La Retorica Della Storiografia Letteraria Nell'età Dell'arcadia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
La retorica della storiografia letteraria nell’età dell’Arcadia by Giovanni Scarola A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Italian Studies University of Toronto © Copyright by Giovanni Scarola 2017 The Art of Literary History in the Age of Arcadia Doctor of Philosophy, 2016 Department of Italian Studies, University of Toronto Abstract I This thesis analyses, from a rhetorical perspective, the main works of the founding fathers of Italian literary history, all of whom lived in the golden years of the Accademia dell'Arcadia: Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni (1663-1728), Giacinto Gimma (1668-1735), Giulio Cesare Becelli (1686-1750), Apostolo Zeno (1669-1750), and Francesco Saverio Quadrio (1695-1756). The methodology is derived from the theoretical framework outlined by Hayden White in Metahistory (1973), adapted to the field of literary history. It is based on the four main rhetorical tropes, the methodological import of which was first pointed out by Giambattista Vico in his New Science (1725, 1730, and 1744): metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. According to White, the historiographer narrates facts through “a verbal structure in the form of a narrative prose discourse.” Such narration follows a process of pre-configuration according to one of the above-mentioned tropes, combining one of four archetypical categories of emplotment (romance, comedy, tragedy, and satire), one of four categories of argumentation (formalist, organicist, mechanistic, and contextualist), and one of the four basic categories of ideological implication: conservatism, liberalism, anarchism, and radicalism. Following the example of White in his study of eight 19th-century historians and philosophers of history--namely Michelet, Ranke, Tocqueville, and Burkhardt among the historians, and Nietzsche, Hegel, Marx, and Croce among the philosophers--this thesis classifies the five mentioned authors according to the appropriate paradigms for trope- ii emplotment, mode of argumentation and ideological implication. As a result, Crescimbeni’s distinctive traits are found to be synecdoche, romance, formalism and liberalism; Zeno’s are irony, contextualism, satire and conservatism; Gimma’s are metaphor, romance, contextualism and liberalism; Quadrio’s are metonymy, comedy, organicism and conservatism; and Becelli’s are metaphor, epic, organicism and radicalism. The “epic” mode of emplotment has been added to White's original framework, given the role played by Italian poetry in the cultural discourse on the nascent Italian spirit of the nation, of which it became a primary symbol. iii The Art of Literary History in the Age of Arcadia Doctor of Philosophy, 2016 Department of Italian Studies, University of Toronto Abstract II This thesis analyses, from a rhetorical perspective, the works that marked the birth of Italian literary historiography, a genre that first made its appearance in 1698, when Gian Mario Crescimbeni published the first edition of his Istoria della volgar poesia. Crescimbeni (1663-1728) and the literary historians who followed in his footsteps, namely Giacinto Gimma (1668-1735), Apostolo Zeno (1669-1750), Giulio Cesare Becelli (1686-1750), and Francesco Saverio Quadrio (1695-1756), flourished in the golden years of the Accademia dell'Arcadia, from 1690 to the mid-18th century, when it began to lose much of its initial lustre. They paved the way for Girolamo Tiraboschi’s Storia della letteratura italiana, a milestone in literary historiography first published in the period 1782-1785, and then republished in a larger, 16-volume version in 1787-1794. Inspired by former Queen Christina of Sweden, the Accademia dell'Arcadia was co- founded by Crescimbeni himself, Vincenzo Gravina, and Paolo Coardi in 1690 in Rome. Thanks to Crescimbeni’s extraordinary abilities as a promoter, the Academy became a major aggregating institution for scholars and poets living in Italy and beyond its boundaries. The Arcadian Academy, which derived its name from the mythical Peloponnese area, upheld the aesthetic significance of lyric poetry, especially pastoral idylls, in a systematic effort to promote a general return to the literary ideals of Classicism, in reaction to Baroque aesthetics. In this respect, one of its principal models was the sixteenth-century poet Angelo iv Di Costanzo, who was considered the true heir of Petrarch. But the Academy was also a determining factor in Crescimbeni’s work and in the development of the genre of literary history itself. Crescimbeni, under the pseudonym of Alfesibeo Cario, was the first Custode Generale (that is, President) of the Academy until his death, which occurred in 1728. The method followed in this