Here again are the pages from Books 1 & 2 that I would like you to pay particular attention to this week:
Book 1: 61-85; 129-40; 148-57; 174-82
Book 2: 227-34; 258-75; 284-95; 311-12; 327-332; 350-1;365-70; 376-97
Questions for this week's posting are as follows:
1. In the revised opening to the Arcadia of your text, Sidney makes much of Urania and the role of memory. Who is Urania? Why is she so significant and why do you think memory features so prominently?
2. How does Sidney's world and landscape compare to that of his Italian predecessor, Ariosto?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Under “list of principal characters” Urania is described as a noble shepherdess and beloved of Claius and Strephon (53). She is significant because the reader does not encounter her like many of the other characters, but instead the reader only receives a description of her from the memories of Claius and Strephon. The reader has to assume that description is an accurate one, when really Claius and Strephon are looking at Urania through the eyes of love, so their description is probably an idealized one. We see how great their love is in the lines, “like men whose hearts disdained all desires but one” (72), because all they desire is her.
I think that the qualities and personality of Urania are not focused on because the reader then focuses on the love itself. It seems that Sidney wants the reader to see the strength of the love, and Kalander even says, in reference to Strephon and Claius, “love, which hath indued their thoughts, say they, with such strength” (84).
The importance of memory is something readers can relate to. Sidney stresses Strephon and Claius’ memories of Urania because in a way it is a curse for them to always be thinking about her and their memories of her, such as the place where they last saw her (61), but they would also never want the memories to go away. The reader can relate because we often have memories that are emotionally painful to think about, such as the memories of a loved one after a break-up. There is a conflict between wanting to remember the good times with that person, but also to forget in order to move on.
In response to the character of Urania and her role involving memory, I think it is important to look at the line when Claius specifically refers to both Urania and the concept of memory itself: “Truly no more but as this place served us to think of those things, so those things serve as places to call to memory more excellent matters” (63). According to the footnote this quote refers to the “traditional art of memory,” consisting of “visual scenes and images” used in order to “help [the orator] recall his material” (849). With this explanation I think it suggests that part of Urania’s significance is that she allows the “art form” of memory to function within the text. In referring to Urania, Claius specifically uses descriptions like “flowery beds” and “shadowed waters” creating an image within the text rather than simply stating that he loves Urania, and that she is beautiful.
Also, as Marianne commented, we only receive descriptions of Urania through secondary sources. I think that even though it is possible to look at the integrity of Claius and Stephron as secondary sources in the text, because the depiction of Urania is secondary it allows her to be placed on a pedestal that cannot easily be disputed. Since the reader does not encounter Urania first-hand in the text, the perfect image that Claius and Stephron create is still there even if it is not the truth. With that said, however, is Urania’s position though the memories of Claius and Stephron one of power? Or is she powerless?
Urania is also an interesting character because rather than causing dissention between Claius and Strephon, her love appears to create a bond between them. Normally it seems that when two men love the same woman, they will compete with each other and stop at nothing in order to defeat the other rival so that they alone may possess her. Yet here we have two men whose love for a single woman brings them together, rather than tears them apart. When they receive a letter from her on page 72, it is a single letter written to both of them.
Memory is an amazing thing; as time goes on, you only remember specific things about events, people, and places from the past. I know for myself that when I think back on years gone by, I only remember the good things, not the bad things that have happened. Our minds pick specific things to remember, and often in our remembrances, things become more embellished than when they had happened. For instance, your first ever date; maybe it was fun, but nothing really spectacular, but as time goes on, you remember that day as one of the best you had, with such fondness because it was something really defining for you. Same with Claius and Strephon; they remember Urania as this pious, pure, goddess of a woman because knowing her was defining for them. Instead of being just another girl, Urania becomes an idol that they worship, and nothing, not even the jewels of Musidorus, can come close to her perfection.
