Orlando

[eskemp]

I read the Song of Roland a while back. It's an interesting story, and worth a read. It has some fun bits of heroism set out against a starkly racist background - or to be more honest, it's more about culture than race. Though the image of Roland at the pass is very impressive, it's a bit undercut by the insistence that the Saracens are devil-

Comments

[rob_donoghue]

Well, Damn. I've only read the French and it fell short for most of the reasons you Cite. I am now intensely curious about the italian.

[eskemp]

Ariosto at least (and I forget about Boiardo) was finishing the epic with also the intention of pleasing his patron, you see, who was claimed to be the descendant of Ruggiero (a virtuous and eventually Christianized Saracen) and Bradamante (a warrior maiden). He doesn't talk much crap about Saracens because, well, the guy funding his epic apparently had the blood in him

[eskemp]

Oh, and I should mention that I have the Oxford World's Classics edition of Furioso, translated by Guido Waldman, in case you run across it. It's a pretty loving work.

[rob_donoghue]

Excellent, I meant to ask. I'll keep an eye out.

[eurika]

Does it hurt to carry brain like yours around? I mean, something that big has to put a toll on your back and knees. :)

[eskemp]

Man, it's just literature. Heck, either Orlando is probably easier to read than Shakespeare if you're not trying for the original Italian.

If I had a really big brain I wouldn't be recommending it on the merits of stuff like "zomg he FLIES a hippogriff to the MOON and meets ST JOHN i am not kidding here you guys". But I am. Because it is pretty awesome.

[mattboggan]

"There is the inevitable conversion at the end, but really it's pretty much a footnote; where Song of Roland emphasized the battle between religion, the Orlando works are about characters."

It's because the Song of Roland is written/ composed in the 12th century whereas the Orlando Furioso is written in the 16th century. Hence the different takes on the matter.

But you probably now that, since you seem to know much more than I do about the origins of the Orlando Furioso.

[eskemp]

Different times, different nations, very different authors, to be sure. The Orlando works are decidedly much more cosmopolitan, which is very refreshing, but they have just as much zeal for telling a gripping story as The Song of Roland did.

Amusingly, in the Orlando works the Saracens sack the ever-loving hell out of Paris and kill a province-load of Frenchmen. If it weren't for the difference in centuries, it would almost seem like an Internet "oh yeah? Take that!"

[hot_pants]

You'll catch something from reading all those knightly romances.

Get on some Quixote next and marvel at 16th century multiculturalism as written by a Spaniard. I, of course, find your attention to the Saracens the most interesting part of the article, and I actually feel like Quixote is a testament against the Saracens-as-Satanists of previous literature.

[eskemp]

Mm, Quixote. You know, that's one of the ones that has seriously intimidated me; I think we have only the abridged text lying around our house (when two bibliophiles marry neither one will know the whole catalog of books). And I've kind of been of the attitude that I should read unabridged, yet it's a daunting proposal.

Of course, considering I've gotten through Three Kingdoms, Journey to the West and Outlaws of the Marsh, this is probably a specious fear and I should get on it. Thanks for the recommendation!

[hot_pants]

It's always intimidated me, too, and I haven't managed to get all the way through it yet. But, its actually a very friendly book once you get your head into it all the way. Its sheer size is the only real challenge.

But the amazing thing about Quixote is how totally modern it is, in terms of its humor and pluralism. I highly recommend it.