thesis has been derived from the framework outlined by the American scholar Hayden White (1928-) in Metahistory (1973), adapting it to the field of literary historiography. White considers historiographers and philosophers of history tout court, whereas this thesis examines five literary historiographers, whose works relate to Kulturgeschichte rather than Staat Geschischte. Moreover, whereas White analysed the works of eight historians who produced their works during the 19th century, this thesis analyses five 18th-century authors. White’s method aims to identify the four main tropes of the rhetorical discourse -- metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony --which were first identified as such by the philosopher Giambattista Vico (1668-1744) --that permeated the mindsets and, consequently, functioned as the main rhetorical backdrop of the works of the aforesaid eight authors. However, before going into more detail, a few considerations are in order regarding Vico and the four rhetorical figures in question. In his Principj di scienza nuova (New Science), the first edition of which was published in 1725, Vico departed from tradition by theorizing history as a cyclical (rather than linear) process that develops over three ages: the age of the Gods, or of the senses, characterized by metaphor; the age of the Heroes, or of the phantasy, exemplified by metonymy and synecdoche, as well as metaphor; and the age of Men, or of the intellect, associated with irony. In more modern times, Vico’s ideas were embraced, before Hayden v White, by Kenneth Burke (1945) and Northrop Frye (1957). Frye also was the first scholar to use, in 1960, the term metahistory, then adopted by White. In his seminal book of 1973, Metahistory, a work in which history is read as a discourse on history itself, Hayden White draws a fundamental distinction between a chronicler-compiler and a historian: while the chronicler simply compiles a sequence of selected dates and facts, the historian first determines his starting and ending points, then arranges and narrates a selection of facts that occurred between them. In this respect, the five thinkers whose works have been examined in this thesis were the first scholars to apply the narrative method to literary history, unlike the chroniclers, compilers and biographers who had preceded them. In White’s own words, the historical work is “a verbal structure in the form of a narrative prose discourse.” White calls such narration a poetic act through which man makes history, specifying that, despite his good intentions, there is no real objectivity in the historiographer’s work. This concept was exemplified very effectively by Robert Penn Warren, a co-founder of New Criticism, who said: “History is not truth. History is in the telling.” In fact, such narration follows a process of pre-configuration by the historiographer, primarily due to one of the afore-mentioned four rhetorical figures. This preconfiguration determines his specific narrative strategies--namely, strategies of emplotment, formal argumentation, and ideological implication--whose combination forms his style of narration. In turn, each one of the said strategies is also organized according to a quadripartite subdivision, as follows: 1. Emplotment: indicates the process through which the historian narrates the facts in a fashion corresponding to a specific “archetype,” a term White borrows from Northrop Frye’s vi Anatomy of Criticism to designate a literary genre characterizing the narration. According to Frye, the archetypical genres are: romance, tragedy, comedy, satire or irony. In adopting Frye’s nomenclature, White excludes irony¸ placing it among the previously mentioned four tropes. He also indicates that more archetypes, such as epic, are conceivable, which, however, he excludes from his structure. A brief explanation of the above-mentioned archetypical genres follows: Romance is a drama of redemption symbolized by the hero’s transcendence of the world of experience, his victory over it, and his final liberation from it; Tragedy is characterized by the protagonist’s fall at the end of a tragic play. However, such fall brings about a general gain in consciousness in those who remain, a rise counterbalancing the fall, even an epiphany concerning the laws governing human existence; Comedy, a work in which there is a general reconciliation at the end of the play. Human beings are reconciled with one another, with their world and society, which re-emerges in a healthier form, with the pieces falling into the right place; Satire, in White’s own words, is “a drama of diremption […] dominated by the apprehension that man is ultimately a captive of the world rather than its master, and by the recognition that […] human consciousness and will are always inadequate.” 2. Formal argumentation,