states and wars, history of literature, history of the territory: the Commedia is also all of this. Natural descriptions, abstract imagery, land and sky, sea and mountain. Humans and monsters, angels and mythological creatures. Above all of this, the omnipresent tribute to friendship and love. Imagine being able to frame all of this, the entire universe known to man, inside rhyming triplets of unerring hendecasyllables. With a newborn language. Dante truly is the greatest writer of all time. Anglos can seethe.
>Dante truly is the greatest writer of all time.
Nah, Pynchon mogs him.
>we love to shit on well-written effort posts 😀
Yes, it’s a well written post, and I didn’t shit on it. Just pointed out the obvious mistake of having Dante over Pynchon.
Same thing.
It‘s noteworthy inasmuch as the purpose of the post was exclusively about scope that Gravity‘s Rainbow has a much wider range of styles and topics
Shut up blogger
Correct, but Anglos don't even read him. They're monolingual.
No reason to read it if you're not a Catholic
Read Inferno and Purgatorio. I liked the poetry but I have no idea what I'm reading from this old Italian language.
Why not Paradiso? It's the patrician cantica. Gorgeous.
>Why not Paradiso?
Just taking a pause and reading something else between the three canticas.
Paradiso is going to be a lot harder. If you didn't get the references so far, find a commentary.
What's everyone's preferred translation? I did Mark Musa for Inferno but it didn't seem to have the emotional impact I was expecting. A common problem with translations though....
Thank you so much. Exactly what I was looking for.
You're welcome