In both the Inferno and Dante’s Inferno, context is vital to understanding the message of the piece. In the Inferno, Dante meets historical Greek figures throughout his journey. Without knowing who the figures are and what kind of sins they committed during their lifetime, it is hard to identify why they are in Hell and what characterizes the level they are on. One example of this is in Canto XXX, when Virgil and Dante come upon Sinon the Greek in the 4th group of the 10th pouch of the 8th circle. Although clues are given as to Sinon’s crime, such as when Adam accuses him, saying “here you speak true; but you were not so true a witness there, when you were asked to tell the truth at Troy,” having a fuller knowledge of Sinon provides further insight into his place in hell. The story of Sinon and Troy is told solely in the Aeneid, written by Virgil, as part of his accusation of the Greeks being shrewd and fraudulent. The historical background provides insight as to why Virgil’s temper would be especially enraged upon seeing Sinon and why he would not want Dante to waste his time listening to Sinon and Adam bicker.
Comparatively, in Dante’s Inferno, those seen in the
circle of fraud specific to money and traitors, a similar scene is portrayed.
Dante and Virgil first enter a corporate building where they see money
launderers, those who cooked the books and those accused of insider trading,
all being punished by the literal nature of their crimes. Dante continues on
then to the frozen lake, where he bumps into Lizzie Borden who points out
Nikolai Ceausescu and his wife, Quisling and two men fighting. She comments
that the one knowing on the other one’s noggin will “chew your ear off” if you
ask him his story (Meredith). The two fighting seem similar to me to Sinon and
Adam arguing, portrayed more literally though, like the rest who committed
fraud. Again here, context is important in understanding why they are in that
level. The companies in the building shown include world.com and Credit
Lyonnais, and Virgil mentions Halliburton has their own building. Although some
context is given about Borden when she corrects Dante in the number of times
she stabbed her father and step mother. She then provides some background on
Ceausescu and Quisling. She says Quisling is a “household name” but one would
probably not understand that it is a noun that means a traitor who collaborates
with enemies occupying their country, just from Borden’s description.
Similarities can be drawn between the scenes encompassing the lower circles of
fraud but it is also important to have the historical background to fully
appreciate and understand what is happening.
While I agree that understanding the historical context of the various sinners in both Inferno & Dante’s Inferno, I would not agree that we, the audience, receive enough historical context within the poem or movie to fully understand a number of characters, all of which would enhance our understanding of their respective circles. For example, in the Inferno, the first person that Dante and Virgil speak to in the 8th ring, fifth pouch (Canto XXII), Ciampolo, is just referred to by name, although he provides quite a bit of information on other officials. With characters such as these, Dante assumes a certain level of knowledge of the political climate of the time, and much of our understanding of the climate comes from some of Dante’s first commenters.
ReplyDeleteThe same is true of the movie. In it, the only person who the writers of the movie doesn’t assume that the audience will know, or perhaps Dante wouldn’t know, is the man who killed Gandhi. Strom Thurmond, for example, is only explained based on the ring he is in (the Hypocrits). No other information is given on him – only those who know who he is will understand the commentary happening there. In both of these works, lack of detail allows a certain amount of “plausible deniability” of sorts; that is, that by not stating the details of each character’s life, common knowledge serves where slander or libel might be leveled against the creators.
I agree that the historical context and identity of many of the characters in both the poem, Inferno, and in the film, Dante’s Inferno. Knowing what exactly the people Dante meets did in their lives helps the reader/viewer to understand what could have caused them to end up in Hell. It is also important when trying to identify all the different sins. However, I think that it is more important to be able to identify all the characters in the movie than it is to identify all the characters in the poem. In the poem, Dante’s main point is to describe what Hell is like and the sins that will get people there, as well as making a political statement. Although the poem is over 700 years old, Dante’s point still comes across very clearly even without knowing each and every soul he meets. The film is meant to be satire and to “offend everyone.” This would not be possible if the viewer could not identify every character and know something about their background. Also, the viewer would not be able to identify the circles of Hell in the movie without knowing the people who appear in it. The poem is able to get the point across without the reader knowing each character, but the movie would not be effective at all without knowledge of the people who appear in it.
ReplyDeleteContext is definitely very important in both Inferno and Dante’s Inferno. It is useful in defining each circle in Hell. I believe that the poem was more successful at providing the necessary amount of context than the movie because most of the people Dante spoke to in the poem gave stories that included a short description of their sins. In the movie, we were usually provided with the names of each character, but aside from the lobbyists, we were not given very much useful information about why they were in Hell. I also agree that more details about each character could have been provided to help the reader identify who they were. However, I believe Dante’s primary purpose in writing Inferno was to council people against certain sins, rather than to poke fun at certain individuals. Therefore, it is more important that the reader is able to identify why these people are in Hell rather than exactly who they are. As someone who was unsure of who all the characters were in the poem, I believe I still understood the general idea of why they were in Hell, so I believe Dante was successful even with a small amount of context. On the other hand, the primary purpose of the movie was to be satirical. Because of this, knowing who the people are in Hell is significantly more important. Therefore the lack of context in the movie, where the characters don’t often provide explanations, is detrimental to its purpose.
ReplyDelete