Rare Experiences
Dennis
The experience of wonder no less than that of the sublime makes up
part of the aesthetics of rare experiences. Each depends on moments in
which we find ourselves struck by effects within nature whose power
over us depends on their not being common or everyday. Both wonder and
the sublime are also categories within the aesthetics of surprise and
the sudden, as is that favourite modern aesthetic category, shock.
Finally, they are both experiences tied to the visual taken in a
deeply intellectual way; they both lead us back to reflection on
ourselves and on our human powers; and they both have deep connections
to mathematics, as Kant showed in the case of what he called the
mathematical sublime, and to whatever link there might be between
mathematics and the most essential details of thinking itself. How we
think and how we are drawn to think about just this, rather than that,
will be the subject of this book.
(snip)
In the sublime, fear and surprise, power and danger occur in a rich
blend. The sublime could be called the aestheticization of fear.
Wonder, the most neglected of primary aesthetic experiences within
modernity, involves the aestheticization of DELIGHT, or of the
pleasure principle rather than the death principle, whose agent within
aesthetic experience is the sublime. (Philip Fisher, _Wonder, The
Rainbow and the Aesthetics of Rare Experiences_)
*************************************
Soule of the Age !
The applause ! DELIGHT ! the WONDER of our Stage !
My Shakespeare, rise;
*************************************
Every Man in His Humour, Jonson
P R O L O G U E.
Though Need make many Poets, and some such
As Art and Nature have not better'd much;
Yet ours, for want, hath not so lov'd the Stage,
As he dare serve th'ill Customs of the Age,
Or purchase your DELIGHT at such a rate,
As, for it, he himself must justly hate:
To make a child now swadled, to proceed
Man, and then shoot up in one beard and weed,
Past threescore years: or, with three rusty swords,
And help of some few foot-and-half-foot words,
Fight over York, and Lancasters long jars,
And in the Tyring house bring wounds to scars.
He rather prays, you will be pleas'd to see
One such to day, as other plays should be;
Where neither Chorus wafts you o're the seas,
Nor creaking Throne comes down, the boys to please;
Nor nimble Squib is seen, to make afeard
The Gentlewomen; nor roul'd Bullet heard
To say, it Thunders; nor tempestuous Drum
Rumbles, to tell you when the Storm doth come;
But Deeds, and Language, such as men do use:
And Persons, such as ComOEdy would chuse,
When she would shew an Image of the Times,
And sport with Humane Follies, not with Crimes.
Except, we make 'em such by loving still
Our popular Errors, when we know th' are ill.
I mean such Errors as you'll all confess
By laughing at them, they deserve no less:
Which when you heartily do, there's hope left, then,
You, that have so grac'd Monsters, may like Men.
************************************
Gabriel Harvey:
The younger sort takes much DELIGHT in Shakespeares Venus, & Adonis:
but his Lucrece, & his tragedie of Hamlet, Prince of Denmarke, haue it
in them, to please the wiser sort. ...
************************************
Sapho and Phao, John Lyly
The Prologue at the Black friars
Where the Bee can suck no honey, she leaveth her sting behind; and
where the Bear cannot find origanum to heal his grief, he blasteth all
other leaves with his breath. We fear it is like to fare so with us,
that seeing you cannot draw from our labors sweet content, you leave
behind you a sour mislike and with open reproach blame our good
meanings because you cannot reap your wonted mirths. Our intent was at
this time to move inward DELIGHT, not outward lightness; and to breed,
if it might be, soft smiling, not loud laughing; knowing it to the
wise to be as great pleasure to hear counsel mixed with wit, as to the
foolish to have sport mingled with rudeness. They were banished the
theater at Athens and from Rome hissed, that brought parasites on the
stage with apish actions, or fools with uncivil habits, or courtesans
with immodest words. We have endeavored to be as far from unseemly
speeches to make your ears glow, as we hope you will be from unkind
reports to make our cheeks blush. The griffin never spreadeth her
wings in the sun when she hath any sick feathers; yet have we ventured
to present our exercises before your judgments when we know them full
of weak matter, yielding rather ourselves to the courtesy which we
have ever found, than to the preciseness which we ought to fear.
