Morons Abound

[stlukesguild]

WTF?

http://www.geneveith.com/2012/03/15/banning-dante/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturenews/9140869/Dantes-Divine-Comedy-offensive-and-should-be-banned.html

http://www.gherush92.com/news.asp?id=2986&tipo=A

:cuss:

[JBI]

Well, if Dante can put people in hell in hell, I guess some cry babies can try to put ancient literary Geniuses in their politically-incorrect hell. The problem is, these people are just looking to employ themselves.

[mortalterror]

They have a point. When I read the Divine Comedy I thought it was racist, homophobic, anti-Islamist and anti-Semitic too. You are either a person who gets upset about those things or you aren't. I don't.

[OrphanPip]

I don't think their intention was ever to sincerely get the book banned. They make it reasonably clear in their response that their intention is to call attention to a tendency to uncritically value canonical text without an awareness of the fact that they perpetuate problematic representations of certain groups. They feel that certain issues aren't adequately addressed in the critical discourse around the work.

It's a pretty mundane position being blown way out of proportion.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, if one is going to ban Dante on those grounds, we might as well ban Shakespeare, Milton . . . or any author who wrote longer ago than 40 years, because one can find prejudice in almost anything written in the past (and present).

Still, this seems like a moot complaint. What school even teaches Dante anymore?

[JBI]

Well, as my Italian teacher phrased it, Italy has two great overarching books in its canon that everyone knows and has read, the Comedia, and the Betrothed.

[Darcy88]

I say ban those who would ban books. Carve out some vast swathe of land in the Canadian North or the inner belly of South America and let them colonize it like the Menonites of old. They can live their idylic lives of ignorance, bothered not by the discomfiting truths and sights of art.

The book-burning fundies should take a moment to think on the potential karmic hazards their behavior invites. Maybe all the liberals will some day in a Robespierrean fury go about like rabid hounds tearing to shreds all bibles and books of God in recompense for all the intolerance the fundamentalist far-wing of that side has shown. Eye for an eye.

[tomingram]

At least there are still a few people in this world who care enough about books to want certain books banned.

The fact that they noticed Dante's anti-Islamic, homosexual, Semitic, tendencies means that they must have actually read Dante to begin with. And that's a good thing. Besides, perhaps if they manage to have Dante removed from classrooms, more students would be interested in reading the now controversial author.

Censorship, in today's world, might be a boon for authors. By singling out a book as dangerous, you encourage people to find it on the internet, where a volume like the Comedia can be found in its entirety, for free.

[Prince Smiles]

At least there are still a few people in this world who care enough about books to want certain books banned.

The fact that they noticed Dante's anti-Islamic, homosexual, Semitic, tendencies means that they must have actually read Dante to begin with. And that's a good thing. Besides, perhaps if they manage to have Dante removed from classrooms, more students would be interested in reading the now controversial author.

Censorship, in today's world, might be a boon for authors. By singling out a book as dangerous, you encourage people to find it on the internet, where a volume like the Comedia can be found in its entirety, for free.
__________________


Hear, hear! Excellent post!

[Kafka's Crow]

18 years old, on a hot dry summer afternoon, I read Inferno sitting in a cool, air conditioned university library reading room. I was shocked by all above. I was young, now I don't care. It saddens me when Dante's sources are completely ignored, specially the influence of Ibn 'Arabi on Divine Comedy. In spite of all sound and fury, humanity has common heritage and Dante's Inferno is as much a part of it as Ibn 'Arabi's Jehanna, the Renaissance glory of Florence is as much part of it as the re-awakening of the Greek discourse in Medieval al Andalusia and Baghdad. What people said in another age, normal things in their own normal lives, must not offend us because we live in a different time but it pains me to see the same old prejudices resurfacing in our own seemingly enlightened age.

[MarkBastable]

The fact that they noticed Dante's anti-Islamic, homosexual, Semitic, tendencies means that they must have actually read Dante to begin with.


I wouldn't bet on it.

I mean, I've noticed "Dante's anti-Islamic, **homosexual, Semitic tendencies", and I've never read a word of it. Not that I'm trying to ban it, but people who want to ban things don't necessarily feel it's obligatory to have personal experience of them.





**Actually, I haven't noticed this one. You're the first person to point out to me Dante's homosexual tendencies.

[Helga]

Well, if one is going to ban Dante on those grounds, we might as well ban Shakespeare, Milton . . . or any author who wrote longer ago than 40 years, because one can find prejudice in almost anything written in the past (and present).

Still, this seems like a moot complaint. What school even teaches Dante anymore?

The University of Iceland does. every three years there is a course only about Dante's comedy. I am going to take it when it is offered again.

