sign in sign up
<<
Home , Malebolge, Scarmiglione

Anno XXXIII, n. 1 RIVISTA DI STUDI ITALIANI Giugno 2015

CONTRIBUTI

DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM XXI-XXIII1

ANIELLO DI IORIO University of Wisconsin Madison, Wisconsin

Le Sage, c’est-à-dire celui qui est animé de l’esprit du Seigneur, celui qui possède la pratique du formulaire divin, ne rit, ne s’abandonne au rire qu’en tremblant. Le Sage tremble d’avoir ri; le Sage craint le rire, comme il craint les spectacles mondains, la concupiscence. Il s’arrête au bord du rire comme au bord de la tentation. Il y a donc, suivant le Sage, une certaine contradiction secrète entre son caractère de sage et le caractère primordial du rire. (Baudelaire, L’essence du rire et généralement du comique dans les arts plastiques )

n Inferno XXI, Dante the pilgrim and Virgil are standing on the bridge between the fourth and the fifth pouch and they are observing upon the Isinners of this circle. The condemned malefactors are the barraters and they are punished for having committed fraud against the local government. Moreover, the sinners of both cantos are devils. Dante the author characterizes their features with different colors, with singular qualities, and with carnivalesque names 2. It should be noted that the devils are in profusion in

1 In occasione delle celebrazioni dei 750 anni dalla nascita di . 2 This term refers to a series of devils that appear in Inferno XXI. Among them we list a few: “, Calcabrina Cagnazzo, , Libiocco, Draghignazzo, Ciriatto, Malacoda, Graffiacane, Farfarello, Rubicante”. (Inferno XXI 647) To shortly define their significance, we begin with Alichino, which comes from hellequin , progenitor of the Italian Arlecchino; Calcabrina is he who can walk on brine, that is, the nimble-footed one; Libicocco may condense the names for two winds, the libeccio and the scirocco; Draghignazzo may be like a large or he who has a smirk ‒ a sghignazzo ; Ciriatto could come from the dialect word ciro; Farfarello relates to folletto , a malevolent spirit or phantom; and Rubicante may be he who grows red (but since the devils are black, a later variant has Rabicante ‒ that 19 ANIELLO DI IORIO both infernal cantos. At the same time, the leader of the devils is Malacoda and he tricks Virgil in Inferno XXII. The beffa occurs when the latter is conducted on a broken bridge, and Dante the pilgrim watches Virgil with nuance: “E se l’andare avante pur vi piace, / andatevene su per questa grotta; / presso è un altro scoglio che via face” (Chiavacci Leonardi 645); (“If you desire to continue on / then make your way along this rocky ledge. / Nearby’s another crag that yields a passage”)3. (Hollander 389) This passage essentially symbolizes the beginning point for the burla to take place, but it is also where this essay’s argument begins to unfold. Rather than investigating directly upon the way Virgil will be tricked in Inferno XXI-XXIII, this work explores the trick through Dante’s discomfort with the beffa 4. After a keen consideration upon the nature of this folkloristic tradition, we begin to examine Dante’s perception for the ruse by first recognizing his wit. Dante the author depends upon the consciousness of an appropriate incongruity ‒ which is according to Oring Elliot, “the perception of an appropriate interrelationship of elements or situations from domains that is, the furious one). More simple are: Barbariccia, the curly-bearded one; Cagnazzo, the big dog; and Graffiacane, he who scratches dogs. Despite all, these are terms or derivations that somewhat allude to the grotesque and carnival sound of this extensive terminology. To further delve into this nomenclature in reference to Dante’s Demonology, see: Robert Hollander, Inferno in Notes (397); and Allen Mandelbaum, The of Dante Alighieri: Inferno (376). 3 All the Italian quotations are from La Divina Commedia: Inferno, edited, and with a commentary by Anna Maria Chiavacci Leonardi, Milano: Mondadori Editore, 2005. All the quotations in English are from Dante: The Inferno, A verse translation by Robert Hollander and Jean Hollander, New York: First Anchor Books, 2002. 4 It should be stated that the beffa in Italian literature has been accurately recognized after Dante’s Comedy , particularly in short stories, like the Novellino, Decameron, and Trecentonovelle . Boccaccio is perhaps the first Italian author for having employed the beffa to a greater extent. Even though it is not the case in this essay to discuss of any aforementioned literary source, to further investigate upon Boccaccio’s beffa , see: Anna Fontes-Baratto, “La Beffa dans le Decameron ”, in Formes et Significations de la Beffa dans la littérature italienne de la Renaissance , ed. Andre Rochon (Paris: Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, 1972). She states: “Exploite toutes le donnes de la situation ‒ à savoir tous les éléments fournis par le récit, au niveau de l’intrigue comme au niveau de la caractérisation psychologique des personnages ‒ et procède a un truquage du réel, passe, présent ou futur, auquel il imprime le sens voulu, en excluant le hasard des événements qu’il va déclencher” (13). 20 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII are generally regarded as incongruous” (Elliot 12) 5. The choice to link two disparate characters on the joke’s stage unveils the main aspect of such incongruity. On one hand, there is Malacoda the Alazon , which translates into a ‘low-mimetic code’ character. On the other hand, there is Virgil the Pharmakos , which symbolizes a ‘high-mimetic code’6. Across the domain of this peculiar episode, the beffa becomes a literary device for Dante to adopt even among characters like Virgil. His human reason gets valued over the Devils’ human mediocrity, but the devil’s figure represents a popular character that was used to both reveal farcical elements in literature and to entertain the public of the Early Middle Ages 7. Since certain types of wit 8 can be interpreted when engendered by two overlapping scripts and can be perceived as opposite in a certain sense, the poet’s voice within the episode of Inferno XXI and XXII can turn out to be ambiguous towards the joke. This means that Dante the author models his point of view upon the tricksters and the tricked with hesitancy: “Allor mi volsi come l’uom cui tarda / di veder quel che li convien fuggire” (Chiavacci Leonardi 633); (“Then I turned like a man, intent / on making out what he must run from”). (Hollander 383) He narrates from a great distance as if he

5 Although I will only adopt Elliot’s theory of Appropriate Incongruity in this essay, it should be suggested that the incongruity theory has been adopted several times in these recent years, and most notably by Arthur Koestler, for whom the humor is the result of “perceiving of a situation or idea in two self- consistent but habitually incompatible frames of reference” (35). Another scholar who exploited the same theory is Victor Raskin, who defines humor as “engendered by two incongruities perceived appropriately in a sense” (100). To consider also the relation between humor and incongruity from Clark’s article Humor and Incongruity (20-32). 6 Northrop Frye’s Anatomy of Criticism discusses in depth on both terms aforementioned (44-65). They indicate a trace on which literary characters will endeavor their central function, based on their role in the Comedy . Most of all, these terms are significant in literature because they determine an order within the ambience of Comedy and the tragedy. These are terms that delineate simultaneously the character’s features as a subject to literary criticism. To explore both high and low mimetic code to a higher extent, see also (37-38; 43-44; 58-59; 62-65; 137-138; and 318-319). 7 For the unabridged history of the devil’s figure in Literature, see: Arturo Graf, Miti, leggende e superstizioni del Medio Evo (79-139); and from the same author, see: Il Diavolo (58-273). 8 By wit I intend cleverness or apt humor, and I will only discuss about Dante’s humor on the specific subject matter concerning the beffa . 21 ANIELLO DI IORIO were an external observer 9. While Dante the author/narrator employs some of his narration’s strategies with more freedom, this self-determination allows the Florentine poet’s voice to oscillate across these antithetical aspects. Whether is Virgil’s high persona or Malacoda’s popular figure, Dante the author will express his wit through this continuous motion between these two opposite characters. Furthermore, it is from this point that I will suggest that because the Florentine poet does not maintain a steady position across the domain of the ruse, Dante begins to conceive the beffa from a bipolar perspective (which translates in high and low mimetic code) 10 . To study Dante’s wit means to understand how Dante foresees the trick, and this procedure should also enable us to recognize his moral neutrality across the joke’s domain. Therefore, I will finally indicate that Dante the author perceives the beffa between the notion of ridicule and the elegiac features, between the comic and the tragic.

