Troubled Ascent Towards Perfection: The Myth of Amor and Psyche
Transcript
Troubled Ascent Towards Perfection: The Myth of Amor and Psyche
Troubled Ascent Towards Perfection: The Myth of Amor and Psyche in Giovan Battista Marino’s L’Adone Sofie Kluge MLN, Volume 128, Number 1, January 2013 (Italian Issue), pp. 103-123 (Article) Published by Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/mln.2013.0010 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/505342 Accessed 16 Mar 2017 05:54 GMT Troubled Ascent Towards Perfection The Myth of Amor and Psyche in Giovan Battista Marino’s L’Adone ❦ Sofie Kluge As I intend to show by a reading of its fourth canto, Giovan Battista Marino’s L’Adone (1623) flaunts a paradoxical coexistence of what appears to be mutually exclusive views of ancient myth. Pathetic, dramatic, humorous, and erotic uses of myth align with philosophical, moral, and meta-aesthetic explorations to create a complex amalgamation of the two major postclassical mythographic traditions and a peculiar hybrid of myth and allegory. In this juxtaposition of the various trends of poetic and didactic mythography, Marino followed the general tendency of the baroque literary writing of myth. In the baroque period, the two major mythographic traditions renegotiated the terms of their relation. Since Antiquity, they had been cultivated side by side in relative peace and harmony. However, at this particular moment in history, didactic and poetic uses of myth grew mutually hostile. The disinterested, scientific and historicizing outlook guiding the humanists’ meticulous editions of classical texts and the resulting new ‘disinterested’ poetic mythography were at odds with the Inquisitors’ demand that art and literature reveal moral truths. Transmitting pagan tales of rape and incest, lasciviousness and adultery, baroque mythological literature became the principal scene of the seventeenth-century polemic conference between delectare and docere.1 1 Compare Carlo Calcaterra’s view (Parnaso in rivolta, 1940) of Seicento literature not as the product of moral disengagement or bad taste, but as the manifestation of an MLN 128 (2013): 103–123 © 2013 by The Johns Hopkins University Press 104 Sofie Kluge The outcome of this conference was not immediately harmonious. However, it was literary. In the seventeenth century, the two major postclassical mythographic traditions fused into a binary, both poetic and didactic, mythography. Their interaction and mutual relativization determined the literary expression of baroque mythological texts, which display both a perplexing and fascinating mosaic of mythographic traditions. Baroque mythological literature is a ‘mirrorof-myth’, in the same sense that a work on the various historical, philosophical, moral, and political aspects of kingship is a ‘mirrorof-princes’. Sophisticated, intellectual, self-reflexive, erudite, and tradition-conscious to the point of pedantry, it reflects all the various forms in which classical myth had been transmitted through the centuries. However, most importantly, baroque mythography reflects the contemporary tension between pagan myth and Christian allegoresis. Bearing this in mind, I will subsequently analyse Marino’s rendering of the Amor and Psyche story in the fourth canto of L’Adone. I will consider the relationship between the morally ambiguous lyric part of the canto and the more unequivocal moralism of the opening prose allegory. In the fourth canto, the contemporary conflict between moral and poetic attitudes toward classical mythology is discernible in the ambiguous concern with the various material obstacles to the process of spiritual ascent illustrated by the mythical tale. This concern, in its turn, is reflected in the thematic preoccupation with the notions of trial and discipline as well as in what may be termed the excursive organization of the canto. Myth as Veiled Truth The lyric parts of Marino’s epyllion2 rest on what may broadly be referred to as poetic mythography. This broad aesthetic current flourished from the twelfth century, and exploited classical mythology as a historical-epistemological impasse resulting from the cultural and political tensions of the age, and leading to a hiatus, a kind of collapsing within itself of the Renaissance aesthetic based on emulation of the classics. 