[PoeticPassions]

I'm against all kinds of censorship, especially of this kind. Sure, Dante's work may be offensive, but so are many works (as for being anti-Semitic and anti-homosexuality, well look in most holy books and you'll find the same thing). I do think it is okay to be critical of art, but to ban something (or have it forbidden in classrooms) that has had such an impact in the literary world and beyond seems really silly... and counterproductive. It would be better to have a dialogue about these things than to outright censor them.

[ChicagoReader]

Well, if one is going to ban Dante on those grounds, we might as well ban Shakespeare, Milton . . . or any author who wrote longer ago than 40 years, because one can find prejudice in almost anything written in the past (and present).

Still, this seems like a moot complaint. What school even teaches Dante anymore?

My University has classes on both Dante and Milton as well. I think most Universities contain core literature classes that at least touch on these texts as well.

[Pierre Menard]

"Schoolchildren and university students who studied the work lacked "the filters" to appreciate its historical context and were being fed a poisonous diet of anti-Semitism and racism, the group said."

Aside from the offensive and rather silly assumption that students (especially uni students) can't understand something in a historical context, I also have to question how productive and intelligent the "Well, instead of developing a filter within these students, let's ban the work instead" attitude is...well, actually, I already know the answer - it's both unintelligent and unproductive.

[Lokasenna]

This is kind of similar to that new edition of Huckleberry Finn that removes all uses of the n-word. And it is similarly unacceptable.

You simply cannot judge a 13th century Florentine by modern moral standards - you have to take it, warts and all. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the views espoused in it, but it is only by providing you with the full context of it that you can come to an informed decision about how you interpret that work.

It may be well outside my area of study, but I can recognize that the Divine Comedy is one of the greatest masterpieces of world literature, and that the world would be a much poorer place without it.

[Alexander III]

I wouldnt worry, the next generation will uplift discrimination as a virtue after the nazification of tolerance by the previous generation.

In all seriousness though, it is people like this who are inspiring a new generation of right-winged, semi-fascist westerners. I mean, when you pull so far to the left, can anyone honestly be suprised that the next generation shall pull very far to the right just because they saw the stupidity and dangers of the otherside and they grew scared. Being extreem in one direction will always cause the next generation to be extreem in the opposite direction.

Alas, it seems that there will soon be a rise in neo-fascisim in Europe and America, simply because the Liberals of nowadays would not settle for moderation. As a student at Oxford, I can tell you guys that those clever folks of my generation are all to the right, very much to the right. At university the view of democrasy as little more than The Tyrany of The Masses is very popular. I have yet to meet any one on the left at uni. And from what I understand, a mere 20 years ago all the undergrads were on the left and there was no one on the right. Even all the professors are noticing the alarming shift in mentality.

I know that my post was a bit off-topic, but I have had this on my chest for a bit and saw this thread as a good oportunity to voice that which I saw and continoue to see more and more everyday.

Hitler no, but Mussolini is staring to be percieved as a great leader. On one had this **** is pleasing to me, for I am of the zeisgeist of my generation, on the other hand one must be cautious as tis a very deep stream we are crossing.

[JCamilo]

I suggest them to remove Muhammad by Osama Ben Laden, then Jew can be replaced to Nazi, Gays references must just be change to "Pimping", so modern audience won't be offended by it. Included those who elected Berlusconi.

It is good to know they just recently forgave dante, so his remains could be buried on his city... which the last remaining Aligheri replyied with a go to hell.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I wouldnt worry, the next generation will uplift discrimination as a virtue after the nazification of tolerance by the previous generation.

In all seriousness though, it is people like this who are inspiring a new generation of right-winged, semi-fascist westerners. I mean, when you pull so far to the left, can anyone honestly be suprised that the next generation shall pull very far to the right just because they saw the stupidity and dangers of the otherside and they grew scared. Being extreem in one direction will always cause the next generation to be extreem in the opposite direction.

Alas, it seems that there will soon be a rise in neo-fascisim in Europe and America, simply because the Liberals of nowadays would not settle for moderation. As a student at Oxford, I can tell you guys that those clever folks of my generation are all to the right, very much to the right. At university the view of democrasy as little more than The Tyrany of The Masses is very popular. I have yet to meet any one on the left at uni. And from what I understand, a mere 20 years ago all the undergrads were on the left and there was no one on the right. Even all the professors are noticing the alarming shift in mentality.

I know that my post was a bit off-topic, but I have had this on my chest for a bit and saw this thread as a good oportunity to voice that which I saw and continoue to see more and more everyday.

Hitler no, but Mussolini is staring to be percieved as a great leader. On one had this **** is pleasing to me, for I am of the zeisgeist of my generation, on the other hand one must be cautious as tis a very deep stream we are crossing.

