Classics and the Western Canon discussion
Divine Comedy, Dante
>
Inferno 11: Pause for a geography lesson
Laurele, I'm intrigued by how your translation has different Canto titles than my translation. I always look forward to seeing yours.
Musa has this Canto as "The Punishments of Hell"
Musa has this Canto as "The Punishments of Hell"
I haven't yet finished reading this Canto,
The early tercets seemed symbolically significant.
"We reached the curving brink of a steep bank" (XI, 1). [EDIT ADDED: Ah! A "curving" bank. No straight path here.)
I thought that rather appropriate. The earlier Circles were reached by more gradual descent, because many of those sins are acquired gradually. Gluttony for instance. Francesca and Paulo. They didn't just meet and start an affair. They read a liitle romannce. They read a little more. Their thoughts slowly started to align with the romance. And then...the moment.
Heresy, too, I would suppose. One doesn't become a heretic overnight.
But here, In Canto XI, the way down is steep.
One or two missteps and you fall in.
You rob someone once, you're a robber.
You murder someone once, you're a murderer.
You kill yourself once, you're a suicide.
A steep descent.
A very steep climb out of such sins.
Impossible for that last one.
The early tercets seemed symbolically significant.
"We reached the curving brink of a steep bank" (XI, 1). [EDIT ADDED: Ah! A "curving" bank. No straight path here.)
I thought that rather appropriate. The earlier Circles were reached by more gradual descent, because many of those sins are acquired gradually. Gluttony for instance. Francesca and Paulo. They didn't just meet and start an affair. They read a liitle romannce. They read a little more. Their thoughts slowly started to align with the romance. And then...the moment.
Heresy, too, I would suppose. One doesn't become a heretic overnight.
But here, In Canto XI, the way down is steep.
One or two missteps and you fall in.
You rob someone once, you're a robber.
You murder someone once, you're a murderer.
You kill yourself once, you're a suicide.
A steep descent.
A very steep climb out of such sins.
Impossible for that last one.
"Our descent will have to be delayed somewhat
so that our sense of smell may grow accustomed
to these vile fumes;
then we will not mind them" (XI, 1-3).
Well....doesn't that just say it all?
Isn't Dante/Virgil saying that no matter how heinous the sin, people ... grow accustomed .. to them?
Just as Virgil and Dante will get use to the stench of the fumes and then not mind them,
so too it is with these sinners...they get used to the stench of their sins...and then they don't mind them.
so that our sense of smell may grow accustomed
to these vile fumes;
then we will not mind them" (XI, 1-3).
Well....doesn't that just say it all?
Isn't Dante/Virgil saying that no matter how heinous the sin, people ... grow accustomed .. to them?
Just as Virgil and Dante will get use to the stench of the fumes and then not mind them,
so too it is with these sinners...they get used to the stench of their sins...and then they don't mind them.
I'm curious how Dante's ranking of the sins corresponds with the teaching of the Catholic Church, or how much of Aristotle's Ethics is incorporated by Aquinas into Doctrine.
Patrice wrote: "Yes, Adelle, that line about the smells really stuck out to me. Something we can all relate to, on lots of levels."
LOL.
I think I truly understand "stench." It's not just a really bad smell.
Years ago I took my girl scouts camping in the mountains at the Girl Scout Camp. It was late August. The latrines hadn't been emptied all summer.
The stench was overwheming. Enough to make one gag.
I told the girls to unbuckle their pants and unzip their zippers when they were about 50 feet away...or however close they could get and still breath. Then to hold their breath, run as fast as they could, do their business, run away.
I wouldn't have thought one could ever "get used to" that smell and not mind. But maybe one could.
LOL.
I think I truly understand "stench." It's not just a really bad smell.
Years ago I took my girl scouts camping in the mountains at the Girl Scout Camp. It was late August. The latrines hadn't been emptied all summer.
The stench was overwheming. Enough to make one gag.
