The Catholic Book Club discussion
This topic is about
The Betrothed
The Betrothed - July-Aug. 2022
>
1. Along the way
message 1:
by
Manuel
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jun 30, 2022 10:54PM
Mod
reply
|
flag
I share this article by the Professor Esolen written by Catholic Education Resource Center.https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/...
Lake Como, and all the other lakes, Lago Maggiore, etc, on the south side of the Italian Alps must be one of the most gorgeous regions on the planet. If you've ever had the good fortune to visit there, it is unforgettable. In the opening paragraphs Manzoni captures perfectly the beauty and majesty of the region. It is at the same time truly lovely but also dangerous and forbidding.
Fonch, thanks for that fabulous article. Prof. Esolen is so stirring! (I've heard a couple of his lectures on Dante. Here's one https://magnusinstitute.org/ep-028-da...)
I am a big fan of the Professor Esolen. He gave me two books. One of them dedicated.
There are abbreviated editions of the novel. Two paragraphs at the end of Chapter IV are missing in the free English translation. "...whence he commenced his pedestrian journey towards the place of his noviciate.They describe the reaction of the party to Brother Cristofo's visit. My German translation has them, and I wanted to cut and paste a quote. It speaks of the power of being in the presence of a holy man.
[Two paragraphs missing]
It is not our design to write the history of his cloistral life; we will only say, he executed faithfully the offices ordinarily assigned to him, of preaching, and of comforting the dying; but beyond these,..."
My translation:
The brother of the murdered and all the relatives had on this day intended to relish the sad joy of pride; instead, they found themselves filled in the joy of forgiveness and goodwill. The company stayed together for a little longer. A happy mood prevailed and an exceptional cordiality. None who attended had been prepared of what ended up being spoken about. ..."
Mod
Mod
I noticed that when I was looking for my copy - several versions out there are much too short to be unabridged. I paid a bit more to try to ensure that I got the full version. I think I succeeded as my version has three paragraphs between the two texts you quoted!
Mod
Mod
That's what I assume, as well.
What a coincidence! I am also reading The Heart, an Analysis of Human and Divine Affectivity by Dietrich von Hildebrand; I came across this line: "First the heart is necessarily silenced in any man so dominated by pride and concupiscence that morality plays no role in his life. We may rightly say of him that 'he has no heart.' Whether it is a Cain or an Iago, a Richard II, a Don Giovanni, or a DON RODRIGO IN MANZONI'S BETROTHED, such a man has no heart."Haha. And I had never heard of this book before it was picked for the book of the month(s)! So glad we are reading it.
I am about half way and enjoying the book,This is my second reading.
I Will start to read when i concluded "on the theatre" by William Somerset Maugham and "Vigdis" a Sigrid Undset's novel. I did not know that Vigdis existed but i love the spanish cover of the book.
Mod
This is my second reading."
I am about halfway and also enjoying the book as well. My pace picked up last week when I was on vacation, but will slow down this week as I battle what I assume is COVID.
I'm about 25% of the way through, and I have to say that it seems a bit overwrought. Every male character seems to be up on his high horse all of the time, thumping his chest and shouting. There is Dickensian level of declamation and outrage, without the particular character and speech patterns that Dickens gives to his apoplectic characters. I'm finding it a little long winded and tedious, to be honest. Of course, the translation may be responsible for some of that. And I am left wondering, couldn't all this fuss have been avoided if Father Christopher had simply said, "Very well, I will marry the two of you myself." Is there some historical reason why Don Abbondio is the only priest in town who can marry them?
Not all friars are priests, and in past centuries it was less likely for a friar to be one than nowadays. Everything indicates that Fra Cristoforo was a friar, not a priest, and thus could not celebrate sacraments.
I have Just started and i have Just remembered because i give up the reading of this book. I am not liking anything as the autor is describing to the Spain of the 17th century with the spanish harashing the italian girls, stealing the countrymen and i do not like the author employs legislation showing the acts against the slobs and bandits as it was the Charles III court, or the Spanish second republic, neither i like that Manzoni gives the image of Spanish Italy decline meanwhile Venice and Savoy are right. Even the author looks an authentic demagogue giving his view of the the behaviour of the 17th century with the impression of the humanitarian 19th century. I think that the novel's register is Black legend typical of the Illustration and the Italy of the Carbonarian and Rissorgimiento. I think that the view of the author of Milan of the Visconti or Sforza would have been different. If at this moment i had to rate my rating would be one or two stars. And my apologies for being the only person that at this moment is not enjoying the novel, but somebody had to say it.