I don't think this has anything to do with a left/right dichotmony at all. The moronic PC/dumbing down brigage prevade everywhere. The best approach to take is to completely ignore them, and like a bad smell, hope they'll go away. If I was teaching Dante and was told this I would continue to do so and give extra classes after school for free. This is the way to try and beat them. Kiss my...

[Charles Darnay]

"Schoolchildren and university students who studied the work lacked "the filters" to appreciate its historical context and were being fed a poisonous diet of anti-Semitism and racism, the group said."

Aside from the offensive and rather silly assumption that students (especially uni students) can't understand something in a historical context, I also have to question how productive and intelligent the "Well, instead of developing a filter within these students, let's ban the work instead" attitude is...well, actually, I already know the answer - it's both unintelligent and unproductive.

I agree with you on this. It is an attack on students' intelligence. If you are the type of person who takes the time to read the Comedia, you will know at least enough about the historic context to understand that Dante's world was not our own. And if you are jumping on the bandwagon of "this book is evil" without having read it, than you are a terrible person, much like most uninformed bandwagon jumpers.

[G L Wilson]

Dante sounds like the Devil. I don't believe it.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

My University has classes on both Dante and Milton as well. I think most Universities contain core literature classes that at least touch on these texts as well.

I meant it being taught in K-12 classes, which seems quite rare. Universities can teach whatever they want, at least in America (up to a point, of course).

[tomingram]

When most universities in the US are diploma mills, who really cares what they do and do not teach? It's tough to fail even the most incapable of students -- they are the majority.

Not that it's the student's fault. Look at the high schools that matriculate them on to the next level!

The precocious students will seek out the good stuff, and they will talk to their professors about it on their own time.

The real problem isn't these idiot censors. The real problem is the quality of education, from pre-K on up. Only when we start churning out quality students will these ridiculous calls for censorship end.

Wake up call: I sit next to Senior English majors who cannot compose a paragraph of coherent argument.

[OrphanPip]

This is kind of similar to that new edition of Huckleberry Finn that removes all uses of the n-word. And it is similarly unacceptable.

You simply cannot judge a 13th century Florentine by modern moral standards - you have to take it, warts and all. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the views espoused in it, but it is only by providing you with the full context of it that you can come to an informed decision about how you interpret that work.

It may be well outside my area of study, but I can recognize that the Divine Comedy is one of the greatest masterpieces of world literature, and that the world would be a much poorer place without it.

I'll repeat that I think the article they published proposed banning Dante as a deliberately provocative stance, rather than as a serious proposal. Their main point was to call attention to how these texts (like Dante's Divine Comedy), even when we take them in their historical context, can still contribute to problematic ideas in the present.

For example, the depiction of Mohammed as being mutilated in hell with his entrails hanging out is certainly understandable in the context of 14th century European attitudes to Muslims, and we shouldn't really expect anything else from Dante. However, that doesn't mean teaching such a scene in a high school setting is not capable of contributing to an already problematic public discourse of anti-Islamic sentiment.

Acknowledging this is more conductive to a learning environment than simply tip-toeing around the issue.

There is certainly a degree of cognitive dissonance at work if we as a society would condemn the propagation of contemporary literature that is highly discriminatory, but somehow say that the presence of such in older works of literature should just be assumed to be unimportant because they are established. They are legitimate questions that should be discussed. Certainly, banning Dante is not a reasonable approach, but making extreme statements is a useful way of drawing attention to a debate which might have some actual substance to it. How do we integrate these texts into the contemporary culture is a worthwhile question, and it is not a new question.

Ironically, Dante himself tries to deal with this issue in the Divine Comedy when he struggles with the integration of the Classical authors into a Christian world view. If the problems created by changing values was legitimate enough for Dante to deal with, why should we be so quick to dismiss it today? It is not as if we do not consistently re-evaluate the canon, some authors (like Dante) tend to be central and don't budge, but those on the periphery of the canon are not so secure. If the same issues were raised by these authors for the removal of a marginal text from the syllabus of secondary schools, I doubt we'd see the same outrage over "PC" nonsense.

Also, the throwing around of "PC gone mad" or whatever other media buzzwords one wants to lash onto is a lazy answer. It is not a response to the argument being made, nor is it even a usefully defined accusation. People in general have very different ideas of what counts as PC and the complaint is so over-used, and often against very reasonable complaints, that it is rendered completely vacuous.

[G L Wilson]

...the depiction of Mohammed as being mutilated in hell with his entrails hanging out is certainly understandable in the context of 14th century European attitudes to Muslims, and we shouldn't really expect anything else from Dante...

In Dante's Inferno, if I remember correctly, quite a few Popes were to be found also.