I told the girls to unbuckle their pants and unzip their zippers when they were about 50 feet away...or however close they could get and still breath. Then to hold their breath, run as fast as they could, do their business, run away.
I wouldn't have thought one could ever "get used to" that smell and not mind. But maybe one could.
Adelle's story reminds me of "Angela's Ashes", how people living in abysmal poverty have to deal with the stench everyday, especially the scene where Frank was forced to take out the chamber pot of his stepfather and vomit in the street.
Patrice wrote: "It made me think of riding the subway in New York.lol After a while you don't hear the noise, you don't smell the smells. Stay away from it for awhile and it will overwhelm you when you go back...."
Didn't Rudy Giuliani clean up the subway?
Adelle wrote: "Laurele, I'm intrigued by how your translation has different Canto titles than my translation. I always look forward to seeing yours. Musa has this Canto as "The Punishments of Hell""
I'm just making my titles up as I go along, Adelle.
Adelle wrote: ""Our descent will have to be delayed somewhatso that our sense of smell may grow accustomed
to these vile fumes;
then we will not mind them" (XI, 1-3).
Well....doesn't that just say it all?
Is..."
Excellent. Like the frog in the pot of cold water with the burner turned on.
Nemo wrote: "Adelle's story reminds me of "Angela's Ashes", how people living in abysmal poverty have to deal with the stench everyday, especially the scene where Frank was forced to take out the chamber pot of..."
Nemo, you're right! I read that book. You would think I wouldn't forget that scene. I wouldn't have were there Smellovision in the book.
Nemo, you're right! I read that book. You would think I wouldn't forget that scene. I wouldn't have were there Smellovision in the book.
Laurele wrote: "Adelle wrote: "m just making my titles up as I go along, Adelle. ..."
Really? Well, then....I shall look forward to your titles with even more eagerness.
Really? Well, then....I shall look forward to your titles with even more eagerness.
Laurele wrote: "Like the frog in the pot of cold water with the burner turned on...."
Exactly.
You know, I do find I get to used to the really, really hot water in a hot tub. :)
Exactly.
You know, I do find I get to used to the really, really hot water in a hot tub. :)
Thought this Olfactory fatigue entry on wiki was interesting in light of the smell discussion :-)no spoiler
(view spoiler)
Also, as long as we're mentioning disgustingly smelling book scenes! :-)Anyone read Parrot and Olivier in America? I can't imagine what it would have been like for Parrot as a boy to have to take the printer-in-hiding's excrements in a can through a small passageway and down a chimney on a daily basis... ewwww...
'By toil and nature, if you remember Genesis,near the beginning, it is man's lot
to earn his bread and prosper.
'The usurer, who takes another path,
scorns nature in herself and in her follower,
and elsewhere sets his hopes.
Inf. XI, 106-111
These lines about the sin of usury are interesting, especially in these days of financial crisis. Art must follow nature, natura artis magistra. And Gods first commandment was: "be fruitful and multiply". But the usurer does not follow nature, and is not fruitful. He produces nothing and his profits are perverse.
So Dante thought. Today economists can explain why interest is not a problem, but Wall Street has discovered new games we feel to be against nature. So I agree with Dante, those buccaneers (but not Warren Buffett) belong in Hell.
Nemo wrote: "I'm curious how Dante's ranking of the sins corresponds with the teaching of the Catholic Church, or how much of Aristotle's Ethics is incorporated by Aquinas into Doctrine."Dante's Hell is explicitly based upon Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics . This is the third and most comprehensive of Aristotle's treatment and contains elements of the other two. The name comes from his son and various scholars suggest that it was put together after Aristotle's death.
Interestingly the Paradiso is based on Thomistic (filtered) interpretations of Aristotle's thoughts.
Wendelman wrote: "'So Dante thought
I've an end note which says "Dante seems to condemn all brokerage, whereas his master Aquinas admitted that, as all goods command a just price, so could the use of money" (Esolen).