Mod
Fonch, the legislation against bravos is historic. Manzoni studied it closely. I don't understand your reference to the Spanish Second Republic, which took place over one century after Manzoni. Also, Spanish Italy was actually in decline during the 17th century, so I can't see why Manzoni shouldn't have shown that.
You say that Manzoni shows Venice and Savoy in the right. Where did you get this idea? Savoy is not even mentioned in the book. Venice is mentioned, but what is said has nothing to do with the politics of the epoch.
Where did you get the idea that Spaniards harassed Italian girls? Of course this may have happened somewhere, but the novel just tells about Don Rodrigo harassing Lucia. On the other hand, as Count Attilio is mentioned as Don Rodrigo's cousin, and his name is clearly Italian, the nationality of the characters is quite mixed and cannot be taken as a criticism against Spaniards. Finally, the Italian Wikipedia says explicitly that Manzoni was attacking the Austrian Empire, that at his time dominated Italy.
I'm afraid you stopped reading the book too soon, after having got a mistaken idea of its contents.
Mariangel wrote: "Not all friars are priests, and in past centuries it was less likely for a friar to be one than nowadays. Everything indicates that Fra Cristoforo was a friar, not a priest, and thus could not cele..."My translation frequently calls him Father Christopher. Do you know if that it a poor translation or a difference in usage?
Still, even if he was not a priest, he must surely know several. It just seems like all the unpleasantness could have been avoided if the characters had just calmed down for a moment and thought things through instead of running round with their hair on fire.
Fonch wrote: "And my apologies for being the only person that at this moment is not enjoying the novel, but somebody had to say it.."You are not the only one who is not enjoying it, thought my difficulties with it are purely literary, since I know nothing about the history.
Mod
In the Italian edition he is called "Padre Cristoforo." Even so, he could have been a friar, not a priest, for friars are frequently called "father."
In any case, even though he were a priest, it's not so easy to perform a Catholic marriage against the will of the parish priest, who according to the Canon is the appropriate person, responsible for the banns and discovery of possible impediments. The bishop is also able to do it. Fra Cristoforo probably would have incurred in some illegality if he had done it.
I totally agree with the maid if Abbondio had written to the Cardinal Frederick Borromeo the story had been different. In my opinion Abbondio should have done it. His cowardice was decissive to the plot. Certainly i feel devotion not for this Borromeo yes for his ascendent Charles Borromeo. I was very close to call Charles in his honor.
I agree with the Professor the secret weddings were banned in the Trent Council a scene as the movie Braveheart had been impossible in the 17th century. Italy is not as France which delays a lot in accepting the Trent 's Council deccissions.
Manuel wrote: "even though he were a priest, it's not so easy to perform a Catholic marriage against the will of the parish priest"That's a fair point. Would that the book had dealt with the subtleties of this a little more rather than everyone, including Fra Cristoforo, running around with their hair on fire.
Not that that melodramatic hand-wringing style is not present in other classic works. It's there in The Count of Monte Cristo, for instance, and in a lot of Dickens. But here is seems more heavy handed and clumsy than in Dickens or Dumas.
I am not finding the style clumsy at all, but very agile. Maybe it is the translation? I am reading it in Italian.
Perhaps the book loses when it is translated to another language.
I must admit that although this book did not like me very much. This book was very praised by Saint John Henry Newman, Galdos, Marcelino Menendez Pelayo and Eugene D'Ors meanwhile was criticized by communist as Gramsci, and Moravia. Benedetto Croce at the beggining was very critic with this novel but after he regret his previous position.
Fonch wrote: "Perhaps the book loses when it is translated to another language."I suspect all books lose when translated to another language. Still, there is style and there is story, and the story still has a lot of people shouting at each other. Fra Cristoforo shouting at Don Rodrigo seemed to me particularly pointless. He is supposedly someone who became a Friar after regretting an intemperate reaction to a small affront, but he does exactly the same thing again, blowing up when there is nothing to be gained, and much to be lost, by doing so. Maybe that is the point. Maybe Fra Cristoforo will turn out to be the villain of the piece, but somehow I doubt it. It seems so far like a work in which the righteousness of its speeches is valued over the verisimilitude of its characters and incidents. But I will press on.
I have written to the Professor a mail because in English i could not reply him. Now i reply to Mark not Friar Christopher is not the villain of the story is Roderick and other character that i can not speak at this moment.
At this moment i am more advanced that when i read the novel when i was young. I want to conclude this book before of 1 st of august for continueing with my Goodreads challenge for this reason i Will go very fast but i do not to spoil the plot. I Will pass the comments to the Professor and he Will post when he thinks convenient.