I found that Sidney’s description and detail to the world and landscape was quite different from his Italian predecessor, Ariosto. In Ariosto’s text from last week I found that he spent more time on the confrontation between the characters and the events that they were involved in and less with the characters surroundings. He lets you know that the soldiers admired the women wanting to take advantage of them, and that they would fight each other like animals, but the detail to landscape and the world seemed to be limited and general. That being said you do know that Orlando is part of the war between Charlemagne and the King of Africa, and that often the characters find themselves lost in the woods.
Sidney seems to take more time near the beginning of Book One to give the reader an insight into the landscape in which he is writing. He writes, “there were hills which garnished their proud heights with stately trees; humble valleys whose base estate seemed comfronted with refreshing of silver rivers; thickets, which being lined with most pleasant shade, were witnessed so to by the cheerful disposition of many well- tuned birds… (page 69). From this particular passage you begin to see that almost picture perfect backdrop that the shepherd’s call home. With the countries proud mountains, beautiful waters and singing birds Sidney gives a overly romanticized description of the shepherd’s life, even seeming to be a little to perfect.
Similar to Amy I noticed several key differences regarding the treatment of nature between Ariosto’s text and Sidney’s. The first difference that I was really struck by was how much closer to nature the characters are in Sidney’s text in comparison to Ariosto’s. As Amy suggests Ariosto is more concerned with the interactions and battles between characters and the more episodic nature of his text does not lend itself as well to in depth descriptions of the natural world which can be found in Sidney’s “The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia”. Also the fact that in Book I Pyrocles and Musidorus are Shepherds living on the land seems to be the premise for much of the idealized and pastoral natural descriptions of the world around them. The shepherd and the life of a shepherd is venerated on page 70 as a “happy people wanting little because they desire not much” to me this is in sharp contrast with the Knights in Ariosto’s work who seem to be constantly striving for more.
Although I agree with Amy in that Sidney’s Arcadia portrays a world that is almost too perfect with ideallic representations of nature and personnification of the natural elements such as “stately trees and humble valleys”. But I think that the overall effect is more realistic in comparison with Ariosto’s text which struck me as having more fantastical elements. Do you guys agree or disagree?
In regards to world and landscape, the main difference I found between Ariosto and Sidney is the amount of detail used to describe a location. Like Amy D. previously mentioned, Ariosto focuses more on characters and events and less on surroundings. When Ariosto does mention a location, the description is minimal and concise. For example, in Canto I the woods are described as “hard by a brook an arbor […] wherein grew fair and very fragrant flowers with roses sweet and other trees beside” (pg.34). This description is rather generic and could describe a number of different woods. Ariosto does not go into great detail naming the types of flowers or trees, nor does he even mention the name of the woods or their location.
Sidney, on the other hand, gives great detail, elaboration and embellishment to his locations. Arcadia is described as an almost utopia, with “meadows enamelled with all sorts of eye-pleasing flowers” and “well-tuned birds” (pg.69). The reader is also told that Arcadia is located near the country of Laconia, giving a sense of geographical location. As well as the idyllic landscape, Arcadia is portrayed as having a simpler way of life. Sidney describes a young shepherd’s boy “piping as he should never grow old” (pg.70), while a young shepherdess sits knitting and singing. This emphasis on age shows that the passage of time is slower and that youth is treasured. I think that Sidney’s descriptions are almost fairy-tale-like and fairly surreal. He describes Arcadia as having “accompanable solitariness” and “civil wilderness” (pg.70); these contradictions make the place seem idyllic and unbelievable because how can a place be friendly and welcoming while isolated and how can wilderness be tame? It seems like the best of both worlds. Perhaps these embellishments and exaggerations remind the reader that they are reading a story and that the adventures encountered by the characters are only make-believe and should not be re-enacted or sought after, or maybe these descriptions remind the reader of a life-style that can be achieved if one returns to a simpler way of life.