So it would seem that Dante chose to embrace the more traditional religious stance on usury rather than that of Aquinas.
As we talked about the frog in the pot above, I wonder if Dante's line of thinking might have been that while a "little bit" of interest might have been acceptable, in theory, man's nature led him to try to angle for as much interest as he could?
Florence was a city of banks. How might that have affected Dante's thinking?
I've an end note which says "Dante seems to condemn all brokerage, whereas his master Aquinas admitted that, as all goods command a just price, so could the use of money" (Esolen).
So it would seem that Dante chose to embrace the more traditional religious stance on usury rather than that of Aquinas.
As we talked about the frog in the pot above, I wonder if Dante's line of thinking might have been that while a "little bit" of interest might have been acceptable, in theory, man's nature led him to try to angle for as much interest as he could?
Florence was a city of banks. How might that have affected Dante's thinking?
Patrice wrote: "Yes, Adelle, that line about the smells really stuck out to me. Something we can all relate to, on lots of levels."At first, upon reading this, I smiled recalling my first encounter changing babies. I was slightly embarrassed because I thought I was supposed to be naturally hardened to such. I got used to it.
Then when I worked in a lab around formaldehyde and it was almost unbearable...but I got used to it.
Then, by accident I was exposed to the rotting flesh of a human being...and I can never imagine that I could get used to that kind of horror. Hence this scene, whatever the amalgamation of the greater stench, makes me shudder.
I couldn't help but notice how well organized Hell was.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth was without form, and void"
And the Greeks had Chaos, which I understand wasn't chaos, but more like void, emptiness, I think.
Now here's Hell. So well organized.
The circles within the circles made me think of how in biologoy there the main categories...and then sub-categories.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth was without form, and void"
And the Greeks had Chaos, which I understand wasn't chaos, but more like void, emptiness, I think.
Now here's Hell. So well organized.
The circles within the circles made me think of how in biologoy there the main categories...and then sub-categories.
I found it challenging to understand parts of this Canto.
Dante told Virgil that his "reasoning runs smooth,
and your explanation certaily makes clear"
I found quite a bit unclear.
Found the following interesting:
D: "...what about those in the slimy swamp...
Why are they, too, not punished here inside
the city of flame, if they have earned God's wrath?
If they have not, why are they suffering?"
[This seems to me a very legitimate question.]
And he said to me, "Why do you let your thoughts
stray from the path they are accustomed to?"
---Initially, these almost seems to read as though Virgil is suggesting that Dante not question, that Dante simply accept the Church's position.
Subsequently, Virgil goes on to remind Dante about Aristotle's reasoning. Which I suppose makes sense as Virgil may be representing Reason there in Hell.
Virgil ended that tercet
"Or have I missed the point you have in mind?"
That may be significant. I think Virgil may have missed Dante's point.
Virgil could only answer with a reason/Aristole answer because all he knows is reason. He doesn't know God.
It just seems to me that Dante was asking more of a spiritual question---which Virgil couldn't answer.
Dante told Virgil that his "reasoning runs smooth,
and your explanation certaily makes clear"
I found quite a bit unclear.
Found the following interesting:
D: "...what about those in the slimy swamp...
Why are they, too, not punished here inside
the city of flame, if they have earned God's wrath?
If they have not, why are they suffering?"
[This seems to me a very legitimate question.]
And he said to me, "Why do you let your thoughts
stray from the path they are accustomed to?"
---Initially, these almost seems to read as though Virgil is suggesting that Dante not question, that Dante simply accept the Church's position.
Subsequently, Virgil goes on to remind Dante about Aristotle's reasoning. Which I suppose makes sense as Virgil may be representing Reason there in Hell.
Virgil ended that tercet
"Or have I missed the point you have in mind?"
That may be significant. I think Virgil may have missed Dante's point.
Virgil could only answer with a reason/Aristole answer because all he knows is reason. He doesn't know God.