In the banquet i did not like that the bad characters were supporting to the Count Duke Olivares this is an evidence that Manzoni was supporting France and Cardinal Richelieu? We must remember that in Characters of the Reformation Richelieu paid a chest plenty of golden coins to the swedish King Gustave Adolphe to intervine in favor protestants and against the Habsbourg dinasty.About the Montferrat war sucession this war it is the beggining of the Spain decline. France supported the Duke of Nevers and Spain supported to Ferdinand Gonzaga. There was not an arrangement and there was a war. Spain had a lot of problems to conquer the stronghold of Casale and sent to his Best generals Gonzalo Fernández of Córdoba descendant of the famous general of the 15th century and Ambrose Spinola who conquered Brede, but nobody could conquer Casale, and to the end of the conflict when Casale was very close to fall the Pope Urban VIII sent to the future Cardinal Mazarine (the Pope belonged to the Barberini's family which was pro-french).
About Count Duke Olivares a prestiguous historian Ferdinand Braudale said that he was not a bad opponent to Richelieu. About the question of herald my opinion is closer to the Podesta than Attilio. In my edition of the book in the notes spoke the Walter Scott's novel "Quentin Durward" where the Duke of Burgundy Charles menace with punishing the sacred person of the herald. At finally was not a person who has the condition of Herald and Louis XI with the permission of Duke Charles killed the herald really the gypsy Haugrevin.
About the duels are totally forbidden by the Trent's council and the guilty was the excommunion for instance Richelieu order to kill to Montmorency for participating in a duel. For this reason the Cardinal Richelieu sent to the Cardinal's Guardians to arrest D'Artagnan and the three Musketers, and it was the reason because i rated with two stars the spanish novel "Pepita Jiménez" it did not like anything that the main character a seminarist had a duel with a member of the nobility for insulting to his girlfriend Pepita Jiménez.
Mark wrote: " Fra Cristoforo shouting at Don Rodrigo seemed to me particularly pointless. He is supposedly someone who became a Friar after regretting an intemperate reaction to a small affront, but he does exactly the same thing again, blowing up when there is nothing to be gained, and much to be lost, by doing so. ”I disagree. Fra Cristoforo was very prudent during all the conversation and tried all means to convince Don Rodrigo with good arguments. He only became indignant when Don Rodrigo proposed as the only solution ¡to have Lucia come to him! What impudence!
Fra Cristoforo’s reaction to this is what any religious should do confronting such a situation, and not at all like the time he blew up at a small affront.
On the subject of Father Christopher being a priest, I noticed this line:“To whom didst thou relate it?” asked Agnes quickly, indignant at the idea of any one being preferred before her as a confidant.
“To Father Christopher, in confession, mamma,” replied Lucy, in a tone of apology.
That does, of course, leave the issue of the authority of the parish priest over marriage.
Mariangel wrote: "Fra Cristoforo was very prudent during all the conversation and tried all means to convince Don Rodrigo with good arguments. "Maybe it comes across differently in the original, but in the translation I am reading, these are Father Christopher's lines in that conversation:
“I come to supplicate you to perform an act of justice: some wicked persons have, in the name of your lordship, frightened a poor curate, and have endeavoured to prevent his fulfilling his duty towards an innocent and unoffending couple. You can by a word confound their machinations, and impart consolation to the afflicted. You can—and having it in your power—conscience, honour——”
He feigns to blame the bravos, but of course Don Rodrigo would recognize that he is the one being called wicked and whose conscience and honor are being impugned.
“It was certainly not my intention to say any thing to displease you: correct me, reprove me; but deign to listen to me. By the love of Heaven, by that God before whom we must all appear, I charge thee, do not obstinately refuse to do justice to the innocent and oppressed! Think that God watches over them, that their imprecations are heard above, and——”
Here he accuses him of obstinacy and injustice and threatens him with divine retribution.
Don Rodrigo then calls him a spy and he responds:
“You do not believe that I am such; you feel in your heart that I am here on no vile or contemptible errand. Listen to me, Signor Don Roderick; and Heaven grant that the day may never arrive, when you shall repent of not having listened to me! Listen to me, and perform this deed of justice and benevolence. Men will esteem you! God will esteem you! you have much in your power, but——”
Don Rodrigo then complains (justly) that he is giving a sermon.
“And to God princes are responsible for the reception of his messages; to God you are responsible; he now sends into your palace a message by one of his ministers, the most unworthy——”
In other words, "I speak with the voice of God!"
And after that it all goes sideways really quickly.
I don't see either prudence or good arguments in any of that. I see immediate accusation of wickedness and injustice and a demand to be obeyed in the name of God. Far from being an argument, it is an accusation and a demand.
