What do you think?
Rate this book
Amorosa Visione
English, Italian
285 pages, Hardcover
First published October 26, 2010
1 person is currently reading
10 people want to read
About the author
Giovanni Boccaccio
1,828 books583 followersGiovanni Boccaccio (1313 – 21 December 1375) was an Italian author and poet, a friend and correspondent of Petrarch, and an important Renaissance humanist in his own right and author of a number of notable works including the Decameron, On Famous Women, and his poetry in the Italian vernacular. Boccaccio is particularly notable for his dialogue, of which it has been said that it surpasses in verisimilitude that of just about all of his contemporaries, since they were medieval writers and often followed formulaic models for character and plot.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 10, 2018
"There was Boethius, and Avicenna, and many others were I to linger and name them, it would not be a lamentable affliction for the doubtful reader, but I shall be silent and tell of those whom she has in train on her left hand, in which direction I turned." (Boccaccio, Canto IV, lines 83-88).
This whole poem is a lamentable affliction upon the doubtful reader. It's as if Boccaccio read Dante's Inferno and took some of the most bizarre and meaningless elements that he deemed made it successful, and threw it together in an absurdist narrative. Poignant mythological figures? A journey through a space of unreality, led by a figure that the protagonist is intrigued by but eventually realizes is, after all, morally incorrect? Cantos? Even Virgil chilling in the dreamscape? Well, of course, Boccaccio wanted that sweet, sweet Christian cash for his epic poem, but he forgot one essential aspect to storytelling: a plot. I'm sure this sold well enough, but there's a reason the Wikipedia page is four lines long where as Dante's Inferno has 7.2 subsections on the site... and a video game.
Amorosa visione is completely bereft of a story. While there's a loose narrative to follow, it reads more like a stream of consciousness that would feature in some post-modernist work for a few chapters rather than Medieval poetry. (Although, admittedly, I don't have enough experience with the latter to say this as a fact, it's just my predisposition on the genre.)
Cantos IV and beyond are dedicated to listing characters. Characters featured in mythological tales, with plot and conflict and reason and explanation. He does not go so far as to explain any of those tales for any of the individuals, (thankfully, or the poem would be twice as long. I suppose that's what the glossary we previously discussed is for), and I feel he thinks by listing these names, we will by proxy associate his work with others ones that the characters are featured in. You know, stories of substance.
But he doesn't try to mask his stylistic imitation as his own. His admiration is blatant as Dante is rewarded with a crown of laurel for his writing. (Boccaccio, Canto V, lines 84-85). And then, Dante fleetingly seems to take the place of Virgil, Boccaccio the place of Dante, in his own weird, disjointed reproduction of Inferno. It's getting pretty meta at this point.
My main question is this: by listing characters and icons separate of his own production, what is he hoping to achieve from his audience? Was it common knowledge to associate the name with immediate recognition back then? While I recognize Menelaus and Absalom and Dante and the like, more than half the names I'd have to Google, and I don't have that time. And people back then didn't have the search engine. And even so, what sort of meaning would be wrought from this constant stream of Boccaccio's recognition? Is this just Boccaccio listing his reading material and mythological knowledge for the hell of it? If so, what's the point of the odd dream sequence at all?
Is the point that there simply is no point? Quite an existentialist work Boccaccio's got there.
Anyway, here's my cast of the characters I recognize. It made this a much more entertaining read:
Love - Courtney Love, leading Boccaccio through his dream with a sweet Jaguar fender in hand.
The Knights of the Round Table - Directly out of Monty Python's the Holy Grail.
Absalom - William Faulkner, obviously "more handsome than any man who ever was."
Hannibal - Anthony Hopkins.
The thought of all these guys chilling with Hippocrates and Dante Aligheri while Boccaccio looks on in awe makes a far more interesting narrative.
This whole poem is a lamentable affliction upon the doubtful reader. It's as if Boccaccio read Dante's Inferno and took some of the most bizarre and meaningless elements that he deemed made it successful, and threw it together in an absurdist narrative. Poignant mythological figures? A journey through a space of unreality, led by a figure that the protagonist is intrigued by but eventually realizes is, after all, morally incorrect? Cantos? Even Virgil chilling in the dreamscape? Well, of course, Boccaccio wanted that sweet, sweet Christian cash for his epic poem, but he forgot one essential aspect to storytelling: a plot. I'm sure this sold well enough, but there's a reason the Wikipedia page is four lines long where as Dante's Inferno has 7.2 subsections on the site... and a video game.
Amorosa visione is completely bereft of a story. While there's a loose narrative to follow, it reads more like a stream of consciousness that would feature in some post-modernist work for a few chapters rather than Medieval poetry. (Although, admittedly, I don't have enough experience with the latter to say this as a fact, it's just my predisposition on the genre.)
Cantos IV and beyond are dedicated to listing characters. Characters featured in mythological tales, with plot and conflict and reason and explanation. He does not go so far as to explain any of those tales for any of the individuals, (thankfully, or the poem would be twice as long. I suppose that's what the glossary we previously discussed is for), and I feel he thinks by listing these names, we will by proxy associate his work with others ones that the characters are featured in. You know, stories of substance.
But he doesn't try to mask his stylistic imitation as his own. His admiration is blatant as Dante is rewarded with a crown of laurel for his writing. (Boccaccio, Canto V, lines 84-85). And then, Dante fleetingly seems to take the place of Virgil, Boccaccio the place of Dante, in his own weird, disjointed reproduction of Inferno. It's getting pretty meta at this point.
My main question is this: by listing characters and icons separate of his own production, what is he hoping to achieve from his audience? Was it common knowledge to associate the name with immediate recognition back then? While I recognize Menelaus and Absalom and Dante and the like, more than half the names I'd have to Google, and I don't have that time. And people back then didn't have the search engine. And even so, what sort of meaning would be wrought from this constant stream of Boccaccio's recognition? Is this just Boccaccio listing his reading material and mythological knowledge for the hell of it? If so, what's the point of the odd dream sequence at all?
Is the point that there simply is no point? Quite an existentialist work Boccaccio's got there.
Anyway, here's my cast of the characters I recognize. It made this a much more entertaining read:
Love - Courtney Love, leading Boccaccio through his dream with a sweet Jaguar fender in hand.
The Knights of the Round Table - Directly out of Monty Python's the Holy Grail.
Absalom - William Faulkner, obviously "more handsome than any man who ever was."
Hannibal - Anthony Hopkins.
The thought of all these guys chilling with Hippocrates and Dante Aligheri while Boccaccio looks on in awe makes a far more interesting narrative.
Displaying 1 of 1 review