************************************
Courtly Performances
Masking and Festivity in Castiglione's Book of the Courtier
Wayne A. Rebhorn
When the courtier's audience claps enthusiastically in response
to his performance and rewards him with the grace of its praise,
Castiglione defines its characteristic reaction with a most important
term: maraviglia. For instance, Ludovico da Canossa urges the
courtier
to use sprezzatura to hide the effort involved in difficult or
unusual
feats: "Because everyone knows the difficulty involved in matters
that
are rare and well done, whence facility in them generates great
marvel". Later, in Book II, Frederico Fregosa sums up his own advice
to the ideal courtier, again focusing on maraviglia as the response
he
should seek in his audience:
<<And, to conclude, I declare that it would be well for the Courtier
to know perfectly all we have said befits him, so that everything
possible may be easy for him, and that everyone may marvel at him and
he at no one...>>
These key passages leave no doubt that marvel or wonder is the basic
response the courtier seeks to arouse in everyone about him and that
it is essential for his social success.
During the sixteenth century, maraviglia (which also appeared
as the
verb maravigliarsi) embraced a wide variety of meanings, including
marvel, wonder, surprise, the unexpected, the extraordinary, the
monstrous, and the supernatural, and it indicated an intensity of
response ranging from mild surprise to total astonishment. Marvel was
the typical response elicited by displays of virtuosity, technical
feats, and witty word games like the double entendres that Bibbiena
declares "cause marvel rather than laughter" (II, 58, 278). On a
deeper level, marvel could also involve vibrant impressions of
beauty,
revelations of unimagined aspects of reality, or startling flashes of
insight into the strange truth of things. In either case, it meant
not
only a delight in being surprised, but an enthusiastic admiration for
the cleverness, intellectual inventiveness, and profundity of the
performer. Hence, it was a reaction that Renaissance artists
especially sought to produce by creating unusual, fantastic, bizarre,
and surprising works. In his Cortegiano, Castiglione uses maraviglia
in just this sense on several occasions, praising the marvelous music
produced by voice and viol playing in concert (II, 13, 209) and
lauding Sannazaro's poems 'con le maraviglie' (II, 35, 245). Since he
presents his ideal courtier as nothing less than the artist of his
own
personality, a virtuoso actor who has perfected his art to the point
where he can toss off the most demanding roles with the most assured
ease, it is singularly appropriate that his audience should respond
to
him with maraviglia, just as they would marvel at the incredible
beauties and ingenious creations of Raphael and Michelangelo.
(snip)
Another way to understand yet more fully the response involved in
Castiglione's concept of maraviglia is to remember that from
antiquity
through the Renaissance, it was the expected and desired reaction to
paradox. Both Cicero and Quintilian translated the Greek term
paradokson (paradox) appropriately with words derived from the Latin
verb 'admirer', meaning to wonder or marvel at, and later in the
sixteenth century, the English rhetorician Puttenham, when
considering
paradox as a figure of speech, instructively called it "the
wonderer".
For all of them, paradox was a species of serio ludere, a playing
with
words, concepts, or value systems that could be a gay, frivolous
amusement, and engrossing pastime, or a profound experience
intimating
truths and realities far beyond normal experience. Thus, although
paradox always depends on an audience's delight in surprise, the
reaction of wonder it produces may include a number of different
emotional intensities and involvements, from raised eyebrows to
openmouthed astonishment. Upon closer scrutiny, the marveling
response
to paradox actually turns out to be two-fold: the paradox akin to
bafflement; then it stimulates the puzzled mind to an exploration or
questioning of what it has experienced, thus intensifying its
involvement in the experience and in some cases, at least, leading to
the perception of deeper truths. The wonder produced by paradox is
itself ultimately paradoxical: the simultaneous experience of
mystification and revelation.
As the preceding analysis would suggest, the maraviglia
aroused by
the ideal courtier's performance might productively be considered a
response to paradox, especially since it invites definition in
paradoxical terms, whether it is considered a matter of disciplined
spontaneity, the easy resolution of the difficult, or the artful
imitation of nature. Moreover, Castiglione's courtier himself can be
read as a creature of paradox: while he is a man like all men who has
neither transcendent authority nor superhuman abilities, strives hard
to appear average, and values 'mediocrita' as his chief virtue; at
the
same time, he performs with an ease and mastery that suggest absolute
superiority to the physical and social restrictions that bind
ordinary
mortals. To such a paradoxical performer, as to his paradoxical
performance, the response of marvel thus seems most fitting indeed.