I. The Ruse’s Domain in Inferno XXI-XXIII

The beffa is fundamentally an act of derision, or a lie, that develops on the canto’s literary stage where it takes place. The extensive nomenclature of this farcical element is characterized by terms such as the scherzo , the ruse, the burla , the beffa , and the inganno. This variety of definitions determines both the importance of this subject matter in literature, and the joke’s literary diversity. In addition, the burla ’s inner nature is tied uniformly to the characterization of the trick, where this farcical element belongs to a region often associated with the comicality. At the same time, regardless of whether it carries out a comical meaning to the reader, or some combinations of the narrator’s neutral voice or the characters’ vague roles, the beffa can be applied to each literary genre. Whether is a novella or a poem, numerous authors since the Middle Ages to the Late Renaissance have employed the ruse into their literary works. Some have adopted it as a folkloristic constituent to enrich the quality of their stories, and some others have embraced this literary device as part of the Florentine tradition. Being a text of high literary complexity, Dante’s literary world encompasses a mythical production through a number of subject matters, such

9 I will be mentioning this term several times in this essay, but it should be noted that it also refers to Bergson’s theory of laughter in his book, Laughter: An Essay On The Meaning of Comic . 10 In this essay, the name Dante will appear under two circumstances: Dante the author/narrator or at times either one, which is indicative of the person outside the scene of the joke (author) or relatively inside the scenery of the ruse (narrator); and Dante the pilgrim, who represents the character that endeavored the infernal journey with Virgil. 22 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII as religion, politics, philosophy, and theatre. Because of its large spectrum of verses, and among the numerous farcical and folkloristic aspects within Dante’s Comedy 11 , the Inferno represents particularly an early epitome for exposing this Cantica’s literary domain in the face of the practical joke 12 . A case in point is from Inferno XXI where the beffa begins to transpire. Several characters illustrate the peculiarity of the burla , and in the middle of the canto, both protagonists enter the stage 13 . On one side, there is Malacoda who represents the main leader and the archetype of the trick. The narrator introduces this devil with enthusiasm, and the rest of the devils are acclaiming him as well: “Tutti gridaron: ‘Vada Malacoda!’ / per ch’un si mosse ‒ e li altri stetter fermi” (Chiavacci Leonardi 641); (“All cried: Let Malacoda go. One moved ‒ / the rest stood still ‒ and he came forward”). (Hollander 387) On the other side, there is Virgil, who reaches the sphere of the joke somehow defensively. He begins by trying to prevent any significant menace against his pupil Dante the pilgrim:

‘Credi tu, Malacoda, qui vedermi esser venuto’, disse ’l mio maestro, ‘sicuro già da tutti vostri schermi, sanza voler divino e fato destro’? Lascian’ andar, chè nel cielo è voluto

11 Among the numerous folkloristic traditions within Dante’s Comedy , see also the following examples from : the game of gambling, and playing cards (Chiavacci Leonardi 171); the mocking of devils from a religious point of view (154-155); for a traditional ritual of marriage (159- 160); concerning the tradition of necromancy (555); for the traditional superstition (555-556); for a tradition concerning the winery and other usual beverages (703-707). 12 It should be reiterated for a broader audience that The Divine Comedy is divided in three ‘Canticas’: the first one is Inferno ; follows Purgatorio , and finally . The first Cantica contains XXXIV cantos, while the last two contain XXXIII. The three combined determines one hundred cantos, which fulfills the entire structure of this literary work. 13 Malacoda and the other devils will be the main character from Inferno XXI-XXIII. I am going to elaborate mostly from canto XXI & XXII. Canto XXI represents the Eight Circle, and the Fifth Pouch, where the Barraters plunged into boiling pitch and guarded by demons armed with prongs. I am solely mentioning the Fifth Pouch in this essay, since it is the main source of this argument. It is not going to be studied further the structure of the Inferno , meaning to discuss about the realm of the Circles and the significance of all the Infernal Pouches. To exploit the various pouches, see: Edoardo Sanguineti, Interpretazione di (97-171). 23 ANIELLO DI IORIO

Ch’I’ mostri altrui questo cammin silvestro. (Chiavacci Leonardi 642)

(‘Consider, Malacoda,’ said my master, ‘whether you would see me come this far unstopped by all your hindering without the will of God and favoring fate? Let us proceed, for it is willed in Heaven That I guide another down this savage way’.) (Hollander 387)

Both Malacoda and Virgil begin to converse with each other, but it is a stanza that vaguely describes their personalities. Although it is a passage that expresses the high tone of Virgil’s voice as the latter asks Malacoda to let them go. This section of Inferno XXI also demonstrates a turning point in the canto. While Virgil and Dante the pilgrim were moving on with their journey around the Fifth Pouch of the Cantica, Malacoda immediately interrupts them. At the same time, as this period should correspond and relate to the practice of the ruse, it merely delineates Virgil and Malacoda’s roles. A few verses after that, another devil enters the beffa ’s territory. His name is and the figures of both the beffatore and the beffato 14 get slightly unfolded:

Poi disse a noi: ‘Più oltre andar per questo iscoglio non si può, però che giace tutto spezzato al fondo l’arco sesto. E se l’andare avante pur vi piace, andatevene su per questa grotta; presso è un altro scoglio che via face. (Chiavacci Leonardi 645)

(And then to us: ‘You can’t continue farther down this ridge, for the sixth arch lies broken into pieces at the bottom. ‘If you desire to continue on,

14 The beffatore (or deceiver) is generally commended (by the narrator and/or by the audience) for his astute resources. He may be praised for his malice, for his quick ingenious, for his awareness, or for his wisdom. Only in a few instances is the beffatore not presented as astute. However, in these instances the beffatore ’s scheming turns to his own disadvantage. The beffato (or deceived) is commonly portrayed by the narrator as simple, fool, idiot, or rough. 24 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

then make your way along this rocky ledge. Nearby’s another crag that yields a passage.) (Hollander 389)

As he attacks both Virgil and Dante the pilgrim, Scarmiglione turns out to be very arrogant. In addition, this passage indicates the first lie that pertains to the beginning of the trick, where the devils’ voices (Malacoda, Scarmiglione, and the group of devils) and words resemble the features of the beffatore ’s role (trickster). Scarmiglione speaks because he reveals how to orchestrate the ruse against the Latin Poet (and relatively Dante the pilgrim). Meanwhile, as soon as Virgil listens to Scarmiglione speaking, the former seems to imply about past experiences with the Barraters. It is also at this point that Virgil begins to uncover another role in this following circumstance, which defines him as the next beffato (tricked or deceived):

E per nulla offension che mi sia fatta, non temer tu, ch’i’ ho le cose conte, per ch’altra volta fui a tal baratta. (Chiavacci Leonardi 639)

(As for any outrage they may do me, have no fear. I know this place and had exactly such a scuffle here before.) (Hollander 387)