Now maybe this is all the fault of the translation (it is an old one from Project Guttenberg), though if so the departures from the original text must be considerable. But if the translation is at fault, I want to know so I can start over with a better one.
I find that the first and second paragraphs are prudent and with good arguments, an appeal to conscience and honor, and a reminder of God’s commandments. This is all within what a religious who needs to confront a sinner would say. And the tone is supplicant in those two paragraphs.Since you don’t agree, could you give me an example of what you consider a prudent way to entreat a powerful lord who is intent on kidnapping and raping a girl to desist?
Mod
I suppose you know that this book is considered as the third most important work of Italian literature, or for some even the second, tying for the place with Orlando Furioso by Ariosto. The first is, of course, La Divina Commedia by Dante, which I consider the best book I have read in my life.
What I can understand is that Italian literature may be difficult or unpalatable for English-speaking people. But that is not a literary assertion, rather it's sociological; in the same way, I can witness that Chinese classical literature is sometimes difficult for me.
Mod
Maybe it comes across differently in the original, ..."
That translation of the original Italian is not bad. However, we differ in one important respect: I don't see anything wrong in everything Fra Cristoforo says. I find it most appropriate and according to the situation and the circumstances. This is why:
Fra Cristoforo knows that Don Rodrigo has tried to seduce a young girl, and has frightened the Parish Priest so that he won't marry her. In the name of God! What do you expect him to say? What would you say in his place? You complain that he's giving a sermon! Of course! and that's what he must do at that point, if he wants to move the soul of the miscreant.
Manuel wrote: "I suppose you know that this book is considered as the third most important work of Italian literature"Yes, I do know. And I am struggling to figure out why.
And yes, it may be a function of a different literary culture. All literature is culturally conditioned. All literature is stylized in one way or another, and one becomes accustomed to the styles and conventions of ones own literature.
But it may also have something to do with the fact that I am reading a 19th century translation. I'm wondering if anyone here knows of a better one.
Manuel wrote: "You complain that he's giving a sermon! Of course! and that's what he must do at that point, if he wants to move the soul of the miscreant."If he wanted to help the people he has promised to help, he would do better to focus on changing the mind of the miscreant rather than moving his soul. If said miscreant is willing to beat up priests and rape maidens, it is not likely that a sermon is going to change his mind. And Don Rodrigo says as much plainly.
You convince someone by appealing to the things they care about. Clearly Don Rodrigo does not mind beating up priests and raping maidens, and I doubt it is news to him that the church disapproves of such things. A sermon is going to have no effect on him. So what does he care about? Perhaps his public reputation? Perhaps the disapprobation of his peers and superiors? And a man like this probably has other conflicts in his life. Perhaps there is a way to turn this situation to his advantage in one of those.
That is what I would expect any reasonable person to focus on if they actually wanted to get the job done and save the young couple. The sermon was never going to have the desired effect. It was always going to make things worse. It would have been better to have stayed away and never given it.
Of course, this is entirely outside the book. My impression is not so much that Manzoni gets the psychology wrong here, but that he is not interested in the psychology, that he is not writing a psychological novel at all, but rather an extended sermon. Creating the occasion for his characters to give sermons is thus the point. It is what he is trying to achieve as a literary objective. It is why his characters so frequently behave in arch ways that are clearly counterproductive to their cause.
And, of course, he is perfectly entitled to do that. I certainly would not argue the every novel has to be psychological. This may be one of the greatest sermonizing novels every written. But I don't find sermonizing novels particularly to my taste.
Mod
Don't we do that too frequently? Aren't Manzoni's characters true to life by acting like this?
Also, if Fra Cristoforo had done as you suggest and been successful, and convinced Don Rodrigo that he shouldn't do what he was planning, the novel would have finished there, at the end of chapter 6. Personally I prefer to have the additional 32 chapters.
Mark wrote: "But I don't find sermonizing novels particularly to my taste."
True! There's no accounting for tastes. ;-)
Manuel wrote: "Mark wrote: "It is why his characters so frequently behave in arch ways that are clearly counterproductive to their cause."Don't we do that too frequently? Aren't Manzoni's characters true to lif..."
Oh, certainly. But I was asked what else someone could have done in that situation and I was answering that question.
And yes, people often do things that are contrary to their best interests, and those are often the most interesting things to explore in literature. But there has to be a reason for it, or it is just a plot hole. So far, though, I don't get the impression that that is what Manzoni is doing here.
And yes, it is a problem for all authors that certain ways out of the dilemma have to be avoided or we will never reach the climax of the story. This is what makes building a credible plot so difficult. It is also one of the difficulties of reading older works, where the reader may not be aware of impediments that would have been obvious to the reader of the time.