At times, this response seems little more than a simple
pleasure in
wit and inventiveness; the courtier's audience admires without
intense
involvement his ability as a performer to play with words and
entertain them with stunts and clever stories, just as they admire
Bibbiena for his comic performance during the second evening. At
other
times, the response seems far deeper, and it derives its intensity
precisely from the fact that the courtier represents for his creators
the realization of their profoundest needs and desires. The image he
creates unites the culture's ideal of witty sophistication and
urbanity, the artful refinement of civilization at its height, to its
happy dream of prelapsarian innocence, simplicity, and nature. The
courtier is both the first citizen in the City of Man and an image of
Adam reborn in Paradise. In fact, all the major attributes that
define
his style have a basically double character, expressing both the
conscious ideals and the unconscious dreams of Castiglione's culture:
his dignita del gentilhomo corresponds to his worldly position and
the
values of civilization while it recalls Adam's more fundamental, God-
given dignity; his grace reveals an easy mastery of social forms and
at the same time invokes the state of grace man enjoyed in Eden; his
simplicity and naturalness indicate the civilized man's perfect
taste,
which is free from affectation, but they simultaneously suggest
Adam's
innocence and harmony with nature. The observers wondering response
to
the courtier thus testifies to the pleasure they experience as he
fulfills their dreams. Moreover, in doing so, he satisfies two even
more profound needs: their need to find order in the world and to
feel
that man is truly free. In effect, the courtier provides his audience
with a sense of congruence between what they deeply hope to see and
what they actually do see; he creates the vision of the ideal
achieved
in the midst of an imperfect historical world. The courtly performer
momentarily obliterates the gap between 'is' and 'ought,' between
reality and desire; he gives a taste of Eden to men who still eat the
fruit of a fallen earth. Moreover, in addition to this intimation of
order, he gives them a glimpse of freedom. For Castiglione, as for
most others during the Renaissance, freedom did not come from
rebelling against the law, but from mastering and fulfilling it
perfectly and thus rising above it to what constitutes man's only
real
independence (see IV, 21,473). This is precisely the freedom the
courtier manifests as he creates his image of total mastery over
limitations of every sort and plays every role he undertakes to
absolute perfection. He is thus a perfect expression of order and a
perfect expression of freedom - one final paradox to arouse the
ecstatic wonder of his audience.
************************************
1571
Letter to Bartholomew Clerke 1571
Dedication in Latin to Bartholomew Clerke's Translation of The
Courtier (1571/1572)
[translated by B. M. Ward]
Edward Vere, Earl of Oxford, Lord Great Chamberlain of England,
Viscount Bulbeck and Baron Scales and Badlesmere to the Reader --
Greeting.
A frequent and earnest consideration of the translation of
Castiglione's Italian work, which has now for a long time been
undertaken and finally carried out by my friend Clerke, has caused me
to waver between two opinions: debating in my mind whether I should
preface it by some writing and letter of my own, or whether I should
do no more than study it with a mind full of gratitude. The first
course seemed to demand greater skill and art than I can lay claim
to,
the second to be a work of no less good-will and application. To do
both, however, seemed to combine a task of delightful industry with
an
indication of special good-will.
I have therefore undertaken the work, and I do so the more willingly
in order that I may lay a laurel wreath of my own on the translation
in which I have studied this book, and also to ensure that neither my
good-will (which is very great) should remain unexpressed, nor that
my
skill (which is small) should seem to fear to face the light and the
eyes of men.
It is no more than its due that praises of every kind should be
rendered to this work descriptive of a Courtier. It is indeed every
way right, and one may say almost inevitable, that with the highest
and greatest praises I should address both the author and the
translator, and even more the great patroness of so great a work,
whose name alone on the title-page gives it a right majestic and
honorable introduction.
For what more difficult, more noble, or more magnificent task has
anyone ever undertaken than our author Castiglione, who has drawn for
us the figure and model of a courtier, a work to which nothing can be
added, in which there is no redundant word, a portrait which we shall
recognize as that of a highest and most perfect type of man. And so,
*although nature herself has made nothing perfect in every detail,
yet
the manners of men exceed in dignity that with which nature has
endowed them; and he who surpasses others has here surpassed himself
and has even out-done nature, which by no one has ever been
surpassed*. Nay more: however elaborate the ceremonial, whatever the
magnificence of the court, the splendor of the courtiers, and the
multitude of spectators, he has been able to lay down principles for
the guidance of the very Monarch himself.