It just seems to me that Dante was asking more of a spiritual question---which Virgil couldn't answer.
Adelle wrote: ""We reached the curving brink of a steep bank..."I found myself this past weekend alone in the midst of a dark wood, the sun going down behind the hills, and a long, curving trail down from "a high bank of broken boulders." Some images from the Inferno came to mind; I especially had the sensation of circling downwards, which has a powerful physical effect, especially when you know that eventually you must find the way to climb back up from that deep.
It was not the Styx but the Schuylkill River that I had seen in the distance from that ring of broken boulders, however. Not that different, perhaps -- a local joke, as in the Surekill Expressway. The steep climbs that I had trudged upwards were actually far more treacherous in the movement downhill. It is easier to lose your footing going down, than up. Easier to fall, to slide, to lose control of the descent, than while laboriously puffing upwards. Like, unfortunately, sin and virtue?
While there is sometimes a joy in going downhill, so much less aerobic exertion, so much more speed; there was, at moments, that same oppressive feeling that I imagine Dante was feeling as he followed in Virgil's tracks.
In line 22, I liked the plain speech that comes through in Mandelbaum: "Of every malice that earns hate in heaven, injustice is the end..."
Heaven can still hate. Not just a sweetly frothy, frolicky self-esteem movement going on up there; condemnation and hate, as well. Sometimes I think our society makes this life so unserious it is a painful miscalculation.
Lines 43-45: "Whoever would deny himself your world, gambling away, wasting his patrimony, and weeping where he should instead be happy" -- how interesting that that last item should measure up to the wastefulness of gambling and squandering the fruits of some progenitor's labor. Weeping where he should be happy -- the whiner, among other things. The kvetcher, the perenially dissatisfied complainer, the .... whiner, I keep coming back to it. Waste, wastefulness, unappreciativeness, plus stupidity. I like Dante's grouping of these errors.
Nemo wrote: "I'm curious how Dante's ranking of the sins corresponds with the teaching of the Catholic Church, or how much of Aristotle's Ethics is incorporated by Aquinas into Doctrine."
Nemo, I've been waiting, too, to see if any Catholics or Aristotle People would respond.
And "Thank You, Rhonda," at Post 21.
(Now, because it has the same rhythm, I am hearing that 60s song in my head. "Help me, Rhonda."
Well, Rhonda DID help.)
Nemo, I've been waiting, too, to see if any Catholics or Aristotle People would respond.
And "Thank You, Rhonda," at Post 21.
(Now, because it has the same rhythm, I am hearing that 60s song in my head. "Help me, Rhonda."
Well, Rhonda DID help.)
Michael wrote: "
Great post.
It is easier to lose your footing going down, than up. Easier to fall, to slide, to lose control of the descent, than while laboriously puffing upwards. Like, unfortunately, sin and virtue?
and
where he should be happy -- the whiner, among other things. The kvetcher, the perenially dissatisfied complainer, the .... whiner, I keep coming back to it. Waste, wastefulness, unappreciativeness, plus stupidity. I like Dante's grouping of these errors.
Great post.
It is easier to lose your footing going down, than up. Easier to fall, to slide, to lose control of the descent, than while laboriously puffing upwards. Like, unfortunately, sin and virtue?
and
where he should be happy -- the whiner, among other things. The kvetcher, the perenially dissatisfied complainer, the .... whiner, I keep coming back to it. Waste, wastefulness, unappreciativeness, plus stupidity. I like Dante's grouping of these errors.
Michael wrote:'Lines 43-45: "Whoever would deny himself your world, gambling away, wasting his patrimony, and weeping where he should instead be happy" -- how interesting that that last item should measure up to the wastefulness of gambling and squandering the fruits of some progenitor's labor. Weeping where he should be happy -- the whiner, among other things. The kvetcher, the perenially dissatisfied complainer, the .... whiner, I keep coming back to it. Waste, wastefulness, unappreciativeness, plus stupidity. I like Dante's grouping of these errors.'