Because Dante the author outlines both assignments for the devil and Virgil, Malacoda can move on with his second lie against Virgil. The devil tells the Latin poet to search for another passage because the one that he is about to undertake is shattered: “Ier, più oltre cinqu’ore che quest’otta, / mille dugento con sessanta sei / anni compié che qui la via fu rotta” (Chiavacci Leonardi 646); (“Yesterday, at a time five hours from now, / it was a thousand two hundred sixty-six years / since the road down here was broken”). (Hollander 389) Because both protagonists of the Inferno have lost their path, and while both of them began to rely on Malacoda to help them find their way back, the deceiver decides to concoct another idea that simultaneously broadens the course of the beffa . The narrator states: “Verso là di questi miei / a riguardar s’alcun se ne sciorina; / gite con lor, che non saranno rei” (Chiavacci Leonardi 646); (“I’m sending some men of mine along that way / to see if anyone is out to take the air. / Go with them ‒ they won’ hurt you”). (Hollander 389) As Virgil and Dante the pilgrim are about to cross the bridge from the Fourth to the Fifth Pouch, they seem perplexed. In the meantime, there are several devils from the group of deceivers that decide to accompany the two protagonists by channeling them through their fabricated passage, 25 ANIELLO DI IORIO which will ultimately lead Virgil to be tricked. Also, this latter circumstance determines how dexterous the Barraters are and it shows how both Virgil and Dante the pilgrim are undergoing through the preparation of the beffa . By escorting both protagonists, this group of devils is simultaneously coordinating the trick’s basic texture, and its jokesome ambience. As a whole, these devils are nurturing the atmosphere for Dante the writer to continue elaborating constructively the basis for a practical joke 15 . In order to expand the sphere of the ruse in the Inferno , Dante the author decides to stretch the previous episode to a greater extent. The Florentine poet suits the ground for both Malacoda and Scarmiglione to execute a third lie against Virgil. The narrator of Inferno XXI will indeed demonstrate the continuation of a well-prepared inganno when he claims:

Cercate intorno le boglienti pane; costor sian salvi infino a l’altro scheggio che tutto invero va sovra le tane. (Chiavacci Leonardi 647)

(Have a good look around the boiling glue. Keep these two safe as far as the next crag That runs all of a piece above the dens.) (Hollander 391)

These verses show once more how the Florentine poet strengthens the foundations of the beffa . By reading the section from the first stanza aforementioned it seems that Malacoda is nurturing the other devil Scarmiglione on how to proceed with the burla . The former is breeding him not only the necessary words, but also the fictitious instructions for Virgil to take. Likewise, this stanza shows how Malacoda intervenes once again on the joke’s stage to ensure that the trick goes as planned. Another sign that directs it to take its course occurs when Malacoda discloses a sense of fictitious preoccupation in front of both Dante the pilgrim and Virgil, and ascertains that the beffato and his pupil will cross the bridge safely ‒ “Costor sian salvi infino a l’altro scheggio” (Chiavacci Leonardi 647); (“Keep these two safe as far as the next crag”). (Hollander 391) This episode clarifies the notion that the beffatore ’s task and his group of schemers seem to be finally achieved. In the meantime, it is the end of Canto XXII that resumes the trick for the last time. The beffato Virgil expresses his puzzling overcome to the public and to his pupil: “Mal contava la bisogna / colui che i peccator di qua uncina”

15 In this essay I will not examine further the efficiency of beffa in the Divine Comedy . This study articulates the sole figure of the ruse as an instrument to exhume Dante’s perception for the joke itself. 26 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

(Chiavacci Leonardi 698); (“He who rips the sinners in the other ditch / misled us in his picture of this place”). (Hollander 427) 16 Because Malacoda and his group of liars have deceived Virgil’s integrity, the Latin poet refers to the latters with indignity. These last verses of Inferno XXII indicate not only the fabricated nature of Virgil, but also the compelling description about his adversary: “Io udì già dire a Bologna / del diavol è bugiardo e padre di menzogna” (Chiavacci Leonardi 698); (“At one time in Bologna / I heard tell of the Devil’s many vices”). (Hollander 427) By recognizing the devil’s disposition at the end of the episode, Virgil realizes that those anomalous figures have confined his sense of consciousness outside the beffa ’s scenery. If the beffatore Malacoda has ascertained the assigned task with his other tricksters, and Virgil has not been able to overcome the deceiving influence that has overshadowed momentarily his acumen, the trick has reached its peak 17 . As the practical joke outspread through its course, the characters involved into this concocted itinerary are to be considered external participants. The burla is entirely prepared to emerge from its textual scenery. It unfolds its core across the domain of perception by engaging upon the sensitive responsiveness of two observers: the reader and the author/narrator. The reader has been vigilant across the various segments of this trick, and represents the first observer to perceive the beffa within his own frame of ideals 18 . The former is a figure that emerges from outside the verses, and represents the constituent that ties up the internal texture of the burla to the outer view of its core. Advancing this notion, Freud defines the exercise of the joke being strengthened by observers outside the settings. According to the Austrian psychologist, if the trick is taking place between two characters

16 We are still in the Eighth Circle, Fifth Pouch: the Barraters. Pursuit by the demons, with Virgil snatching up Dante and sliding down to the Sixth Pouch, where the Hypocrites file along slowly, clothed in caps of lead. 17 It should be asserted that the structure of the joke in Dante’s Inferno is fairly fabricated: there is the deceiver ( beffatore ), the deceived ( beffato ), and the group of devils who assisted the main architect of the joke on exercising it. Despite this cantica might not be the most appropriate place from which to examine the ruse, it still represents a place where the deceivers feel at ease to develop the joke. There is a clear and concise organization of the ruse, meaning that the devils speak out the plan to Virgil and Dante Pilgrim. Also, as the beffa progresses throughout the episode, the reader can follow through. Finally, there are the reader and the author/narrator who express their final judgment upon the exercise of the ruse, and they tie together the outcome of the joke. 18 The figure of the reader will be discussed solely in this line of the essay, while a major consideration will be deemed upon the main observer: Dante the author/narrator. 27 ANIELLO DI IORIO performing their roles, then a person is required to test whether they have attained their aim or not 19 . It is a concept that can be essentially related to Dante the author in Canto XXII, when the Florentine writer refers directly to the reader as Dante proceeds through the episode:

O tu che leggi, udirai nuovo ludo: ciascun da l’altra costa li occhi volse, quel prima, ch’a ciò fare era più crudo. (Chiavacci Leonardi 669-670)

(Now, reader, you shall hear strange sport. All turned their backs to where the sinner stood, he first who’d most opposed the plan.) (Hollander 409)

The purpose of this centralized stanza inside this canto shows the diverse perspective that two readers can envision. This means that while the reader embraces the spectrum of the practical joke with his final remarks, his interpretation of the same phenomena can certainly differ from each other. Perceiving the episode of the burla subjectively means that that this type of observer will eventually be faced with the spirit of the character’s humor. At the same time, if we try to juxtapose the idea of laughter to Dante the author/narrator, and we try to determine the writer’s perception for the beffa, it may take us into a rather different trajectory 20 . We have already realized that Dante the poet begins to approach Canto XXI by pronouncing the first three lines with acrimony. The narrator that speaks Dante’s words states:

19 Sigmund Freud, Jokes and Their Relation to The Unconscious (176-177). 20 This notion reflects the author’s responsiveness to the domain of the beffa, which at times can conform to the reader’s interpretation. For instance, after a long theoretical and political discourse that could exasperate the observer’s interest, Machiavelli wrote in the preface to Belfagor (a short story that he wrote at the beginning of the 16 th century) the needs to amuse his audience with something different than the usual line of thought: “L’allegria che ivi traspare è tutt’altro che disposta a dare la ben lontana idea di una preoccupazione di spirito nel detestar privati dolori, ma a dipingere altresì una bizzarria da scena e metterla possibilmente in ridicolo” (3-4). Machiavelli takes this notion to a greater extent when he states “noi dobbiam pur dilettarci”, which clearly depicts the stronger relation between Machiavelli and his audience’s standpoint (7). 28 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

Così di ponte in ponte, altro parlando che la mia comedìa cantar non cura , venimmo; e tenavamo ’l colmo (Chiavacci Leonardi 629)

(Thus from one bridge to the next we came until we reached its highest point, speaking of things my Comedy does not care to sing.) (Hollander 382)

These specific words from the section above illustrate the author’s voice by claiming that the pilgrim and his guide Virgil are to face a distinct area of interest across the next verses. As soon as the practical joke heightens on the scene, Dante the pilgrim acts differently than expected. The narrator’s voice discloses Virgil position in front of the ruse eloquently, but the former seems quite uncertain about Dante the pilgrim’s role in it. By the time the narrator’s voice accompanies Dante the pilgrim and Virgil, the narrator expresses a voice of disbelief and mistrust. His tone is sluggish and he even proposes the pilgrim to momentarily abscond from Virgil and the beffa :

Allor mi volsi come l’uom cui tarda di veder quel che li convien fuggire e cui paura sùbita sgagliarda, che, per veder, non indugia ’l partire e vidi dietro a noi un diavol nero correndo su per lo scoglio venire. (Chiavacci Leonardi 633)

(Then I turned like a man, intent on making out what he must run from , undone by sudden fear, who does not slow his flight for all his looking back: just so I caught a glimpse of some dark devil running towards us up the ledge.) (Hollander 383-385)

The narrator suggests Dante the pilgrim to flee from those circumstances because they might not fully compel him. He is deliberately eluding fears and matters, and in front of the devils who are deceiving Virgil, Dante the author/narrator appears to be cynical to a greater extent. This means that by observing judiciously upon this episode, it becomes clear that the Florentine poet conceives this folkloristic tradition rather objectively. Hence, if we enclose in one section the verse expression “la mia comedìa non cura” (629) 29 ANIELLO DI IORIO

(“speaking of things my Comedy does not care to sing”), (382) with “tarda di veder quell che li convien fuggire”, (629) (“intent on making out what he must run from”) (382) we become aware that Dante the author is circumventing from within the story. After all, it seems obvious that this Florentine poet’s thwarting shapes the pilgrim’s role by diverting the latter from the joke’s scenery. In the face of Dante’s sense of ambiguity, the beffa conceals behind this triggering conundrum. Moreover, this same procedure leads us to delineate the foundations of this farcical element, which are to be further investigated through Dante’s perception of the ruse.

II. Portraying Dante’s Wit From the Paradox of Antithetical Aspects

To begin studying Dante’s ambiguous representation for the beffa in Inferno XXI-XXIII, it would be essential to examine Dante’s frame of mind by first recognizing the implications that emerge from Dante’s wit. One of the main aspects that could be taken into consideration is the juxtaposition between humor and practical joke. In light of this, Oring Elliot implements a theory about the conception of the humor in relation with the practice of the trick, which crosses several themes and subject matters simultaneously. Elliot believes that the humor can sometimes be discovered through an unusual course. In order for the observer to captivate the reason why a character is acting in a certain mood, he has to examine his features through a correlation of several incongruent natures. The literary scholar says: “The perception of wit depends upon the perception of an appropriate incongruity ‒ that is, the perception of an appropriate interrelationship of elements or situations from domains that are generally regarded as incongruous” (Elliot 12). It is a concept that gives us an idea about certain types of wit that can be interpreted when engendered by two overlapping scripts and perceived as an opposite in a certain way. In addition, by relating the notion of wit to a series of unrelated realms or thoughts or ideals or traditions or points of view, the scholar demonstrates the variable space of the humor’s conception. Framing Virgil, the group of devils, and the conception of the ruse in Inferno XXI & XXII around Elliot’s theory, this will enable us to perceive the main aspect about this interrelationship in the Divine Comedy 21 . The choice of

21 It goes without saying that the Infernal Sphere represents a realm where the grotesque lays its foundation; the narration can often be venomous; the writing is somehow vitriolic and vindictive; but most of all, the ambience, engendered by horror and repulsion reveals a place of inaptness for the beffa . The names from within the circles of the Inferno , and the various forms of punishment, both give us a sense of the atrocities that define this environment as such. However, by the time Dante the author integrates the beffa in Inferno XXI-XXIII, the joke develops outside its comfort realm. It is clear that the 30 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII integrating Virgil across an aberrant domain like the beffa unfolds a rather unfathomable task for the Latin poet to endeavor. From Inferno XXI to XXIII, we conceive Virgil’s high persona somewhat succumbing (even if for a short period of time) to the derisive region of the trick. In other words, we become witnesses of this temporary passage from a magnum poeta (who communicates to Dante and the reader his high reason) to a character facing those eccentric devils from the joke’s ungraceful atmosphere. By the time Virgil partakes with the group of tricksters, this circumstance features a high level of oddness, which concurrently spawns a twofold stage. On one side, while relating the grand figure of Virgil to this popular ideal of the burla , this juxtaposition produces a peculiar incongruity. The beffa is an autochthon product of the popular culture, and when this latter is compared to a high literary figure like Virgil, this turns to a riddle. It generates this temporary challenge against Virgil’s real values as a grand poet. The narrator states: “Allor vid’io meravigliar Virgilio / sovra colui ch’era disteso in croce / tanto vilmente ne l’eterno esilio” (Chiavacci Leonardi 697); (“I saw that Virgil marveled at the sight / of this shape stretched as on a cross, / so ignoble in his eternal exile”). (Hollander 427) Virgil’s humiliating phase continues on towards the end of Canto XXIII, when the Latin Poet finally realizes that he is the only deceived among the several characters mentioned: “Lo duca stette un poco a testa china; / poi disse: ‘Mal contava la bisogna / colui che i peccator di qua uncina” (Chiavacci Leonardi 698); (“My leader stood a while, his head bent down, then said: / He who rips the sinners in the other ditch / misled us in his picture of this place”). (Hollander 427) Virgil is about to come out of this uncomfortable environment, which is filled with strange figures and awkward characters. Yet, the last two verses define Virgil’s real figure still concerned: “Appresso il duca a gran passi sen gì, / turbato un poco d’ira nel sembiante” (Chiavacci Leonardi 698); (“At that my leader stalked off with long strides, / a moment’s look of anger on his face”). (Hollander 427) By leaving the Fifth Pouch, Virgil is finally abandoning this temporary function with his head bent down. At the same time, as the fabricated role of Virgil beffato is coming to an end, this conclusion highlights the incongruent shift within the Comedy. This means that those incongruities challenged his acumen, which temporarily succumbed under the dominion of the trick. It is true that this episode is perhaps the only in Dante’s comedy where Virgil’s character is faced with such a demeaning ambience, but it is also fair to say that the Latin poet is drawn into the joke’s spirit, and so he has to renounce momentarily to some of his own rational sensibility. beffa lays its roots in the popular culture whose outcome reflects the comical domain. Advancing this thought is Freud, who believes that no tension can be admitted on the joke’s stage, or the outcome of the trick can be easily distorted (177-179). 31 ANIELLO DI IORIO