I unfortunately have to disagree with Amy D. on the matter of Ariosto failing to include landscape details in his work. If anything I thought that the only beauty worth loving in Ariosto’s text was through the scenic imagery that was rare but prominent throughout the text, such as the image of “A fine young grove with pleasant shadow grew, Near to the which two little rivers were Whose moisture did the tender herbs renew, And make a sweet and very pleasing sound By running on the sand and stony ground.” (33) I do agree that Ariosto was more concerned with telling the tales of his knights in their pursuit and battles, but I think the elements of nature that are included are embellished enough to include elements of nature similar to that of Sidney. The only difference I see is that Sidney included descriptions of natural elements to compliment the nature of the shepherds and their lifestyle, whereas Ariosto seems to have only included elements of nature in order to add to the mood of his story, by adding peril, delay, and expectation by pausing to note the scenery, which can either be a “young grove” or “woods and deserts all obscure, places uninhabited and waste.” (33) I do agree that Sidney wished to focus more on love, true chivalry and valiance regarding the men in the text, but I don’t believe that this love and chivalry is limited to only the men as Ariosto’s text did. Sidney attempts to give the women in this text as much credit as he does the men as “with what a gallant grace she ran with the lion’s head in her hand, like another Pallas with the spoils of Gorgon. Gynecia sware she saw the very face of the young Hercules killing the Nemean lion. (180) Even Gynecia, who fled for her life in absolute fear from the lion was praised with “having skill in surgery, an art in those days much esteemed because it served to virtuous courage which even ladies would…seem to cherish.” (178) The men in the text are not praised for “fighting, nor for discoursing but for plainness and honesty” (180) which is a far better measure of the men than Ariosto gave his knights, especially considering that the young men most embellished upon are not knights in Sidney’s story, but shepherds.
Memory was obviously a predominant theme throughout Arcadia, and Sidney plays on the idea of selective memory throughout his work. Much like the rest of us when recalling a past relationship or love, Claius and Strephon remember only the happy times with Urania; they put her on a pedestal that is almost impossible for any other human being to reach. This poses a problem for the reader, however, since all we learn about Urania is derived from Claius and Strephon's memories, and it is impossible to tell if they are accurate or not. Because of Claius and Strephon's undying love for Urania the reader never really gets to see her flaws and shortcomings (which are usually the most interesting part of a person), so I hope that in future sections the really juicy stuff will come out.
As the noble shepherdess, admired and love by Claius and Stephon, Urania is perceived as goddess-like in Sidney’s Arcadia. Urania is describes as being the most natural form of human beauty within the story. Parallel to Urania’s physical beauty, Sidney focuses on Arcadia’s natural beauty in Chapter Two, as Arcadia is the most natural form of realism. ON can say that Urania is the human form of Arcadia. Sidney uses similar words to compare both beautys: Urania is described as “flower fields and shadowed waters” (63) and Arcadia as “meadow enabled with with all sorts of eye-pleasing flowers” (69). Urania is the human form for what Sidney’s characters describe for the epitome of all that is natural and perfect; making her appealing to the female reader.
Urania and Arcadia as goddesses in their own nature maybe significant in this story as the religious and pagan attributes of the story. There is no real praise over God and no significant mention of pagan worship, thus admirable beauty maybe the perfect and evolving substitute.
A agree with Kathryn when she notes that memory is a prominent feature touches upon the human’s ability to remember the essence of nature, both beautiful and grotesque. However, romantic literature seems to focus on the beautiful and the amazing is a degree of marvel. Memory can also serve as a method of preserving the mortal as immortal. As a “place to call memory” (63), ,memory serves as visual scenes and images which are stored in the mind in order to remember the material at a later date (849). Urania’s natural beauty, Arcadia’s natural landscape and the beautiful words of Sidney’s text will be everlasting in the memory of readers, thus Sidney creating immortal literature.