[OrphanPip]

In Dante's Inferno, if I remember correctly, quite a few Popes were to be found also.

Ya, they respond to that criticism in their response posted by stlukes, but I don't particularly care to try and defend or criticise Dante directly. However, the reason for Mohammed being tortured is precisely because of Islam. Where as, the Popes are being punished for whatever variety of sin or corruption Dante accuses them of. So, we can't exactly say that Dante is just punishing everybody, because he doesn't.

[G L Wilson]

Ya, they respond to that criticism in their response posted by stlukes, but I don't particularly care to try and defend or criticise Dante directly. However, the reason for Mohammed being tortured is precisely because of Islam. Where as, the Popes are being punished for whatever variety of sin or corruption Dante accuses them of. So, we can't exactly say that Dante is just punishing everybody, because he doesn't.

I am anticlerical, therefore I like the thought of a few clerics floating in hell.

[MarkBastable]

I'll repeat that I think the article they published proposed banning Dante as a deliberately provocative stance, rather than as a serious proposal. Their main point was to call attention to how these texts (like Dante's Divine Comedy), even when we take them in their historical context, can still contribute to problematic ideas in the present.

For example, the depiction of Mohammed as being mutilated in hell with his entrails hanging out is certainly understandable in the context of 14th century European attitudes to Muslims, and we shouldn't really expect anything else from Dante. However, that doesn't mean teaching such a scene in a high school setting is not capable of contributing to an already problematic public discourse of anti-Islamic sentiment.

Acknowledging this is more conductive to a learning environment than simply tip-toeing around the issue.

There is certainly a degree of cognitive dissonance at work if we as a society would condemn the propagation of contemporary literature that is highly discriminatory, but somehow say that the presence of such in older works of literature should just be assumed to be unimportant because they are established. They are legitimate questions that should be discussed. Certainly, banning Dante is not a reasonable approach, but making extreme statements is a useful way of drawing attention to a debate which might have some actual substance to it. How do we integrate these texts into the contemporary culture is a worthwhile question, and it is not a new question.

Ironically, Dante himself tries to deal with this issue in the Divine Comedy when he struggles with the integration of the Classical authors into a Christian world view. If the problems created by changing values was legitimate enough for Dante to deal with, why should we be so quick to dismiss it today? It is not as if we do not consistently re-evaluate the canon, some authors (like Dante) tend to be central and don't budge, but those on the periphery of the canon are not so secure. If the same issues were raised by these authors for the removal of a marginal text from the syllabus of secondary schools, I doubt we'd see the same outrage over "PC" nonsense.

Also, the throwing around of "PC gone mad" or whatever other media buzzwords one wants to lash onto is a lazy answer. It is not a response to the argument being made, nor is it even a usefully defined accusation. People in general have very different ideas of what counts as PC and the complaint is so over-used, and often against very reasonable complaints, that it is rendered completely vacuous.

You'll get no thanks for being reasonable and measured. We're having one of our periodic bouts of sacred indignation, and there's no remedy but to wait it out, like spring rain. Or an attack of piles.

[JCamilo]

Ya, they respond to that criticism in their response posted by stlukes, but I don't particularly care to try and defend or criticise Dante directly. However, the reason for Mohammed being tortured is precisely because of Islam. Where as, the Popes are being punished for whatever variety of sin or corruption Dante accuses them of. So, we can't exactly say that Dante is just punishing everybody, because he doesn't.

He does not place every muslin in hell, there is 1 or 2 in limbo, but we can say that even dante nods or something as such.

Anyways, the thing is Dante needs no defense. The nature of his arbirtrary judgement, his medieval bias, etc. is well know. Also, I doubt so many people read dante for real, to be affected by it. He suffered stronger criticism before, even during his life, one of the reasons he had a fall from grace during enlightment exactly for his moralism and righteouness, and this changed what? If italians do not want to read Dante, then it is worst for them, not for him.

In other hand, it is easy to say how stupidy it is. A country that is in the hand of a misognist creepy like Berlusconi for decades, that indeed has some anti-gay and anti-islamic views, growing xenophobia is worried to banish Dante, who is the very founder of the idea of their nation. Are them going to blame it on 3,4 passages where Dante acts medieval or find their own mistakes? Burning down their past, full of mistakes, which includes Dante's hell is probally the dumbest way to make that country be forgiven and get in heaven.

[Charles Darnay]

You'll get no thanks for being reasonable and measured. We're having one of our periodic bouts of sacred indignation, and there's no remedy but to wait it out, like spring rain. Or an attack of piles.

I initially read this as "...an attack of pies" - and yes, I think the equating of such debates to an attack of pies is quite correct. You can't do anything about it, it won't last too long, and when all is said and cleaned-up it's hilarious.