On the other side, by looking at the second segment of this peculiar incongruity, the previous odd juxtaposition might diminish when faced with other aspects related to the beffa ’s episode. This process indicates the antithetical aspects between Virgil and Malacoda, and it reveals the real distinction between Virgil (through the representation of Human Reason ) and Malacoda (the representation of Human Mediocrity )22 . Because Virgil often expresses his superiority through his Human Reason, we are able to identify the two examples that stand out continuously: Maestro and lo duca mio . Both terms unveil Virgil’s enhanced intellectual faculty in front of the pilgrim. This demonstrates how the latter somewhat tries to learn throughout the Inferno , whereas Virgil often tries to guide him to the righteous course: “Lo duca mio subito mi prese” (Chiavacci Leonardi 686); (“My leader in a moment snatched me up”); (Hollander 421); “Onde ’l duca si volse a me e disse: ‘Aspetta, / e poi secondo il suo passo procedi” (Chiavacci Leonardi 691); (“At that my leader turned around to say: / Wait a moment, then continue at his pace”); (Hollander 423) Dante the author’s high conception for his master not only overwhelms across the many verses, but makes Virgil his preeminent source behind the Florentine poet’s literary groundwork. In terms of literary style, Virgil represents one of the main foundations for Dante, and one of the only noble poets of Italy. In light of that, the use of word poeta during that period was both one of the most potent words in Dante’s Comedy , and an expression that nurtures high intellectuals throughout their works 23 . It is also fair to assert that the word poeta has been used numerous times in the comedy. Most of the time Virgil was to adopt it, and the first time being used was when Dante claims Virgil as his guide:

‘O de li altri poeti onore e lume, vagliami ’l lungo studio e ’l grande amore che m’ha fatto cercar lo tuo volume. Tu se’ lo mio maestro e ’l mio autore, tu se’ solo colui da cu’ io tolsi lo bello stilo che m’ha fatto onore. (Chiavacci Leonardi 25-27)

22 This term is indicative of inferiority, and often symptomatic of the low- class individual. I adopt it in my analysis to mostly contrast it with the superior judgment of intellectuals and poets. It originates from the Latin Humana Mediocritas , which could indicate the ordinary people. It is also a term that has often been mentioned by Arturo Graf in his book Il Diavolo (Roma, 1980). 23 To further investigate upon the word poeta or about the noble poets of Italy, see Allen Mandelbaum, The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri: Inferno (346). 32 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

(Are you then Virgil, the fountainhead that pours so full a stream of speech? I answered him, my head bent low in shame. O glory and light of all other poets, let my long study and great love avail that made me delve so deep into your volume. You are my teacher and my author. You are the one from whom alone I took The noble style that has brought me honor.) (Hollander 7)

This stanza communicates the Latin poet’s own brief vita Virgili , where Dante the author nearly displays a sense of debt to the traditional and classical lives of the poets. Furthermore, he tries to make Virgil an allegory of high reason over Malacoda for having expressed a superior judgment to the greatest poet. Dante depicts Virgil’s high reason and intellectuality through a series of terms, thoughts, and ideals. According to Frye, this flattering remark enhances the figure of Virgil, by categorizing his character from the Inferno as a High-Mimetic Code. The Florentine writer is also able to highlight this contrast through some essential points indicative of the other protagonists (the devils):

Noi andavam con li diece demoni. Ahi fiera compagnia! Ma ne la chiesa Coi santi, e in taverna coi ghiottoni. (Chiavacci Leonardi 657-658)

(On we went, escorted by ten demons. What savage company! But, as they say, In church with saints, with guzzlers in the tavern.) (Hollander 401)

Dante the pilgrim and his guide Virgil are departing with ten demons, and Dante the author describes this passage with one significant simile. Malacoda and the other black devils characterize the gluttons eating inside a cave. Yet, if we momentarily disentangle the gluttons’ metaphorical notion and place it within a closed domain, we instantly get the sense that this contiguous relation between the gluttons (in the infernal sphere indicates a synonym for pig) and the devils determines the diminishing factor for the protagonist Malacoda. This analogy accentuates a system of words, which intensifies Dante’s repugnance for certain beings. It demonstrates how feasible is for the Florentine poet to condense the devil’s nature inside the demeaning realm of

33 ANIELLO DI IORIO

Human Mediocrity 24 . Hence, if Virgil shapes his high literary fashion while confronting the demonic ill-mannered characters, this serves the purpose to set him apart from the low-life devils and their leader Malacoda. In addition, the Austrian philosopher Karl Rosenkranz delineates this notion from a similar perspective as well. In light of the poet’s high intellectuality, the scholar defines the devil’s task in literature absurd (241)25 . Since practicing the joke on the same stage, Rosenkranz observes upon the devil as he is facing the intellectual. The philosopher suggests that the poet’s wisdom, despite being juxtaposed to those diabolic forces, they will always differ to each other” (241) 26 . Virgil’s intellectual omnipresence is conspicuous across the domain of the beffa , and the devil can solely represent an insignificant symbol 27 . Despite Virgil has been deceived by the devils, his real nature is not confined under his adversaries. Virgil is able to stand out in front of this eccentricity because his real intellectual figure remains as such, and the aforementioned incongruous aspect becomes appropriate. If we are to frame Malacoda’s nature while confronting the practice of the trick, the idea to tie two interrelated natures within the same domain becomes more evident 28 . It should be firstly stated that the devil’s figure is generally

24 The linguistic perspective changes as Dante the author/narrator narrates upon both Virgil and Malacoda. For instance, when the Florentine author speaks of Virgil, it is always a type of language that deciphers (with elegance) the superior figure of the Latin Poet. See Inferno , XXI, vv. 127-132; XXII, vv. 43-47; XXIII, vv.145-148. But Dante narrates more harshly against Malacoda. See: Inferno , XXI, vv. 34-36, vv. 118-126; XXII, vv. 13-24, vv. 55-63, and vv. 106-111. 25 Karl Rosenkranz, in Estetica del brutto , suggests that: “L’impresa del diabolico appare assurda quanto più grandi l’intelletto e le volontà sono presenti in questa impresa” (241). It should be noted that because some of the aforementioned critics were never translated in English language (among a few – Rosenkratz and Arturo Graf – both of them mentioned in this essay), I will indicate their original quotations in Italian Language in the respective footnotes. It should also be noticed that I will be paraphrasing in English both of Rosenkratz and Graf’s quotations from the original texts. 26 From the Estetica del brutto: “In confronto alla sublimità della saggezza e onnipotenza divine l’intelligenza e la forza diabolica non appaiono se non come una sapienza in dodicesimo e un’onnipotenza in miniatura” (241). 27 Edoardo Sanguineti agreed with this notion in his work Interpretazione di Malebolge : “Virgilio indica il giudizio superiore mentre Malacoda il Basso morale” (76). 28 On the accuracy of Malacoda’s computation of the time that has elapsed since the fall of the bridges, which is a notion that does not necessarily support our argument, see C. S. Singleton, The Vistas in Retrospect , in 34 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII constituted for being a character that served the author to entertain the public. Arturo Graf emphasized such a concept to a greater extent when he claims that, Dante’s devils do not utter a mere horrific aspect, but they might even provoke laughter (110) 29 . That is why Graf implies that this type of devil is able to conform to a popular environment during the Middle Ages. Because devils like Malacoda and Scarmiglione already characterize the ridicule figure in numerous legends, they embody the figure of the fool and the jester (111) 30 . Nevertheless, Dante’s devils differ from the previous ones because they speak. Despite their vulgar and arrogant language, the devils communicate with Virgil and Dante the pilgrim. If Dante the writer nurtures these devils with a specific voice, it is justifiable to assert that the Florentine poet is trying to convey an important message across the realm of Inferno XXII. It is fair to say that he established a turning point for the devil’s figure. If the devil knows how to speak, his words can easily determine the parameters of a joke, and within this frame of thought, Malacoda then represents the inferior population. Virgil’s high reason was the prominent point to define his fashion under the High-mimetic code . On the other hand, Malacoda epitomizes the opposite by unfolding a Low-Mimetic Code 31 . The study of the devil’s nature of subjectivity will enable us to examine this character’s inferior figure to a greater extent. This means that if Malacoda is the leader of the group of devils, he also carries out the burden of the Alazon and the Miles Gloriosus . We are aware that both of them indicate a deceiving character in fiction, and Malacoda and his devils represent the ultimate figures that exercise the beffa . According to Rosenkranz, these terms help us to enhance a better definition for a figure that explores the fashionable

Modern Language Notes 81 (1966), pp. 55-80; and G. Baglivi and G. McCutchan, “Dante, Christ and the Fallen Bridges”, in Italica No. 54 (1977), pp. 250-262. 29 Graf states that: “I diavoli che Dante trova nella quinta bolgia del cerchio ottavo, se hanno del terribile, hanno soprattutto del comico” (110). 30 Arturo Graf in La demonologia di Dante: “Il diavolo appare ridicolo in numerose leggende, e per cui si giunge a ideare il demonio burlesco, sciocco, ridicolo” (111). 31 Advancing this theory is Karl Rosenkranz, in Estetica del brutto , who claims several interesting points objecting the bad with the figure of the Devil: “Il male come diabolico si distingue dal male di una passione particolare, di una particolare cattiveria, di un affetto passeggero perché odia sostanzialmente il bene, fa della negazione di esso lo scopo assoluto e prova piacere nel fare il male. Nella consapevolezza, inseparabile dal suo concetto, della sua opposizione al bene sta il motivo del suo passaggio alla caricatura” (230-231). To further study the figure of the Devil according to Rosenkranz, see also the following pages: (229-231; 235-238; and 241-242). 35 ANIELLO DI IORIO field of the trick. According to Rosenkrantz, the devil’s pretentiousness is symptomatic of comical figure and the final outburst of laughter (235) 32 . While Malacoda endorses his derisive move conscientiously across the domain of , he achieves all the essential characteristics that a joke requires, and once he achieved his task as beffatore , his prior incongruous aspect appears to be appropriate as well. The diverse qualities of both protagonists Virgil and Malacoda seem to overlap, and because of that, this interrelated notion could elicit a paradox. To begin with, it is essential to succinctly reframe those characteristics that endorsed this ironic pattern into a closed domain. It is not unprecedented to see Virgil’s double figure throughout Inferno XXI-XXIII. He is both Dante the pilgrim’s intellectual guide and a beffato . This latter aspect is somehow a fictitious nature unfamiliar to the Latin poet. On the other hand, even though Virgil’s superiority overshadows Malacoda, the latter simultaneously characterizes the perfect mode for comicality. Malacoda is not only the ideal model for entertaining the medieval audience, but he appears to suit properly the joke’s stage as well. Dante the author fabricates these characters’ roles to outline the strategy of the beffa , but he ascertains this folkloristic tradition as a distorting ideal for both of the characters’ real nature too. This literary variant shows the ironic peculiarity where the essence of the ruse seems to benefit partially one segment of the protagonist, while degrading the other face of it. Yet, if we carefully search for the starting point of this twofold phase within Inferno XXI-XXIII, we immediately recognize that the original source does not come from the sole notion of the burla . This conception comes also from the Florentine poet, who bears these antithetical ideas throughout the infernal verses. It is indeed this paradoxical notion and this ironic ingredient that exhorts Dante the author to operate upon the characters’ natures. Subsequently, this conjecture represents a legitimate contrast, which has not been determined accidentally. Advancing this thought, Vossler claims that this undignified brawling of sinners and devils are disturbed, and for Dante they are put aside since there is no room for a farce (274). However, the Florentine poet seems to be aware about the trick in the cantos, and if this paradox emerges from this episode, it is certainly not the result of an unintentional case, but the author’s premeditated definition concerning the burla . It is Dante’s shrewdness to institute such a domain of high complexities along the characters, and it is the reader’s task to uncover this appropriate incongruity along the different matters. Because this paradox exemplifies the practice of the burla in Dante’s Inferno , the essence of the ruse corresponds to the writer’s humor, which transpires from within the text. Dante’s voice can emerge with eccentric tones,

32 Karl Rosenkranz, Estetica del brutto : “La sua pretesa maestà è subito convertita nella comicità del povero e stupido diavolo” (235). 36 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII it can illustrate different paradigms of one character, and it can diverge from one to another. In other words, it is a voice that belongs to Dante’s wit 33 .

III. Relating This Paradox to Dante’s Bipolar Perception of the Beffa

It is not a case that the abovementioned paradox represents the main source to understand how Dante’s wit operates in the Inferno . Although, to recognize Dante’s perception of the ruse it is essential to reinstate respectively both of the characters’ double appearances through the notions of High Reason and Basso Medioevo . This suggests that Dante the author considers these two characters’ natures from a dual perspective. A case in point is once more Virgil. While he is the poeta magna for the Florentine poet, the latter suddenly refers to the Latin Poet with an ironic laughter: “O tu che siedi tra li scheggion del ponte quatto quatto, / sicuramente omai a me ti riedi” (Chiavacci Leonardi 643); (“You there, cowering among the broken boulders / of the bridge, now you may come back to me in safety”). (Hollander 389) Even Malacoda is regarded as both a glutton inside a taverna , and as the devil figure that discloses the ideal features to suit this folkloristic tradition. The practice of the joke encompasses this mere viewpoint, and it is through this meticulous contrast that this variable characteristic gets disseminated between two poles of the beffa . Both of the protagonists’ distorted natures are somewhat accompanied on the stage from the conception of Dante’s wit. This means that the Florentine author depicts this twofold insight, and if we associate this adjustable vision of Dante’s wit to the notion of antithetical aspects, it seems reasonable to foresee this humoristic concept through a double-edged perception 34 . It is a subtle formation that allows Dante to shift his humor from one hand to the other. This inner movement shows also how able is Dante the poet to continue circumventing upon stories he feels hesitant for. If the author’s point of view about the joke directs him to elude concurrently upon the figures of Virgil and Malacoda, then is this double- edged wit that makes the Florentine poet an external observer. By following this humoristic peculiarity, Bergson assumes that the writer's observation cannot stand on either side: “Settling one the surface, it will not be more than skin-deep, dealing with persons at the point at which they come into contact

33 Even if not relevant to this essay, there is another important consideration pertinent Dante’s wit that should be reexamined: Dante Alighieri, Purgatorio , XXI, vv. 115-117. 34 The notion of double-edged perception has been clearly examined by C. J. Ryan, Inferno XXI: Virgil and Dante: A study in Contrast . Even though Ryan ascertains a more general perspective between Dante and Virgil, and even if he does not emphasize on the concept of the beffa , there are certain sections of the paper that indicate the peculiar perception of Dante (16-31). 37 ANIELLO DI IORIO and become capable of resembling one another” (80). Dante the author becomes a quasi-spectator of his own work. He defines the development of either figure from a short glance, which means that the Florentine poet will keep the distance from where the characters are playing their roles. In his essay La commedia dei diavoli e la tragedia di Dante , Luigi Pirandello instead claims that Dante the writer remains entirely outside the joke’s scene. According to the Sicilian author, Dante neither participates as spectator nor as an external observer. In other words, Pirandello believes that because of the high complexity of Dante’s comedy, there is neither room for a farce like the beffa nor for any type of laughter afterward (361) 35 . It is true that even Bergson clearly justifies the reason for Dante not to delve into an ambivalent field like the trick: “Even if it could, it would not desire to do so, for it would have nothing to gain in the process” (80). This demonstrates that despite integrating the practice of the joke inside his comedy, Dante’s intention was to elaborate this matter within a rigorous plan. This shows how relentless the author is to assist upon the idea of participating at the beffa as well. On this note, Bergson sustains: “To penetrate too far into the personality, to couple the outer effect with causes that are too deep-seated, would mean to endanger and in the end to sacrifice all that was laughable in the effect” (80). Although this passage might imply upon the author’s standpoint getting farther from the concept of the ruse, hence agreeing entirely with Pirandello’s statement, Bergson suggests that it is rather justifiable for a writer to do so: “So any poet may reveal himself as a wit when he pleases. To do this there will be no need for him to acquire anything; he would turn into a wit by simply resolving to be no longer a poet in feeling, but only in intelligence” (52). It is Dante the author’s inner voice that controls certain notions from an outer surface. By doing so, he can expose simultaneously his ambiguous status in front of the burla . When Dante determines that his wit does not belong to a steady constellation of ideals, his point of view oscillates from the double appearances of both characters Virgil and Malacoda 36 .

