FAVOLE, PARABOLE, ISTORIE: THE GENEALOGY OF BOCCACCIO’S THEORY OF ALLEGORY A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by James C. Kriesel Martin Bloomer, Director Christian Moevs, Director Graduate Program in Medieval Studies Notre Dame, Indiana May 2008 UMI Number: 3309176 Copyright 2008 by Kriesel, James C. All rights reserved. UMI Microform3309176 Copyright2008 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 © Copyright 2008 James C. Kriesel FAVOLE, PARABOLE, ISTORIE: THE GENEALOGY OF BOCCACCIO’S THEORY OF ALLEGORY Abstract by James C. Kriesel This study maintains that allegory is the key to understanding Boccaccio’s poetics and literary theory. Boccaccio either composed allegorical fictions such as the Ameto, Amorosa visione, or Buccolicum carmen, or he theorized allegory’s role in literature’s semiotics, for example in his Trattatello on Dante and in the Genealogie deorum gentilium. Despite Boccaccio’s interest in allegory, it has not been understood that allegory is foundational for Boccaccio’s conception of literature. Traditionally, scholars have considered Boccaccio to be the first Italian “realist” author, who criticized simplistic notions of God, theology, and medieval allegory. This thesis reevaluates Boccaccio’s understanding of allegory in the wake of proto-Humanist defenses of classical literature and Dante’s valorization of vernacular fiction. Chapters 1-2 contextualize allegory within medieval literary theory. Medieval debates about allegory turned on two questions: what texts are allegorical and how are they allegorical? Chapter 3 suggests that Boccaccio represents the culmination of medieval literary theory because he develops a theory of allegory universally applicable to all texts. Rather than prioritize the historical and figural semiotics of the Bible over fiction, James C. Kriesel Boccaccio suggests that all texts and literatures are equally allegorical, and thus communicate similar truths and have similar value. Boccaccio’s allegorical literary theory allows him to justify the coherence of his own diverse writings, synthesize the Italian and Latin cultural projects of Dante and Petrarch, and valorize secular fiction. Chapter 4 treats Boccaccio’s allegorical use of the erotic in the Ameto and Amorosa visione. Boccaccio’s early fictions experiment with literary semiotics as a system in their own right, without being justified by theology or philosophy. In polemic with Dante, whose fiction signifies in relation to Biblical prefiguration and metaphysics, symbolized by the ideal erotic, Boccaccio’s signify in relation to the real and the physical, symbolized by the mundane erotic. Chapter 5 suggests that Boccaccio’s Corbaccio functions as an Ovidian remedium for readers who do not read allegorically. Based on elegy’s connection, as developed in Ovid’s amatory writings, between loving, reading, and writing, the Corbaccio uses hatred as a metaphor for the literal reading of women and literature. The Conclusion briefly discusses allegory in the Decameron. For my family, the American and the Italian ii CONTENTS Acknowledgments...............................................................................................................v Chapter 1: Introduction Boccaccio and Allegory: the Historiographical Context..............1 Chapter 2: Allegory and Medieval Literary Theory.........................................................17 2.1. Introduction....................................................................................................17 2.2. The Historical Development of Allegory......................................................19 2.3. Conclusion.....................................................................................................39 Chapter 3: The Genealogy of Boccaccio’s Theory of Allegory.......................................42 3.1. Introduction....................................................................................................42 3.2. The Study of Boccaccio’s Literary Theory....................................................44 3.3. The Trattatello in laude di Dante: Allegory and Poetry, Fiction and Scripture .......................................................................................................................50 3.4. The Genealogie deorum gentilium: Fiction, Allegory, and Syncretic Poetics .......................................................................................................................63 3.5. The Genealogies of Literature: Boccaccio’s Literary History.......................85 3.6. Conclusion...................................................................................................103 Chapter 4: Reading and Writing the Erotic: Boccaccio’s Early Allegorical Poetry.......106 4.1. Introduction..................................................................................................106 4.2. Dante and Allegory in the Ameto and Amorosa visione..............................109 4.3. Re-Embodying the Erotic: Boccaccio and Neoplatonism...........................118 4.4. Re-Envisioning the Erotic: Boccaccio’s Redemption of Erotic Poetics......134 4.5. Re-Reading