Sounds like the whole world has a need for a Thanksgiving Day!
Adelle wrote: "Nemo wrote: "I'm curious how Dante's ranking of the sins corresponds with the teaching of the Catholic Church, or how much of Aristotle's Ethics is incorporated by Aquinas into Doctrine."Nemo, I'..."
I was hoping more for responses from Catholics, because I'm really curious how much of Aristotle's Ethics was incorporated into church doctrine, though I appreciate Rhonda's reply, she is not a Catholic :)
From Dorothy Sayers, in her notes to canto 11 of her translation (Sayers was Anglican, not Catholic, but the tradition is the same):"Dante's classification of sin is based chiefly on Aristotle, with a little assistance from Cicero. Aristotle divided wrong behavior into three main kinds: (A) Incontinence (uncontrolled appetite); (B) Bestiality (perverted appetite); (C) Malice or Vice (abuse of the specifically human faculty of reason). Cicero declared that all injurious conduct acted by either (a) Violence or (b) Fraud. Combining these two classifications, Dante obtains three classes of sins: I. Incontinence; II. Violence (or Bestiality); III. Fraud (or Malice). These he subdivides and arranges in 7 Circles: 4 of Incontinence 1 of Violence, and 2 ofFraud.
"To these purely ethical categories of wrong behavior he, as a Christian, adds 2 Circles of wrong belief: 1 of Unbelief (Limbo) and 1 of Misbelief (the Heretics), making 9 Circles in all. Finally, he adds the Vestibule of the Futile, who have neither faith nor works; this, not being a Circle, bears no number.
"Thus we get the 10 main divisions of Hell. In the other books of the Comedy we shall find the same numerical scheme of 3, made up by subdivisions to 7; plus 2 (=9); plus 1 (=10). Hell, however, is complicated by still further subdivision. The Circle of Violence is again divided into 3 Rings; the Circle of Fraud Simple into 10 Bowges; and the Circle of Fraud Complex into 4 Regions. So that Hell contains a grand total of 24 divisions. (See section map on opposite page.)"
Now I'm dizzy!
Laurele wrote: "From Dorothy Sayers, in her notes to canto 11 of her translation (Sayers was Anglican, not Catholic, but the tradition is the same):"Did Sayers say whether Dante's classification agree with the teachings of the Anglican Church? I don't see it in the passage you quoted above. How much of Sayers notes reflect her personal belief?
I don't know, Nemo. You'd have to search it out.
Adelle wrote: "Florence was a city of banks. How might that have affected Dante's thinking? "As a point supporting the influence on Dante's thinking, he frequently criticizes Florence's pride and avarice at its sudden wealth. One gathers that most of the offenders are Florentine save one who speaks and claims to be Paduan.
Marvin Becker, writing on this subject, suggests that civil leaders in Florence were so prejudiced by the need to protect their economic interests, that ordinances against usury were applied only to pawn-brokers and not, significantly, to the wealthy Florentine merchant-princes, whose money-lending activities continued without formal censure from the city.
From Art and Nature man was meant to take
his daily bread to live--if you recall
the book of Genesis near the beginning;
but the usurer, adopting other means,
scorns Nature in herself and in her pupil,
Art-- he invests his hope in something else. (Musa)
My understanding is that "Art" here means honest labor. Thus by making money from money, rather than from natural means, the usurer sins. Of course, this sin is repeated everyday on Wall Street, and elsewhere. We call it capitalism.
his daily bread to live--if you recall
the book of Genesis near the beginning;
but the usurer, adopting other means,
scorns Nature in herself and in her pupil,
Art-- he invests his hope in something else. (Musa)
My understanding is that "Art" here means honest labor. Thus by making money from money, rather than from natural means, the usurer sins. Of course, this sin is repeated everyday on Wall Street, and elsewhere. We call it capitalism.
Zeke wrote: "From Art and Nature man was meant to takehis daily bread to live--if you recall
the book of Genesis near the beginning;
but the usurer, adopting other means,
scorns Nature in herself an..."
The users laws are a mystery to me. It's as if the medievals did not have the parables of the talents in their New Testaments.
Usury is condemned in Ezekiel, Leviticus and a few other places in the OT. I think the idea is that usury is a type of unnatural and false increase and a means of defrauding your neighbor. It does not create value but extorts value from the victim.
The parable of the talents in the New Testament is not an endorsement of usury, but a lesson on how to achieve genuine growth. Things that don't have life in them, such as money, don't grow by themselves, if you bury them, they will remain the same. OTOH, living things do grow and multiply. God gives life to all, and it is "God who gives the increase". So to "deposit your money with the bankers" really means to sow to the Spirit, receive increase from God, and reap everlasting life.
I needed to borrow money and was and am willing/ happy to pay interest. I didn't have the full price to buy my home. I didn't want to pay the full price all at once to buy my car. I am willing to pay for the conveniece of not having to carry a lot of cash around with me when I shop. And I appreciate that someone will do so for a reasonable fee.
As you say, those talents won't grow if they're not "used." I could rent my neighbor my shovel for a day and my shovel would "earn" money for me. I could rent my neighbor $300 for a month and my money would "earn" money for me.
I don't see a difference.
I am so thankful there are banks.
As you say, those talents won't grow if they're not "used." I could rent my neighbor my shovel for a day and my shovel would "earn" money for me. I could rent my neighbor $300 for a month and my money would "earn" money for me.
I don't see a difference.
I am so thankful there are banks.
Adelle wrote: "I needed to borrow money and was and am willing/ happy to pay interest. I didn't have the full price to buy my home. I didn't want to pay the full price all at once to buy my car. I am willin..."Talking about "frog in a burner", how easily we get used to extortion and slavery.
Laurele wrote: "..The users laws are a mystery to me. It's as if the medievals did not have the parables of the talents in their New Testaments. "That's what I was just thinking!
Patrice wrote: "Sometimes it seems the banks don't believe in interest either! ;-)"LOL! maybe they've been reading too much Dante's Inferno! :-)
Nemo wrote: Talking about "frog in a burner", how easily we get used to extortion and slavery: "."
Do you REALLY see it that way, or are just messing with me? ;)
I don't see extortion or slavery.
No one makes me borrow money, it is a choice. There's no extortion.
The bank tell me upfront what the interest rate will be. No extortion so far as I can see. It's a service like any other.
Now...if I borrow too much...I suppose I could slide into a "slavery" of sorts. But it would be self-imposed...if I knowingly kept borrowing money I knew I couldn't afford to pay back. Strictly speaking, I don't think that's the definition of slavery. More like indentured servant maybe. You sign the contract because it's worth it to you.
It strikes me as offensive that someone would want or expect to borrow money without paying for the use of that money.
If you own a house, is it extortion to charge rent for it's use?
Renting out the house isn't exactly labor.
But you earned the money to buy the house, so now you can "get"/because you're not "earning" ... You can " get" money for renting it out for someone to use.
The same with interest, it seems.
You earned the money. Now you are renting that money out for some
one to use. You "get" money.
It seems to me comparable to renting homes for a living, or renting out cars for a living, or renting out router rooters by the hour to other people who want to use them. Strictly speaking, you "earn" that money the same way a bank "earns" interest. Semantics.
Lol. And I APPRECIATED being able to rent that router rooter and i thought I got my money's worth...and I was thankful when the water went down the drain again.
Do you REALLY see it that way, or are just messing with me? ;)
I don't see extortion or slavery.
No one makes me borrow money, it is a choice. There's no extortion.
The bank tell me upfront what the interest rate will be. No extortion so far as I can see. It's a service like any other.