35 Pirandello states: “La crudezza appunto di questa rappresentazione che non s’arresta innanzi ai particolari più sconci e triviali, anzi ci assalta con essi, dimostra che non c’è affatto la compartecipazione di Dante alla commedia, e che perciò essa non va considerata per sé, nella sua volgare sconcezza, ma in relazione col poeta che solo non ne ride né può riderne” (361). 36 There are different readings about the idea of steady constellation , which is a term that has been used since the Middle Ages. It should be considered the Neo-Platonic vision of Ficino who discussed thoroughly in his Commentary to Plato’s Symposium , who dedicates several paragraphs to the constellation of the stars, the circles, and the numerous lights. I explore this term upon the sole interpretation from La tradizione del comico , by Nino Borsellino. He briefly relates the concept of the joke to the notion of steady constellation: “La 38 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

The conception of external observer indicates that the author not only explores several themes with caution, but looks upon the object of derision, without directly investigating on its progress. Dante the author concocts the beffa in his comedy, but he perceives only the finished project with elusion out of the entire course of the joke 37 . This notion also explains why the Florentine poet recognizes that some resources are fundamental for him to advance with his literary venture, such as the poetic style, the linguistic element, the theological inspirations, and many other characteristics, which as a whole, they determine the main dominion of knowledge that prevails upon the Divine Comedy . Instead, the ruse for Dante occupies the outer scope of his comedy, and that is the reason for this peculiarity to corroborate Dante standpoint as the external observer. This entitles the poet for more freedom to manipulate his strategies, and consents him to keep the right distance from the practice of the trick. Nonetheless, Dante the author/narrator is what confirms more eloquently Dante’s viewpoint in front of the practical joke. This occurs as he exploits its essence from behind the scenes and reveals this gist of remoteness from the episode of the burla :

E io: ‘Maestro mio, fa, se tu puoi, che tu sappi chi è lo sciagurato venuto a man de li avversari suoi’. Lo duca mio li s’accostò allato; (Chiavacci Leonardi 661)

(And I: Master, if you can do it, find out the name of this poor wretch caught in the clutches of his enemies. My leader got up close beside him.) (Hollander 403)

This notion clearly declares Dante’s choice to elude from those characters. Virgil continues to proceed, while Dante conceals behind the scenes. Also, there are verses such as: “I’ m’acostai con tutta la persona lungo ’l mio duca” (Chiavacci Leonardi 644); (“I drew my body up against my leader”), (Hollander 389) where Dante is approaching his master because he has been beffa formalizzata non è una costellazione fissa, ma è appunto una vicenda di modificazioni” (23). 37 See also Michail Bachtin, L’autore e l’eroe : “L’autore crea, ma vede la propria opera soltanto nell’oggetto cui egli dà una forma, cioè, della creazione vede soltanto il proprio prodotto e non il processo interiore psicologicamente determinato” (7). 39 ANIELLO DI IORIO observing thus far from a great distance, and yet, he never goes near those characters: “Omè, maestro, che è quell ch’I veggio?’ / diss’io, deh, sanza scrota andianci soli, / se tu sa ir; ch’I per me non la cheggio” (Chiavacci Leonardi 647-648); (“Oh, master, I said, I don’t like what I see. / Please, let us find our way without an escort, / if you know how. As for me, I do not want one”). (Hollander 391) By corroborating his constant elusion upon the episode of the beffa , Dante the author demonstrates that he conceals his ambiguity for the joke behind the victim Virgil. Whereas it is this latter to take Dante narrator out of the scene for that time being, the Florentine poet is careful too about how to approach those black devils from an outer view. Because this sensitive quality is associated with the ironical notion of paradox, Dante’s twofold wit represents the foundation behind his perception for the ruse. Being an external observer and witnessing the occurrences with his sense of capricious mobility, Dante the author is free to unveil his humor, which is characterized upon several features that are not congruent to each other. Since Dante’s perceptive sensibility for the ruse oscillates as well as his humor does, the poet cannot perceive the beffa from one standpoint. He cannot concentrate thoroughly upon a subject from a great distance. This conception exemplifies a humoristic inconsistency that defines the parameters of Dante’s wit in Canto XXI through XXIII. By considering its essence through a double-edged perception, the Florentine poet speculates upon the exercise of the ruse from a bipolar perspective. This viewpoint allows Dante the author to continue oscillating from one domain to another. Bergson expands upon this assertion to a greater extent, when he claims that: “However interested a dramatist may be in the comic features of human nature, he will hardly go, I imagine, to the extent of trying to discover his own” (80). The French philosopher ascertains that it is the concept of the joke to direct Dante outside the text. If any other author integrates the beffa with the habitual concern to deliver a comical significance outside its textual domain, this can hardly occur in Dante’s Inferno . His attitude for the trick has appeared rather indistinct and ironic, which turns out to be difficult to define. The ironic response to the joke also explains the first notion of Dante’s ambiguity when he began canto XXI with “Così di ponte in ponte altro parlando / che la mia comedìa cantar non cura” (Chiavacci Leonardi 629); (“Thus from one bridge to the next we came / until we reached its highest point, speaking / of things my Comedy does not care to sing”); (Hollander 383) and afterward with “mi volsi come l’uom cui tarda / di veder quel che li convien fuggire” (Chiavacci Leonardi 633); (“I turned like a man, intent / on making out what he must run from”). (Hollander 383) Subsequently, if Dante the writer circumvents from the episode of the burla with a sense of vagueness, this means that his viewpoint for the beffa stands concurrently between the serious and the jokesome, the horrible and the ridicule, the tragic and the comic. 40 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

At the same time, there are a few critics that have interpreted this last statement, by defining the episode of the joke with either a comical or a tragic frame of mind. On one hand, it is Benedetto Croce to suggest that in the Fifth Pouch, Dante is observing upon the development of the ruse, while forgetting completely of these types of sinners (39). As he refers specifically to Cantos XXI through XXIII, Croce believes that the Florentine poet seems very involved on the beffa ’s scenery. Despite the few appearances of the Florentine poet within the cantos, Croce claims that the narrator simultaneously exposes his voice upon Virgil, and unveils somewhat Dante the author’s sarcastic aspect traversing the episode (39). Indeed, as the narrator endorses Virgil against the black Devils and Malacoda, the Florentine poet also begins to perceive Virgil’s figure into a comical frame of mind. Within this particular scene, Croce sees the author’s aspect that consequently begins to laugh at his own guide (91). On the other hand, while Croce defines the Florentine poet’s approach on this episode through a comical conception, Bacchelli takes a more pessimistic stance and claims that the trick does not necessarily reveal comicality. When a number of devils surround the Latin poet to deceive one of the pivotal figures in the Divine Comedy , this can simultaneously infer a dislike outside the realm of the text. Bacchelli considers this particular scene symptomatic of repugnance because he seems to diverge the episode of the joke outside its prospected nature (393). If the trick for Bacchelli does not follow the habitual comical course, then this literary device represents a rather tragic course for such a farcical element. Both critics express their comments along the mere boundaries of the story’s anecdote. Croce and Bacchelli have considered the beffa from within the sphere of the text, which means that they could not abscond from those words pronounced by the devils towards Virgil. Yet, if Dante’s perception of the ruse is set outside the text, neither Croce nor Bacchelli can examine the poet’s point of view properly because each one of them infer solely on the characters’ natures. This means that they are not able to conceive the correct measures that Dante the author takes in order to perceive the burla . Furthermore, it is the Florentine poet to ultimately determine such a notion in the Epistle to Cangrande , where Dante defines his intention for traversing the diverse spectrum of the Comedy with the proper humoristic measures. The Florentine writer claims that the juxtaposition of tragic and comic (in accordance to Horatius’ Ars poetica ) resembles the poet’s ability to touch upon both features (1391) 38 . Dante observes upon prior theoreticians to