2 The ‘epyllion’ (‘minor epic’ in Greek, or mythological epic) may be defined as a narrative poem with mythological content with a psychological take on events, written in an ornamental lyrical style mixed with tragic notes, and favoring secondary plots and the erudite digression (often in the form of ecphrasis). For a theoretical discussion of the Baroque epyllion and an ‘empirical’ study of an important specimen of the genre, see Sofie Kluge, “Espejo del mito. Algunas consideraciones sobre el epilio Barroco” (forthcoming, in Criticón, 2012) and “Un epilio Barroco. El Polifemo y su género,” Rodrigo Cacho Casal and Anne Holloway (eds.), Centro y periferías (London: Tamesis, 2012), forthcoming. M L N 105 storehouse of entertaining and moving stories about intriguing dark passions and forbidden feelings, violent deaths and malevolent destiny. In this tradition, we find erotic as well as pathetic and dramatic explorations of classical myth, which is not taken to mean anything other than what it explicitly says, but rather to mean what it says very seriously or unironically—melodramatically, even. However, with each of the twenty lyrical cantos introduced by a moral allegory in prose (text by Sanvitale with illustrations by Lorenzo Scoto), L’Adone simultaneously shows influence from the multiform didactic current, which dated back to the Stoic and Neoplatonic mythography of late Antiquity and found its extreme expression in the French fourteenth-century commentaries to Ovid’s Metamorphoses. This tradition included both moral allegory proper (Venus as an allegory of Lust), more temperate philosophical musing on the universal meaning of myth (Odysseus as an allegory of human reason), Euhemerist riddling (Zeus as an allegory of some historical king), and the satiric-burlesque ‘sugared pill’ (Hercules as an allegory of the ridiculous surrender to Love). More particularly, the prose allegories follow the mythographic paradigm provided by sixteenth-century manuals such as Lilio Gregorio Giraldi’s History of the Gods of the Gentiles (1548), Natale Conti’s Mythology (1551), and Vincenzo Cartari’s Images of the Gods of the Ancients (1556). Distant heirs to Fulgentius’ Mythologies (fifth or sixth century) and Bersuire’s Ovidius moralizatus (around 1340), these works performed allegorical interpretations of the ancient myths with varying degrees of moral commitment. Even though we cannot know exactly what Marino thought of moral mythography (if he considered it an obsolete tradition or valued it as an noteworthy part of his cultural heritage), the prose allegories are undeniable evidence that he knew it and that he let his text reflect whatever he might have thought about it.3 Beyond speculation about authorial attitudes, the prose allegories of L’Adone certainly suggest an overall complexity of the work, which reflects the fact that the proverbial “poet of the senses”4 also authored the Dicerie sacre (1614). Yet in their very kinship with the moral mythographic tradition, the allegories have proved an obstacle to many 3 Compare that one of the principal sources for Marino’s rendering of the Cupid/ Psyche episode—Ercole Udine’s La Psique (1599)—has allegories by Angelo Grillo, who has emerged over the past decades of criticism (since Besomi’s 1959 study of the Lira) as a major stylistic influence on Marino, and in some sense the missing link between Tasso and Marino. 4 See Carlo Calcaterra, “Il poeta dei cinque sensi” Il Parnasso in rivolta (Milano: Mondadori, 1940) 11–82. 106 Sofie Kluge modern interpreters. Twentieth-century scholars have either passed them over as mere paraphernalia essentially irrelevant to the work,5 or regarded them as posing an ironic interpretative challenge to the reader. Most recently, the allegories have been seen as the necessary apologetic correlate of the poet’s controversially carefree exploitation of classical mythology.6 However, if we disregard the moral allegories we run the risk of anachronistically projecting a nineteenth-century ‘impulsive’ and un-conceptual concept of literary art onto a seventeenth-century text. Even if the view, that these allegories represent Marino’s attempt to explain away the sensual explicitness of the work faced with Inquisitorial charges, may be correct,7 the ‘apology argument’ surely has its own debatable axioms. It implies, for instance, the notion—foreign to Baroque literature—of the inspired poet writing in a state of frenzy, who only