In terms of question 2, I would be inclined to agree with Amy; I found that Ariosto was much more concerned with descriptions of his character's adventures than their surroundings, while Sidney seems to spend a large part of his writing describing the setting. Although I found Sidney's writing quite fluent, the slowness of the plot really got to me and at times I did wish he would move a little faster. Although it could be said that Ariosto jumps all over the place in his work I found the intense action somwehat easier to follow than Sidney's Arcadia.
I agree with Kathryn in regards to the love that Calius and Strephon have towards Urania does not tear them apart but makes their friendship stronger. Perhaps it is because they are not knights who must prove their valour and worthiness of their lady by being triumphant over the other, but are merely shepherds who think themselves only worthy enough to love her in their memory of her. Urania herself is but a shepherdess and perhaps does not require a show of arms to win her over. Another reason could be that all that Claius and Strephon have of her is the memory that they both have, as she is not constantly in their presence, perhaps if she was their attitudes towards each other may change.
The role of memory in this situation brings the shepherds together, because usually when people share the same memory, they tend to want to enjoy it together. Memory also serves the reader when reading a long piece as Sidney's "Countess". We as readers also get a strong memory of Urania's pciture in our heads painted by the two shepherds, so that we remember her even when she reappears so little within the text. Later her picture reappears when her beauty is being defended, and we remember who she is even though she is not talked about a lot.
2. How does Sidney's world and landscape compare to that of his Italian predecessor, Ariosto?
Ariosto's description of the landscape seems to interact more with the characters than Sidney's. For instance, in Orlando Furioso the description of the land was always together with the description of the characters actions. for instance, on page 53 of Canto 2, 3rd verse: "he followed her through valley, hill and plain, through woods and thickets, for his masters sake,"...here we are given a description of the landscape while the horse "followed" the woman throughout the woods. So, throughout the canto’s, we see Ariosto use his imagery of the landscape with the plot.
In Sidney, the landscape seems to be more of a backdrop to the plot. that is, it doesn't have anything to do with the characters actions. He uses it more so to give us a setting for his work. Take for instance, the introduction. He starts book one by mentioning the earth and sun in the first sentence. (61) Ariosto commences his work by describing the dames, knight and loves delight. (25) Sidney uses landscape as metaphors: “her breath is more sweet than a gentle southwest wind,” (63) or “we can better consider the suns beauty by marking how he gilds these waters and mountains…” (63). From these passages you can see the different intent that landscape was used for each author.
Although it may at times appear that the landscape is somewhat removed from the actions of the characters I do not believe that is in the background in Sidney's text.
Throughout the beginning of book one the landscape appears to be a character on its own. This appearance is due to the personification of nature, which can be seen when the landscape is shown to react to Urania's beauty when "the winds whistled and the seas danced for joy" (62). While this passage can be thought to be a mere reflection of Stephon's feelings the description of the blood of the dead "[filling] the wrinkles of the sea's visage, which it seemed the sea would not wash away that it might witness it is not always his fault when we condemn his cruelty" (67) shows the landscape as being a part of the scene that is taking place. The sea in this passage is attempting to defend itself against the reputation that it has been given.
As a result of the many references to lanscape in combination with its being regarded as "him," and as an active being, the landscape in "The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia" appears to be a more important element than it is in Ariosto's text. In Ariosto's work the landscape does not interact with the characters but exists in the background.