Now...if I borrow too much...I suppose I could slide into a "slavery" of sorts. But it would be self-imposed...if I knowingly kept borrowing money I knew I couldn't afford to pay back. Strictly speaking, I don't think that's the definition of slavery. More like indentured servant maybe. You sign the contract because it's worth it to you.
It strikes me as offensive that someone would want or expect to borrow money without paying for the use of that money.
If you own a house, is it extortion to charge rent for it's use?
Renting out the house isn't exactly labor.
But you earned the money to buy the house, so now you can "get"/because you're not "earning" ... You can " get" money for renting it out for someone to use.
The same with interest, it seems.
You earned the money. Now you are renting that money out for some
one to use. You "get" money.
It seems to me comparable to renting homes for a living, or renting out cars for a living, or renting out router rooters by the hour to other people who want to use them. Strictly speaking, you "earn" that money the same way a bank "earns" interest. Semantics.
Lol. And I APPRECIATED being able to rent that router rooter and i thought I got my money's worth...and I was thankful when the water went down the drain again.
In the conversation about banking and usurery, I think we are getting away from what (for me) is Dante's main objection. His position seems to be that it is "unnatural" to make money without either labor or nature's bounty.
I'm not sure if that is the same objection that Islam makes. But I would note that Islam has found creative ways around the injunctions.
I'm not sure if that is the same objection that Islam makes. But I would note that Islam has found creative ways around the injunctions.
I would agree with you, Zeke. I do agree with you, Zeke. And I'll cease and desist--- right after this.
This just occured to me. Maybe, just maybe, in some sort of pre-Orwellian double-speak, the banking industry purposefully chose the banking terminolgy they did. Choosing terms that would start to influence people away from viewing banking as somehow sinful...influencing people to think of banks' profits as comparable to the "natural increase" of crops on the field or comparable to the money acquired though physical labor.
ie:
"You want to make your money WORK for you...in the bank or in the market." obviously in the strict sense, money does not WORK.
"In the bank, your money will EARN interest." Strictly speaking, money can't EARN anything. It's not living.
"Put your money in the stockmarket and watch it GROW." But money isn't alive. It cannot GROW.
"Buy our bonds. They have a high YIELD." lol. This makes it sound as though the bonds, the money, were a crop...that actually produces a harvest...a YEILD. But money and bonds aren't alive...they don't really have YEILDS.
Eh? Using terms that make it appear as though money is growing, and yielding, and earning....just like legitimate money.
This just occured to me. Maybe, just maybe, in some sort of pre-Orwellian double-speak, the banking industry purposefully chose the banking terminolgy they did. Choosing terms that would start to influence people away from viewing banking as somehow sinful...influencing people to think of banks' profits as comparable to the "natural increase" of crops on the field or comparable to the money acquired though physical labor.
ie:
"You want to make your money WORK for you...in the bank or in the market." obviously in the strict sense, money does not WORK.
"In the bank, your money will EARN interest." Strictly speaking, money can't EARN anything. It's not living.
"Put your money in the stockmarket and watch it GROW." But money isn't alive. It cannot GROW.
"Buy our bonds. They have a high YIELD." lol. This makes it sound as though the bonds, the money, were a crop...that actually produces a harvest...a YEILD. But money and bonds aren't alive...they don't really have YEILDS.
Eh? Using terms that make it appear as though money is growing, and yielding, and earning....just like legitimate money.
Interesting stuff Adelle. Noticing how "yield" and "grow" (can I add "nest egg"?) parrot agricultural terms.
Zeke wrote: "Interesting stuff Adelle. Noticing how "yield" and "grow" (can I add "nest egg"?) parrot agricultural terms."lol
Adelle wrote: "Do you REALLY see it that way, or are just messing with me? ;)"Economics is not my strong suit. So I'm still trying to work this out, as usual. I'd like to hear from someone who has studied economics.