retrospectically stops to consider the meaning of his text. This picture is surely familiar, but is it true? Indeed, the persistent denial of what is undeniably a part of the printed text is significant and points to larger issues concerning the concept of baroque and its evaluation in modern-day aesthetics, which I cannot address in the present context.8 5 A most thorough, several hundred pages long examination of L’Adone, Pozzi’s “Guida alla lettura” (in Marino, Tutte le opere, ed. Pozzi (Milano: Mondadori, 1976) 11–166, for instance, devotes a mere half page to the prose allegories (173). See also Harold Martin Priest’s incomplete translation in Adonis. Selections from L’Adone of Giambattista Marino (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1967) to my knowledge the only existing English version), which leaves the moral prose allegories out without even commenting on this considerable severing of the original text neither in his “Notes on the Translation,” nor in the “Basis for the Selection of Passages” paragraph. 6 Clizia Carminati, Giovan Battista Marino tra Inquisizione e censura (Rome-Padua: Antenore, 2008). 7 Carminati’s book makes quite a convincing case. 8 I am referring to the fact, that the scholarly discussion of L’Adone for many years remained bound to the evaluation of that elusive and controversial Baroque literary aesthetics that it was always—from the poet’s own time through today—seen to epitomize. See Franco Croce, “I critici moderato-barocchi. I – La discussione sull’Adone,” Rassegna della letteratura italiana 59 (1955): 414–39 and “Nuovi compiti della critica del Marino e del marinismo,” Rassegna della letteratura italiana 61 (1957): 459–73. Thus, over the centuries, the scholarly evaluation of Marino’s work has changed with the changing view of stylistic features such as sensual descriptiveness, elaborate ornamentation and rhetorical virtuosity: whereas these features were celebrated by (most of) the poet’s contemporaries as the height of sophistication, they were vituperated as symptoms of aesthetic and moral decadence during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with a persistent marginalization as the unfortunate result; and then they were, conversely, praised as the quintessence of modern worldliness by twentieth-century academics. Yet, notwithstanding the overall constructive shift away from the detraction and negligence of earlier ages, this development did not lead to the anticipated general reassessment of Marino’s Baroque poetry. Subjecting the pejorative eighteenth- and nineteenth-century M L N 107 Considering Marino’s overtly premeditated manner, the hypothesis that the allegories had some kind of aesthetic function may at least be tried out. Although il cavalier was perhaps not the literary genius he was held to be in his own day,9 there can be little doubt that his work reflected contemporary aesthetic taste, however hard this taste may be to grasp from a modern point of view. It is not at all certain, as Benedetto Croce thought, that Marino’s famous words, that L’Adone shows how “immoderate indulgence ends in pain,” was insincere.10 At this point in literary history, allegory was not merely something imposed from the outside, but also an aesthetic mode consciously cultivated by European poets, including Tasso11 and Marino.12 As I will show by my reading of the fourth canto, the traditional moralism of the prose allegories is deconstructed, as it were, by the essential ambiguity of the lyric parts. However, this process is not view to a reverse evaluation, the mid-twentieth-century vindication of L’Adone merely confirmed the indictment that the Baroque was all about appearances and generally indifferent to substance—although this now meant something unequivocally positive. Subjecting the pejorative eighteenth- and nineteenth-century view to a reverse evaluation, the mid-twentieth-century vindication of L’Adone merely confirmed the indictment that the Baroque was all about appearances and generally indifferent to substance; except this now meant something unequivocally positive. See, for example, the work of Carmela Colombo, Cultura e tradizione nell’ L’Adone di G. B. Marino (Padova: GBM, 1967), especially the conclusion and Marziano Guglielminetti, “L’Adone poema dell’arte” Tecnica e invenzione nell’ opera di Giambattista Marino (Firenze: Casa Editrice G. D’Anna, 1964) 107–41. Further, James V. Mirollo, The Poet of the Marvellous, Giambattista Marino (New York: Columbia UP, 1963). Most recently, Rainer Zaiser, “Inszenierte Poetik: Metatextualität als Selbstreflexion von Dichtung in der italienischen Literatur der frühen Neuzeit” Ars Rhetorica 22 (2009), especially pp. 156–57. Following the outline of Giovanni Getto’s essay “Introduzione al Marino” Opere scelte di Giovan Battista Marino e dei Marinisti (Torino: U.T.E.T, 1949) republished together with other texts in Il Barocco letterario in Italia (Milano: Mondadori, 2000), which presented Marino’s poetic as “la poetica del sapere e del sapore” (6), scholars such as Giovanni Pozzi and, recently, Marie-France Tristan , La scène de l’écriture: essai sur la poésie philosophique du Cavalier Marin (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2002) are among those to have challenged the picture of Marino as an aestheticist. Recent criticism points in a number of different directions, its very diversity defying, as it were, the dead-end dichotomy of earlier criticism. This positive development no doubt reflects the development of the concept of the Baroque, as testified to by Andrea Battistini’s Il Barocco (Rome: Salerno, 2000). 9 See Priest: “As to the merits of Marino’s book, there is general agreement that its reputation was inflated in its time” (xi). 10 See Benedetto Croce’s famous Aesthetic as a Science of Expression and General Linguistic, trans. Douglas Ainslie (London: Macmillan, 1909), 56. 11 See Mindele Ann Treip, Allegorical Poetic & the Epic. The Renaissance Tradition to Paradise Lost (Lexington,: University of Kentucky Press, 1994), chapter 5. 12 Claudio Moreschini has a very good description of Marino’s balancing of traditional allegory and “the new sensitivity of the seventeenth century.” See “Towards a History of the Exegesis of Apuleius: The Case of the ‘Tale of Cupid and Psyche,’’’ trans. Coco Stevenson. Latin Fiction: The Latin Novel in Context, ed. Heinz Hofmann (London: Routledge, 2004) 215–28. 108 Sofie Kluge unequivocal, nor does it eliminate the moral element of the text altogether. Indeed, judging by this canto, what is at stake in L’Adone is exactly the relative strength of myth and allegory: in the fourth “Novelletta” canto we find a virtual dramatization of the conflict between both these modes, reflecting the Baroque conflict between the aesthetic and moral functions of art. While the lyric part of the canto—as I will subsequently show in detail—offers an ambiguous examination of the relation between proliferating mythical fancy and transcendental allegorical sternness, the allegoria presents this relation more unequivocally in terms of the moral conflict between luxurious flesh and virtuous spirit. According to the manifest moralization of the prose allegory, the Psyche myth is concerned with the human condition (“La favola di Psiche rappresenta lo stato dell’uomo”). The figure of Psyche is an allegory of the soul who, after many trials and tribulations arranged by Destiny, arrives at sublime pleasure (“tipo della istessa anima, che per mezzo di molti travagli arriva finalmente al godimento perfetto”). In the end, she is happily married to Amor (“agitata dalla Fortuna per diversi pericoli e dopo molte fatiche e persecuzioni copulata ad Amore”), a figure of Desire (“la Cupidità”). It is further said that the young protagonist is fairer than her two elder sisters and envied because of her beauty by none other than Venus, who signifies Lust (“la Libidine”). While Psyche’s parents, God and Matter (“Iddio e la materia”), are presented as morally neutral, the sisters, Flesh (“la Carne”) and Free Will (“la Libertà dell’arbitrio”) appear as tempting instigators of concupiscence. Thus, they urge Soul to defy her husband’s explicit prohibition and secretly behold his face while he sleeps, an act said to signify the adherence to the delights of sexual pleasure (“attenersi ai diletti della concupiscenza”). Finally, the central narrative prop of the oil lamp, whose flickering flame causes it to drop burning wax on Amor’s shoulder, is interpreted as an allegory of the heat of passion that leaves the mark of sin on the flesh (“dimostra l’ardore della concupiscibile, che lascia sempre stampata nella carne la macchia del peccato”).13 Transferred to aesthetic terms, the prose allegory underscores the necessity of pagan myth to become an edifying allegory. It urges the departure from the lascivious sensualism incarnated in ancient mythol13 See Bruno Porcelli, “Amore e Psiche da Apuleio al Marino” Le misure della fabbrica. Studi sull’ “L’Adone” del Marino e sulla “Fiera” del Buonarroti (Milano: Marzorati, 1980) 43–64: “In realtà, l’allegoria del canto segue Beroaldo [Filippo Beroaldo’s Latin commentaries on Apuleius’ work [1500]] in maniera cosí pedissequa da ridursi quasi ovunque ad una vera e propria traduzione letterale” (63). M L N 109 ogy and advocates the embrace of an ideally exponential ascent toward spiritual perfection. Myth—it is implied—is the aesthetic equivalent of an obsolete (primitive and immoral) intellectual stage. However, if the pagan elements are duly abolished through moralization, it may serve the spiritual agenda of more highly developed eras in the form of allegory. Read as a poetological manifesto, the prose allegory points to the importance of the relation between both these modes to this particular canto. As such, it repeats the message of L’Adone’s dedicatory letter to Maria de’ Medici, which underscores the relation between myth and allegory as a major issue of Marino’s epyllion. After rehearsing the conventionalities of seventeenth-century literary dedications (unworthiness of the poet and hyperbolic celebration of the noble benefactor; enumeration of famous patronages; humble recommendation of the work offered), at considerable length and in a very sophisticated manner, Marino finally addresses the recipient of his poem, the long-time queen regent of France whose son, Louis XIII, is the subject of the extensive Hercules allegory of the dedication. The poet resumes the idea introduced in the opening lines of the letter, that the imaginative Greeks disguised mysteries under the veil of their fabulous fictions: “La Grecia, di tutte le bell’arti inventrice, laqual sotto velo di favolose fizzioni soleva ricoprire la maggior parte de’ suoi misteri, non senza allegorico sentimento chiamava Ercole musagete, quasi duce e capitano delle Muse” (3).14 Thus, Marino expresses his expectation that Maria will understand the double nature of his own mythology, as against those who hold that the mythical fables contain no moral whatsoever: Oltre che, per essere il componimento ch’io le reco quasi un registro delle sue opere magnanime, delle quali una parte, ancorché minima, mi sono ingegnato d’esprimere in esso, e per avere io ridotto il suggetto che tratta, como per l’allegorie si dimostra, ad un segno di moralità la maggiore che peraventura si ritrovi fra tutte l’antiche favole, contro l’opinione di coloro che il contrario si persuadevano, giudico che ben si confaccia alla modesta gravità d’una prencipessa tanto discreta. (9) Via his interpretation of the Hercules myth as a complex allegory and through the definition of ancient myth as veiled theology (“misteri” under the “velo di favoloso fizzioni”) and “moral cipher” (“segno di moralità”), Marino points out the way he wants his own text to be read. He explicitly refers to the methodology of the moral prose allegories 14 Tutte le opere di Giovan Battista Marino. A cura di Giovanni Pozzi. Vol. II, Tomo 1 (Milano: Mondadori, 1976). 110 Sofie Kluge as an interpretative paradigm (“como per l’allegorie si dimostra”). Far from the defensive position of an apologist, the dedication expresses the somewhat superior attitude of someone initiated into the divine mysteries and familiar with the secret truth contained in the pagan myths. According to both the ensemble of moral prose allegories and the dedication, then, the lyric passages of L’Adone should be seen as containing something more than its sensual poetic beauty. Although the prose allegory of the fourth canto on the surface presents this ‘more’ in moral terms, and its deciphering as a straightforward business, the use of terms such as “rappresenta,” “dinota,” “significano,” “cioè,” “si finge per,” “s’intende,” “cioè a dire,” “dimostra” indicates a basic awareness of the hermeneutic problem. As the ingenious Hercules allegory of the dedication suggests (on the basis of Hercules’ epithet musagetēs [“leader of the Muses”] developing the image of Louis as a warrior hero plus aesthete), allegorical signification is never unequivocal, but infinitely prolific and ambiguous. In a text concerned with the exponential ascent toward moral perfection—that of the soul, that of the text—such ambiguity poses a problem. For what becomes of spiritual progress if the way is full of exasperating trials? What becomes of narrative evolution if digression turns into a consolidating structural principle? And what becomes of moral transparency and allegorical decipherability if the materiality of poetic language presents a hindrance to the very act of reading? Do not such features essentially prevent the text from accomplishing its transformation from pagan myth to edifying allegory after the paradigm of the allegoria? Or do they on the contrary, as the poetic prelude claims, further it? These are some of the issues that the fourth canto addresses on the basis of its superordinate inquiry into the relative strength of myth and allegory. Trail as Theme, Discipline as Plot At its outset, in what may be termed the lyric prelude (4.1–6), the poem of the fourth canto reassumes the moral agenda of the prose allegory. Here, an anonymous third-person narrator circumscribes the Stoic-Christian idea of constancy in detached moral-philosophical terms: “È di dura battaglia aspro conflitto / questa che vita ha nome, humana morte / . . . / Ma fra l’ingurie e fra i contrasti invitto / non però sbigottisce animo forte, / anzi contr’ogni assalto iniquo e crudo / s’arma e difende, e sua virtù gli è scudo” (4.1). M L N 111 Subsequently, the notion of ‘discipline’ as spiritual nurture is developed through an array of emblematic images: the grafting that revitalizes the tree; the scalpel that turns the craftsman’s material into a beautiful artefact; the flint stone that strikes sparks when hit with another piece of stone; the chord that responds to the musician’s strokes with arguta armonia; the grape that releases purple wine when pulverized by the tooth; the coal that blazes up into a great fire when poked; the ball that bounces vigorously when hit with the willow (4.3–5). Then follows another aloof moral-philosophical passage contemplating the fruits of trouble and suffering: “La fatica e ’l travaglio è paragone, / dove provar si suol nostra finezza; / né senz’ afanno e duol, premi e corone / può di gloria ottener vera fortezza” (4.6). This largely concludes the role of the anonymous third-person narrator who will not return until the last stanza and then only for a brief closing remark. Like the abstract figurative pantomimes, mimes or playlets that preceded contemporary plays and operas, setting the mood by anticipating the central theme of the main performance and sketching its plot (as the narrative elaboration or temporal unfolding of the theme),15 the impersonal, emblematic, and quasi-proverbial prelude introduces the thematic core of the subsequently recounted Amor and Psyche myth: the progressive ennoblement of the soul through the hardships of love.16 It does so in strictly moral terms, referring the crucial role of trial and discipline in the process of unbearable yet ultimately redemptive mortification that is human life. Somewhat surprisingly, considering Marino’s persistent reputation as a worldly aestheticist poet, this prelude anticipates the general treatment of the Amor and Psyche myth in the poem. It remains true to the spirit of prose allegory and poetic prelude in regard to theme and plot. Describing Psyche’s exposure on the mountain, her psychomachy, her temptation by the sisters, her search for Amor, and the ordeals imposed on her by Venus, the poem quite obviously revolves around the theme of ‘trial’. Modelling the development of the narrative around Psyche’s advancing physical and spiritual regimenting—with her growing belly as a sort of inverted symbol of her progress—it may be said to turn ‘discipline’ into the governing principle or hinge of the plot. 15 This function of plot as a narrative elaboration or temporal unfolding of the theme is quite characteristic of contemporary opera: consider, for instance, how the theme of ‘Fragilità humana’ treated allegorically in the prologue to Monteverdi’s Il ritorno d’Ulisse in patria (1640) is subsequently elaborated in the plot of the opera. 16 Most readers will agree to this ‘minimal interpretation’. See, however, Erich Neumann’s Amor und Psyche. Deutung eines Märchens; ein Beitrag zur seelischen Entwicklung des Weiblichen (1952), for an entirely different approach. 