the Erotic: Boccaccio and Ulysses...........................................165 4.6. Re-Narrating the Real: Boccaccio and the Narrative of Creation................187 4.7. Conclusion...................................................................................................204 Chapter 5: Hating the Corpus: the Corbaccio and Misinterpretation.............................208 5.1. Introduction..................................................................................................208 5.2. Ovid’s Literary Love: Writing, Interpretation, and Textual Intercourse.....213 5.2.1. The Love of Art: Ovid’s Ars amatoria and Failed Lovers.................218 5.2.2. The Love of Art: Ovid’s Ars amatoria and Fiction............................244 5.2.3. The Hatred of Fiction: Ovid’s Remedia and Misreading....................259 iii 5.3. Misreading: from Fortune to Shipwreck......................................................268 5.3.1. The Literal Reading of Women..........................................................268 5.3.2. The Literal Reading of Literature.......................................................276 5.4. Literal Misreading: the Hatred of Literature................................................296 5.5. Conclusion...................................................................................................321 Chapter 6: Conclusion Allegory and the Decameron.....................................................325 Bibliography...................................................................................................................345 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS During an extended period of research, professional training, and personal growth, it is inevitable that one’s advisors become friends and that one’s friends become advisors. “If anyone ever needed or held dear or received enjoyment from” advisors and friends, “I am certainly to be numbered among those.” While I cannot thank properly the people who have influenced me and my work, I hope that this dissertation may be a sign of the love and the care that I feel towards all who have supported me. It has been an honor to have worked with the exceptional scholars and more importantly the exceptional people that served on my dissertation committee. Profs. Martin Bloomer and Zygmunt Barański have tirelessly guided my intuitions about the originality and significance of Boccaccio’s literary theory, and are responsible for my thinking about Boccaccio’s relationship to Dante and to the classics. Thank you both for your friendship, expertise, and generosity. Profs. Theodore Cachey Jr. and Christian Moevs have commented extensively on drafts of this manuscript, and are responsible for my formation as an Italian scholar and teacher, as well as my love of Italian literature. Thank you for believing that I had something original to contribute, and for showing me how say it. Thank you for your kindness and your guidance. Due to its unique resources and staff, the Medieval Institute at Notre Dame was the only place where this research could have been completed. First and foremost, my deepest gratitude goes to Prof. Thomas Noble, who has influenced this project in v everyway. From my first year in the Institute, Prof. Noble made it possible for me to pursue a sui generis academic formation that included two extended periods of study in Italy. Without his institutional and financial support, as well as his contributions to my understanding of medieval history, neither my degree nor this research would have been possible. It is also a pleasure to thank Margaret Cinninger, Roberta Baranowski, Linda Major, and Marina Smyth for their friendship and for their help with all the challenges that a PhD program offers. Other faculty who have contributed to my understanding of the Middle Ages and Italy, and who have my sincerest thanks include Profs. John Welle, Michael Lapidge, Frank Mantello, Colleen Ryan-Scheutz, Margaret Meserve, and Daniel Sheerin. A special note of thanks goes to Profs. Jerry Reedy and Martin Gunderson of Macalester College, who fostered my love of literature and intellectual curiosity during my undergraduate degree. My research has also had the generous financial support of numerous institutions and persons. In addition to the University of Notre Dame, I would like to thank the US Fulbright Commission for supporting a year of research in Italy. I am also grateful to the William Devers and Albert Ravarino families, who not only finance many aspects of Italian studies at Notre Dame, but have also funded my own research and training in Italy for multiple years, support and opportunities that are unimaginable anywhere else but Notre Dame. As a result of their generosity, I was able to collaborate with and study at two Italian research institutions, whom I thank for their warm welcome and the assistance they gave me. At the Accademia della Crusca in Florence, thanks go to the director of the Opera del Vocabolario Italiano, Prof. Pietro Beltrami, both for writing in support of my Fulbright application and for hosting me during my Fulbright year. Thanks are also vi
Description: