Friday, February 18, 2011

Decameron, Readings for Day 2:

Because the stories told in Decameron are unrelated, and we read so many of them, I had trouble figuring out what to focus on: which stories are most important? Which themes should I pick apart and focus on? However, while feeling overwhelmed by the number of anecdotes, I simultaneously felt that they were in essence very similar.
I think it is interesting to look at Boccaccio's purpose and approach to art, love, and God. In the introduction to 4th day, Boccaccio says "the Muses are ladies, and although ladies do not rank as highly as Muses, nevertheless they resemble them at first sight, and hence it is natural, if only for this reason, that I should be fond of them" (289). Here, it seems that he uses artistic purpose to justify natural desires, which echoes what seems to be a larger purpose of the book: by artistically describing scandal and lust, it becomes less shocking and more acceptable. Boccaccio more explicitly describes his purpose in the epilogue, explaining how "like all other things in the world, stories, whatever their nature, may be harmful or useful, depending on the listener" (799). His tone here implies a goal of artistry rather than didacticism. Much like Ovid, it appears the Boccaccio's purpose is primarily to reveal multiple perspectives and illuminate common situations, and it is up to the reader, and beyond the authors' control, to extract whatever meaning they may.  Also notable, in contrast, to Ovid, is Boccaccio's lack of hubris. He says, "there is no craftsman other than God whose work is whole and faultless in every respect" (800), indicating a humility towards his own work that certainly does not exist in Metamorphoeses, Aeneid, or the Homeric works. This may indicate his more plebeian purpose, and the fact that he is making no judgment on these universal human desires, but, as a human, is subject to them himself.

Another similarity to Ovid is the number of botched "metamorphoses" that exist in Decameron, which in some cases also echo Dante's idea of contrapasso. For instance, after Friar Alberto convinces the woman that he is "angel gabriel" going to bed with her, his punishment is to be honeyed and feathered (311). This "metamorphosis" is obviously artificial, temporary, and failed, but temporarily "turning" the Friar into an animal is a reflection on the animalistic baseness of his deception, and further echoes the idea of humans behaving as animals during the plague. However, the hilarity of the image of the Friar also adds levity in light of the animalistic horrors of the plague. This punishment is also a contrapasso in that after deceiving the woman, he is forced to appear deceptively to others (in costume).
A more obvious contrapasso-like punishment, which simultaneously echoes the story that Vertumnus tells Pomona about Iphis, who spurns her lover and turns to stone, describes another woman who has rejected her lover, who then, after death, "Every Friday at this hour I overtake her in this part of the woods, and slaughter her in the manner you are about to observe . . . on the remaining days I hunt her down in other places where she was cruel to me in thought and deed" (422). This punishment involving love seemed vaguely out of place among the other stories of Decameron, because elsewhere, regardless of amorous transgressions, no one is severely punished. I'm not sure what Boccaccio is doing here!

However, Boccaccio does seem to make some comment about appropriate versus inappropriate love. In the fourth story on 5th day, which is essentially the only love story without any wrath or complications, the man notices "her charming ways and impeccable manners, and, seeing that she was marriageable age, he fell passionately in love with her" (394). Here, logic and consideration of appropriateness of situation comes before lust, and it appears to be this rationality that enables relatively peaceful marriage. In other stories love and lust take precedent over rationality, and, though hilarity generally ensues, it is clear that Boccaccio does not view lust and love negatively. When the woman whose husband won't sleep with her is debating taking on a lover, she muses, "for I shall simply be breaking the laws of marriage, whereas he is breaking those of Nature as well" (434). Based on this, and the universality of lust in Boccaccio's stories, it seems that natural laws are more important than contractual laws, and that the physical often does, and perhaps rightly should, prevail over the logical. This is especially relevant in time of plague, which is essentially a massive physical force undermining all attempts at reason and rationalization. Boccaccio's views on love are further elucidated in introduction to the story of Guiscardo and Ghismonda, which says "Love, to whose eyes nothing remains concealed" (293). Here, Love is depicted on being omniscient in a similar way that God is omniscient, casting Love in a semi-divine, powerful, and valuable role.

I found the question of intelligence and agency that was addressed at numerous points in the text to be particularly interesting and particularly paradoxical. One of the storytellers explains that "men will come to realize that women are just as clever as their husbands" (490), in a clear acknowledgment of the equality of female intellect. However, there is also an irony here, because though females may be equally intelligent, they nonetheless are given very little agency and in many of the stories, are traded around, married off, and made into mistresses at the whim of the men around them (particularly notable in the story of the woman with nine successive husbands). By setting up this paradox of intelligence and agency, Boccaccio seems either to be making the argument that in fact intelligence is not in itself valuable, or sympathizing with women's lack of sway in their own lives (I'm not sure how likely the latter is). Boccaccio's stories often include some element of intelligent trickery, and it is often here that the hilarity and the action lie, suggesting that Boccaccio places high value on wit (though still acknowledges that it doesn't directly lead to agency). However, trickery is a questionable manifestation of wittiness, as exemplified in the tale of Elena, who tricks her suitor into waiting in the cold, prefaced by the warning: "it will teach you to think twice before playing tricks on people" (586). Perhaps Boccaccio values intelligence, but only with this caveat: it's acceptable that women are smart as long as men triumph in the end, as the spurned lover does in this story.
One final twist to the conception of female agency is in the story of Gualtieri marrying a peasant girl, who "was so gracious and benign towards her husbands' subjects . . . whereas they had been wont to say that Gualtieri had shown lack of discretion in taking this woman as his wife, they now regarded him as the wisest and most discerning man on earth. For no one apart from Gultieri could ever have perceived the noble qualities that lay concealed beneath her ragged and rustic attire" (787). Here, though the woman had no control whatsoever in marrying Gualtieri, she has significant impact on his public image. It is somewhat ironic that females are so powerless in marriage and yet have such dramatic influence on public view of husband, but also offers slight condolence for the general lack of female agency: this is where they can exert at least a little control.

No comments:

Post a Comment