112 Sofie Kluge Although Jupiter’s interference as a deus ex machina in stanzas 288–90 may appear to challenge the debasement/ascent logic implicit in the notions of trial and discipline, it is still reasonable to assert the fundamental conformity of theme and plot to this logic and, hence, to the idea of exponential ascent toward perfection proposed in prose allegory and poetic prelude. Indeed, the vengeful Venus is finally satisfied by Psyche’s indomitable steadfastness: “La dea l’ascolta e di stupore impetra, / che ‘n tanti rischi indomita la trova; / ma ‘l petto a quel parlar l’apre e penetra / un non so che di tenerezza nova” (4.287). The protagonist’s constancy finally secures the story’s dénoument, even if Amor is not sufficiently convinced of his mother’s appeasement to let events take their due course: “In questo mezzo io pur temendo in vero / il minacciato mal, con tanta fretta / rivolo inverso il ciel [ . . . ]” (4.288). In the end, it is the protagonist’s sublime discipline that moves the plot toward its fulfilment, thus affirming the fundamental conformity of the narrative to the explicitly proposed moral of the canto. The conformity of theme and plot means that we will have to look elsewhere for that complexity and subtlety of expression, which separates the ambiguous poem from the more unequivocal moralism of the allegoria. Leaving the prelude and proceeding to Amor’s lively first-person narration, a genuine textual innovation on Marino’s part, is a good way to begin. Although this narration also essentially sticks to the theme and plot indicated by the third-person narrator of the prose allegory and prelude, it by far exceeds the conceptual limits of this narrator’s moral interpretation of the material. Spiced up with digressive passages of grandiloquent eulogy, tearjerking pathos, piquant voyeurism, and horror effects, it contrarily suggests that the overall interpretation of the myth in the canto may not be as simple as prose allegory and prelude suggest. The passionate, deviating descriptiveness dominating these excursuses fundamentally jar with the idea of the Amor and Psyche myth as a straightforward moral allegory of spiritual ascent. In fact, these eccentric or centrifugal passages suggest that the text not only operates in terms of exponential ascent, but also implies a notion of digression as progress, progress as digression. Reviewing the poet’s principal deviations from his main sources, Apuleius’ Metamorphoses (second century A. D.) and Udine’s Psiche, provides a sense of this paradoxical notion.17 17 See Ottavio Besomi’s “Composizione a intersio nel c. IV dell’Adone” Esplorazioni secentesche (Padua: Antenore, 1975) 9–52; Carmela Colombo, Cultura e tradizione nell’ L’Adone di G. B. Marino (Padova: GBM, 1967) 11–84; Porcelli 43–64, “Amore e Psiche da Apuleio al Marino;” Giorgio Barberi Squarotti, “Psiche e Adone: il lieto fine e la morte” Studi di onomastica e letteratura offerti a Bruno Porcelli (Pisa-Roma: GEI, 2007)145–61; M L N 113 Digressive Poetic The first significant deviation in relation to the sources of the fourth canto is found in stanzas 38–42.18 Here we have Amor’s enthralled rendering of his first view of Psyche, whose beauty—depicted from breast to hair using a more or less conventional array of rhetorical figures and poetic images—first distracted him from the duty imposed on him by his jealous mother: “Vuol che di stral villano il cor le punga, / e ch’a sposo infelice io la congiunga” (4. 34). Amor’s description of “quel sovruman, sovradinivo oggetto” (37) is traditional in the choice of imagery, innovative in the elaboration of inherited images.19 It exercises the vocabularies of courtly poetry and Petrarchism, which had by Marino’s time merged into a somewhat cliché-ridden yet also highly sophisticated and self-conscious aesthetic idiom. First, we have the hyperbolic paraphrase of Psyche’s eyes as “dobbio oriente,” “dui cieli,” and “dobbio sol” (4.38) resuming a familiar topic of Western love poetry, but giving it an extravagant baroque twist through the superimposition of as much as three different cosmological images. This praise is concluded with the ingenious exercise of a related, equally traditional theme: the killer eyes of the lady (“lumi perfidi”), destroying first and declaring war later (“uccidon prima e poi bandiscon guerra”), thus occasioning the death of the unwise lover (“il malaccorto [ . . . ] si trova morto”) who does not even get to beg for mercy before he drops