I know it’s out of context, but as I haven’t seen it mentioned yet…Last week our presenter pointed out how often Ariosto is referenced by Milton in his works. The name Urania is also used by Milton in Paradise Lost, “The meaning not the name I call…” (B.VII). It is the third and most mysterious invocation of that text. Urania is the underused Greek Muse of astronomy and astrology, or the heavens. Having been first introduced to the name in this context, I am having a hard time distancing myself from that reading of her. I don’t think it is completely out to lunch to draw a connection between philosophizing shepherds (Greek shepherds – p. 65), which we might link to a pastoral, nostalgic tradition, and an elevation of the mind, or reason; “Hath not the only love of her made us, being silly ignorant shepherds, raise up our thoughts above the ordinary level of the world…made us, when others were sleeping, to sit viewing the course of the heavens…” (P. 63). Arcadia is described as a place where “Even the Muses…choose…this country for their chief repairing place, and by bestowing their perfections so largely here that even the very shepherds have their fancies lifted so high… (P. 75). Urania is a Muse in a pastoral setting – a setting chiefly interested in idealizing a simple, golden past and valuing higher thought, or philosophically star-gazing (Which at this point becomes circular logic). She becomes significant because she inspires them to reason, however it is possibly a reason delegated to a receding Golden Age (Our shepherds continuously encounter people doing unreasonable things for largely unsatisfying reasons). The quest in this light becomes a quest for a golden age of reason. Memory is the goad that drives them on. This is of course a highly literary reading of the character (which is never much fun) and we may see it disproved in the later books. However, I simply could not shake the deja vu, “Hey, I know that name from somewhere…Milton! It’s Urania!”
Marina
From the perspective of mytholody Urania is the goddess of all things heavenly and I noticed some intermingling of things "high" and "low" in the text. The shepards in ther simple pastoral life are admiring and loving something that is high. In regards to memory, they pretty much state that she is above their capacity, "as we can better consider the sun's beauty by marking how he gilds these waters and mountains than by looking upon his own face, too glorious for our weak eyes, so it may be our conceits...will better weigh it by her works upon some meaner subject employ". (63) so the impression her beauty has made on their memories is easeir on ther lower minds. The other conflict between high and low that I noticed is in Kalandar's description of Philanax. He talks in great depth about Philanax's love and admiration of Basilius and about how he doesn't know whom to love more: the Prince or the person. Clearly he is trying to address both the prince and the person in his letter to Basilius, but again, this puts him in conflict with fortune and fate. This brings us back to Urania who is considered to be a goddess of Astronomoy and Astrology (I think?). Basilius is trying to say that though he believes in those high things, such as sooth sayers, he does not agree with the King's choice on how to handle the prophesy."These kinds of sooth sayings, to be nothing but fancy, wherein there must either be vanity of infallibeleness, and so either not to be respected, or not to be prevented" he says this with "humble boldness" (80) This puts him in a difficult position because he loves him as a King, admires him as a person too, but does not agree with his decision as a person or King. He doesn't want to lose his job of course.
In exploring a definition of the "romance genre", we've been discussing the ideas of wandering and delay and the negotiation that exists in the hero characters between progression and stasis. In the opening passages of Sidney's text I feel that memory functions as a nexus of these tensions for Strephon and Claius. Theirs is an "over-busy" and "restless" remembrance that continually draws them together and to this particular place. It is both the cause of their joy in a connection to Urania, but also the cause of their suffering in that she can only exist in their memory. In Claius' response to Stephron he says: "Hath not the only love of her made us, being silly ignorant shepherds, raise up our thoughts above the ordinary level of the world, so as great clerks do not disdain our conference?" (63) Their relationship with Urania has obviously changed the shepherds in some way - they have become 'more worthy' and have ultimately striven to overcome their role as mere shepherds - however, their progress is tempered by their interaction with her as being singular and in the past. The memory of Urania is both freeing and constraining. Importantly I think that the shepherds memory of Urania links them to the romantic heroes of the text. I do not think it is coincidence that they find Musidorus - a traditional "noble" knight or hero - at this place, and in the course of their reverie. The shepherds reliance on the remembered image of Urania serves the same purpose as the knight revering the image of his "idealized" lady. He continues in his quest so that he can be worthy of her, but when he is worthy of her, then he must "settle down" so to speak and reneg his wandering hero status. The shepherds interaction with memory and the "idealized" lady shows that heroic development is not limited to the "noble class". In a sense, Sidney democratizes heorism - in that its principles rely more on actions and purity of spirit rather than on birth or occupation.
Post a Comment