The anguished reader's cry, "Why don't they just..." is something that every author needs to be careful to avoid. On the other hand, there are conventions of genre and conventions of particular times that permit some violations of plot logic for the sake of story, and these may trip up a reader of a different time when they no longer apply.
Why did Father Christopher go on this fruitless journey which, as a sensible man, he should have known would do no good? Because Manzoni wanted to paint a portrait of Don Rodrigo at this point, to bring his villain into the frame. He wanted Don Rodrigo to get angry at Father Christopher as a way to illustrate his character, so he had Father Christopher give him a sermon and accuse him of infamy in order that he should react to it.
This was clearly the right time to bring the villain into the frame. But the storytelling contrivance that accomplishes it is obvious and, by modern standards, clumsy. We live in an age now in which we don't like the storytelling to show. This work does not belong to this age, and clearly this was not a concern for Manzoni.
But if we put all that aside, I'm still not seeing much here beyond the sermonizing. Maybe that will come later.
Mark wrote: "On the subject of Father Christopher being a priest, I noticed this line:“To whom didst thou relate it?” asked Agnes quickly, indignant at the idea of any one being preferred before her as a conf..."
Now that you mention it, I remember reading it too. Then Fra Cristoforo is indeed a priest, and the reason why he cannot marry them himself must be what Manuel said. Even nowadays, the publication of the marriage banns and preparation of documentation has to be done by a priest at the parish where bride or groom belong, even if they plan to hold the ceremony at a different parish.
Having done a little research on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that the Project Guttenberg translation I have been reading is getting in the way of my appreciating the novel and have lashed out the 12.99 CDN they want for the Penguin Classics translation by Bruce Penman. I think I will start over again with this translation and see if my opinion of the book improves.
Mod
You are not the only one who is not enjoying it, thought my di..."
I agree with you that the language is somewhat overblown, but I think it is fairly typical of novels from the period, and I think Manzoni frequently uses it to good effect.
Mod
That's a fair point. Would that the book had dealt with the subt..."
I actually stopped reading Dickens because I found his language had become tedious. While I find Manzoni more surprising, maybe subtle is the word I'm looking for.
I actually stopped reading Dickens because I found his language had become tedious. While I find Manzoni more surprising, maybe subtle is the word I'm looking for."As a novelist myself, I find the relationship between language and story fascinating. You can achieve literary and aesthetic effects with both story and language. I believe, though, that story is by far the stronger of the two for this. I'm not usually a fan of wordy writers, therefore. The resort to purple prose in an attempt to create an emotional response in the reader is, in my view, nothing but a failure of storytelling.
On the other hand, I'm not a fan of Hemmingway, whose attempt to get language out of the way of story has the paradoxical effect of making the language front and center.
But I love Dickens. I find many of the 19th century writers a bit of a slog, but Dickens is a delight. So, to a lesser extent, is Dumas. But it seems I have been judging Manzoni based on a poor translation, so I am starting again with a more modern and hopefully superior one.
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show..."
I am in the last 100 pages and expect to finish this week.
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Well, as I said I would, I started over with a new translation (the Penguin Classics one) and it is a much better translation (by which I mean much easier to read -- I am not able to judge its fidelity to the original). And I did find that Manzoni did forestall the questions I had about Fr. Christopher, and about why they could not ask another priest to marry them. I don't know if those answers were in the Project Guttenberg translation or not, or if I only noticed them the second time through because I was looking for them. All that said, I am giving up on the book. I find it unbearably tedious. It is very much a didactic novel, a thinly veiled excuse for commenting on history and theology. That is to some people's taste, but not to mind.
Any modern editor would send the MS back to the author with "Show Don't Tell" written in the margin. Renzo lacks any kind of interior life or interior conflict. His main function in the novel seems to be to witness various aspect of Italian history and to occasion various sermons. I profoundly do not care what happens to him. And as for his romance with Lucia, my only wish is that the poor girl does not get lumbered with this stiff.
And that is why I cannot continue. I am supposed to hope for their eventual reunion and marriage, and I wish nothing of the kind for the poor girl.
Mark wrote: "Well, as I said I would, I started over with a new translation (the Penguin Classics one) and it is a much better translation (by which I mean much easier to read -- I am not able to judge its fide..."I appreciate this thoughtful and well-written post. Despite trying repeatedly, I just could not get into the novel and decided after a couple of tries that life is too short to spend on something so difficult. That frustrated me because the book is so highly recommended by Pope Francis.
reply | edit | delete | flag
back to top
You are following this discussion (instant email). Edit
comment add book/author (some html is ok)