38 Dante Alighieri, Lettera a Cangrande : “Come afferma Orazio nella sua Arte poetica , dove consente talvolta ai comici di esprimersi come i tragici e viceversa”. Tragic and comical: this peculiarity can be considered to another degree of interpretation from Purgatorio VI, vv. 22-24. In this canto, there are two main characters: Pier da la Broccia and la Dona di Brabante. Both of 41 ANIELLO DI IORIO redeem the idea of fusing comic and tragic, the notion of ridicule to the elegiac features. What seizes our interest is the adoption of two disparate genres. This concocted characteristic gives us the sense that by blending his mode of communication around two unequal literary principles, the author conveys his ideas across the numerous verses from a movable standpoint. This status consequently unveils Dante’s anti-static conception, which determines the poet’s viewpoint along both principles. Moreover, it is with the variable frame of mind that Dante determines his perception for the ruse somewhat objectively. Dante the external observer communicates flexibility through the unification of tragic and comical. By oscillating from one pole to the other, and by conceiving the burla within this continuous motion, Dante divulges a sense of moral neutrality towards the beffa . Also, those paradoxical notions that consisted of crossing two antithetical aspects were the products of Dante’s objectivity expressed throughout his wit. It is through this joke’s episode that the careful reader can perceive the author’s impartial side, which lies between the tragic and the comic, between the laughter and pessimistic conceptions. In addition, there are critics that take into account a rather different interpretation. For instance, Sozzi believes that the only solution to this bizarre episode is to interpret Dante’s perception of the ruse from an amoral point of view (766) 39 . Despite some interesting ideas throughout his article on the Farcical Elements, even Spitzer specifies one point which could be properly disputed: “Dante’s guilt consisted only of curiosity; in itself a noble motive from the first moment after he had entered this bolgia” (175) 40 . Notwithstanding his ambiguity, Dante did not convey a moral confusion throughout those lines, because he is only keeping the distance, and he is often shadowing upon this episode. It cannot be a simple curiosity either because it seems to shallow this complex subject into a curious case. Even though the Florentine poet acts superficially around the episode, this does not mean that this short appearance should be indicative of curiosity. Dante the author is simply vigilant and approaches the episode with prudence.

IV. Conclusion these figures represent the antithetical nature of incongruity while they function within the same environment. 39 Sozzi, in Lectura Dantis Scaligera: Inferno : “L’unica soluzione dell’interrogativo di questo episodio ci riporta nell’ambito di un’avversione e di un disagio morale di Dante di fronte al basso mondo della baratteria” (766). 40 The idea defined by the term curiosity, stimulates even Croce to proceed with his own interpretation upon the episode of the joke: “Dante teme; non si sente sicuro, ma al moto del timore si sovrappone quello della curiosità, rivolta al bizzarro spettacolo” (92). 42 DANTE’S PERCEPTION OF THE RUSE FROM INFERNO XXI-XXIII

Also, it should not be shelved the idea that Dante is trying to avoid any contact with Barraters and sinners that he felt somehow repugnant for. This is the reason that led Dante partaking a neutral side. He was partially disinterested upon the joke’s scene, which led him concealing some of the singular characteristics about this folkloristic tradition behind this moral aspect. Yet, it is the same poet that touched upon the notion of the beffa from a certain distance. By integrating this farcical element into a complex literary work like the Divine Comedy , Dante the author still preserves his fiorentinità . He cannot disdain the facts, nor can he ignore the events, which after all, they all belong to his motherland and his people. Dante’s infernal domain has not been projected within one constant frame of mind, nor has it been intended for the sole purpose to exploit its literary realm within the mere text. Inferno XXI through XXIII represent a segment from a large volume, which embodies the author’s subtle ideas along his flexible perception. If Dante chose to incorporate the two incongruent natures of Virgil and Malacoda along the spectrum of the trick, both of them are concurrently succumbed to Dante’s objective sensibility. Ultimately, it is the reader’s task to relate to Dante’s mobile perception, where we can identify Dante’s awareness for the beffa across the region of irony.

______

WORKS CITED

Alighieri, Dante. Lettera a Cangrande , http://www.classicitaliani.it/dante/cangran.htm Bacchelli, Riccardo. “Da Dite a Malebolge: la tragedia delle porte chiuse e la farsa dei ponti rotti”, in Giornale storico della letteratura italiana , CXXXI (1954), pp. 1-32. Bachtin, Michail. L’autore e l’eroe: Teoria letteraria e scienze umane , Torino: Einaudi Editore, 2000. Bergson, Henri. Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of Comic , San Bernardino: Wildside Press, 2008. Baudelaire, Charles. “L’essence du rire et généralement du comique danse les arts plastiques”, in Oeuvres complètes , Paris: Gallimard, 1976, pp. 525- 543. Borsellino, Nino. La tradizione del comico , Milano: Garzanti, 1986. Clark, Michael. “Humor and Incongruity”, in Philosophy , Vol. 45, No. 171, (1970), pp. 20-32. Croce, Benedetto. La poesia di Dante , Bari: Laterza, 1966. Fontes-Baratto, Anna. “La Beffa dans le Decameron ”, in Formes et significations de la beffa dans la littérature italienne de la Renaissance , Paris: Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, 1972, pp. 11-44. 43 ANIELLO DI IORIO

Freud, Sigmund. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious , New York: Norton, 2004. Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays , Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. Graf, Arturo. “La demonologia di Dante”, in Miti, Leggende e Superstizioni del Medio Evo , Volume II. Bologna: Forni Editore, 1965, pp. 79-139. _____. Il diavolo , Roma: Salerno Editrice, 1980. Hollander, Robert and Jean Hollander. Inferno , New York: Anchor Books, 2002. _____. Purgatorio , New York: Anchor Books, 2004. _____. Paradiso , New York: Anchor Books, 2008. Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation , New York: Macmillan, 1964. Mandelbaum, Allen. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri: Inferno , New York: Bantam Classic, 1982. Machiavelli, Niccolò. Belfagor Arcidiavolo , Milano: Garzanti, 1999. Oring, Elliott. Jokes and Their Relations , Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1992. Pirandello, Luigi. “La commedia dei diavoli e la tragedia di Dante”, in Saggi, poesie e scritti vari , Milano: Mondadori Editore, 1960, pp. 343-361. Raskin, Victor. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor , Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1985. Rosenkranz, Karl. Estetica del brutto , Palermo: Aesthetica Edizioni, 2004. Ryan, J. C. “Inferno XXI: Virgil and Dante: A Study in Contrast”, in Italica , Vol. 59, No. 1, (1982), pp. 16-31. Sanguineti, Edoardo. Interpretazione di Malebolge , Firenze: Leo S. Olschki, 1961. Sozzi, Tommaso B. “Canto XXII”, in Lectura Dantis Scaligera Inferno , Firenze: Le Monnier Editore, 1967, pp. 757-793. Spitzer, Leo: “The Farcical Elements in Inferno XXI-XXIII”, in Three Essays on Dante , Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988, pp. 172-177. Vossler, Karl. “Poetry of the Divine Comedy ”, in Medieval Culture: An Introduction to Dante and His Times , New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing, 1958, pp. 269-277.

44