From a classical economics pov, money is the token of value created by labor, and is used for the purpose of exchange. When you rent an apartment, you pay money for the use of the apartment. There is an equal exchange, and no interest. In usury, the usurer gives less but receives more in return by charging interest. That is not an equal exchange.
Most here will know that Merchant of Venice explores issues of banking and lending. It also probes another issue pertinent to Dante's work (and religion): the issue of justice vs. mercy. Which has priority? Can they co-exist?
Obviously, in Inferno we are getting a good dose of Divine justice. As we proceed in Comedia will we ever find the mercy that, for some, is the heart of Christianity?
1 Corinthians 13:13. "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
Obviously, in Inferno we are getting a good dose of Divine justice. As we proceed in Comedia will we ever find the mercy that, for some, is the heart of Christianity?
1 Corinthians 13:13. "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
Lending at interest had a bad rep in the pre-modern world. Nowadays I think it's pretty well accepted that lending at interest is nothing other than renting out money, just like renting out a car, a house, or a wood chipper. On the other hand,we still condemn those who knowingly lend at high interest to those who are unlikely to ever be able to pay the debt, for the purpose of locking them in debt slavery.
Zeke wrote: "Most here will know that Merchant of Venice explores issues of banking and lending. ..."There is a bit of "contrapasso" in The Merchant of Venice too. Shylock, the usurer who was used to getting more for less, was forced by the court to get the exact amount, one pound of flesh, nothing more nothing less. He couldn't do it.
Patrice wrote: "Those giant interest rates are in part to make up for all of the people who default. In other words, many people are paying for other peoples sins. It doesn't seem fair, does it?
Without interest there would be zero incentive to lend money, to take a risk. ..."
I don't think lending was started as a business practice, but a common practice to help your friend and relative, to help your neighbor in need. The same incentive that people have for doing good deeds.
A banker can certainly make an honest living by taking a salary or service fee for the work involved in managing the money under his care.
Patrice wrote: "The premise of Merchant of Venice was false. That "pound of flesh" thing is totally against Jewish law. One is never allowed to damage the body as it does not belong to you but to God."It does say in the Law concerning physical injury, "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot". Since Shylock evidently values his money more than his own flesh, he can demand financial debt be paid in pound of flesh.
Adelle wrote: "No one makes me borrow money, it is a choice. There's no extortion."I think I tend to agree with this perspective. Just as you might pay rent for the use of a home, you also in a sense pay rent for the use of a loan or investment sum that's purchased from your company. Also from the standpoint of the lender. Work or "art" had to be performed to come up with the initial sum, and then when the wise investor seeks to find a good investment it's still work and time involved in the process of determining what would be a good investment. I don't doubt for a minute that Warren Buffett puts in a lot of hard hours of work through research determining what investments to make with his money. He is a steward over the money after all in the same way a farmer is a steward over his fields.
Also, what about the perspective of George Bailey Bailey Building and Loan! :-) Seems to me a very artful way of providing a service for the good of the community, when done right of course! :-)
Jews were expelled from England in 1290 and not openly readmitted until 1656. Shakespeare presumably knew of Jewish culture only by hearsay.
Hollander's outline:
Summary of Canto: Inf XI
1-9 a second group of heretics: Pope Anastasius
10-15 the stench of sin from lower hell
16-27 Virgil's description of the sins of lower hell:
malice resulting in use of violence or fraud
28-51 violence (Circle 7) vs. neighbor, self, or God
52-60 fraud (Circle 8) vs. others
61-66 treachery, a worse form of fraud (Circle 9)
67-75 Dante's question: why are not the inhabitants of
Circles 2-5 punished in Dis?
76-90 Virgil's answer: incontinence less offensive to God
than malice and mad brutishness
91-96 Dante still puzzled by Virgil's words about usury
97-111 Virgil on the sin against art, 'God's grandchild'
112-115 coda: Virgil annnounces it is time to go (ca. 4am)