Again, Castiglione has vividly depicted more and even greater things
than these. For who has spoken of princes with greater gravity? Who
has discoursed of illustrious women with a more ample dignity? No one
has written of military affairs more eloquently, more aptly about
horse-racing, and more clearly and admirably about encounters under
arms on the field of battle. I will say nothing of the fitness and
the
excellence with which he has depicted the beauty of chivalry in the
noblest persons. Nor will I refer to his delineations in the case of
those persons who cannot be courtiers, when he alludes to some
notable
defect or to some ridiculous character, or to some deformity of
appearance. Whatever is heard in the mouths of men in casual talk and
in society, whether apt and candid or villainous and shameful, that
he
has set down in so natural a manner that it seems to be acted before
our very eyes.
Again, to the credit of the translator of so great a work, a writer
too who is no mean orator, must be added a new glory of language. For
although Latin has come down to us from the ancient city of Rome, a
city in which the study of eloquence flourished exceedingly, it has
now given back its features for use in modern courts as a *polished
language of an excellent temper, fitted out with royal pomp and
possessing admirable dignity*. All this my good friend Clerke has
done, combining exceptional genius with *wonderful eloquence*. For he
has resuscitated that dormant quality of *fluent* discourse. He has
recalled those ornaments and lights which he had laid aside, for use
in connection with subjects most worthy of them. For this reason he
deserves all the more honor, because that to great subjects -- and
they are indeed great -- he has applied the greatest lights and
ornaments.
For who is clearer in his use of words? Or richer in the dignity of
his sentences? Or who can conform to the variety of circumstances
with
greater art? If weighty matters are under consideration, he unfolds
his theme in a solemn and majestic rhythm; if the subject is familiar
and facetious, he makes use of words that are witty and amusing. When
therefore he writes with precise and well-chosen words, with
skillfully constructed and crystal-clear sentences, and with every
art
of dignified rhetoric, it cannot be but that some noble quality
should
be felt to proceed from his work. To me indeed it seems, when I read
this courtly Latin, that I am listening to Crassus, Antonius and
Hortensius, discoursing on this very theme.
And, great as all these qualities are, our translator has wisely
added
one single surpassing title of distinction to recommend his work. For
indeed, what more effective action could he have taken to make his
work fruitful of good results than to dedicate his Courtier to our
most illustrious and noble Queen, in whom all courtly qualities are
personified, together with those diviner and truly celestial virtues?
For there is no pen so skillful or powerful, no kind of speech so
clear, that is not left behind by her own surpassing virtue. It was
therefore an excellent display of wisdom on the part of our
translator
to seek out as a patroness of his work one who was of surpassing
virtue, of wisest mind, of soundest religion, and cultivated in the
highest degree in learning and literary studies.
Lastly, if the noblest attributes of the wisest princes, the safest
protection of a flourishing commonwealth, the greatest qualities of
the best citizens, by her own merit and in the opinion of all,
continually encompass her around; surely to obtain the protection of
that authority, to strengthen it with gifts, and to mark it with the
superscription of her name, is a work which, while worthy of all
monarchs, is most worthy of our own Queen, to whom alone is due all
the praise of all the muses and all the glory of literature.
Given at the Royal Court on the 5th of January 1571.
http://www.elizabethanauthors.com/vere106.htm
************************************
He that is with him is Amorphus
a Traveller, one so made out of the mixture and shreds
of forms, that himself is truly deform'd. He walks
most commonly with a Clove or Pick-tooth in his
Mouth, he is the very mint of Complement, all his Be-
haviours are printed, his Face is another Volume of
Essayes; and his Beard an Aristrachus. (Jonson, Cynthia's Revels,
III,ii)
Amorphus. That's good, but how Pythagorical?
Phi. I, Amorphus. Why Pythagorical Breeches?
Amo. O most kindly of all, 'tis a conceit of that fortune,
I am bold to hug my Brain for.
Pha. How is't, exquisite Amorphus?
Amo. O, I am rapt with it, 'tis so fit, so proper,
so happy. --
Phi. Nay do not rack us thus?
Amo. I never truly relisht my self before. Give me
your Ears. Breeches Pythagorical, by reason of their trans-
migration into several shapes.
Mor. Most RARE, in sweet troth.
*************************************
Dennis