dead, stricken by love. Then follows a highly stylized description of Psyche’s face (4.39–40), rehearsing yet also elaborating the inherited registers of amorous-laudatory formulas: the bright red of her cheeks described as a sunrise (“aurora”) that gives way to the sunlight of the eyes (“al sol degli occhi [ . . . ] cede”); the brightness of which brings out a delicate blush of the cheeks, subsequently compared to the rubescence of the wild apple (“qual in non colto ancor pomo si vede”); the whiteness of her skin metaphorized into snow (“neve”); the fragrant mouth resembling the flower of the Salvatore Ussia, Amore innamorato - Riscritture poetiche della novella di Amore e Psiche. Secoli XV–XVII (Vercelli: Edizioni Mercurio, 2001). 18 See Besomi’s synoptic paradigm 15. 19 The non-traditionality of Marino’s metaphors is a standing discussion in Marino scholarship, compare Eugenio Donato, “Tesauro’s Poetic: Through the Looking Glass” MLN 78 (1963) 15–30; Susanna N. Peters, “Metaphor and ‘Meraviglia’: Tradition and innovation in L’Adone of G. B. Marino” Lingua e stile 7 (1972) 321–41; and Frank Warnke, “Marino and the English Metaphysicals” Studies in the Renaissance 2 (1955) 160–75, with exclusive reference to Marino’s early poetry. 114 Sofie Kluge tender rose gently opening its petals (“ch’apra le labra dele fresche foglie”). Exploring the sexual connotations of the image, suggested by the metonymic relation petals-lips and underscored by the use of the word “intatto” in relation to the flower, Amor fantasizes about the impact of this mouth kissing (“che farà poi baciando? i cori uccide”). In stanza 41, he then proceeds with a description of Psyche’s hair—soft and blonde, of course (“più ch’ambra molle e più ch’elettro bionda”)—and her different hair styles (“o stretta in nodi, o in vaghe trecce accolta, / o su gli omeri sparsa ad onda ad onda”) introducing the current poetic image of the lady’s hair as an ocean for the lover to drown in (“tra procelle dorate i cori affonda”), subsequently given a surprising twist with the conventional marine imagery metamorphosing into the sails of a ship (“L’aure imprigiona, se talor si spiega, / e con auree catene i venti lega”). Finally, in stanza 42, the image of Psyche’s bosom as a tender bed (“morbido letto”) for Amor’s languishing heart is developed in a rather unconventional direction as her breasts are described as two lily pillows (“guanciali di gigli”), the colour of the lilies leading, by way of metonymy, to the snow and hoare that the girl’s breast is said to look like (“in vista”) while it is in its effect (“nell’effetto”) fire and burning flame. In summary, Amor’s enamoured picture of Psyche, which in a typical baroque manner employs a range of poetic forms while elaborating these with surprising twists and turns, represents a noteworthy deviation from the main line of the plot, characterized by abundant descriptiveness and passionate absorption in aesthetic detail. It has the immediate effect of distracting the reader’s attention away from the progression of the plot, leading him astray in exactly the same pleasurable manner that Amor himself is led astray by Psyche’s beauty. It is, in other words, a deviation in the most fundamental sense of the word. Marino’s next significant deviation from his main source, Apuleius, is found in stanzas 52–79, a lengthy exploration of the mourning of Psyche’s family at her exposure on the mountain. It features the eloquent lamentation of her father (4.55–60) and the protagonist’s realistic, moderately grieving response.20 I will not go into the rhetoric-stylistic details of this extensive passage, but merely note 1) the potential conflict between the tragedizing, horizontal perspective of elegy forcefully invoked in this part of Besomi, Composizione 15–16. 20 M L N 115 the poem and the apotheosizing, transcendental outlook propagated elsewhere in the canto, and 2) the transferability of this potential conflict to the fourth canto as a whole, suggested in the memorable lines “non sa fra i tanti orrendi oggetti / se ‘l talamo o se ‘l tumulo l’aspetti” (4.53): the plunge into the abyss of sorrow represented by the father may not be all that conducive to the spiritual ascent around which the text revolves. Hence, Psyche, the paradigm of this ascent and bearer of the moral agenda of the canto, corrects her progenitor’s unconstructive approach to misery: “Che val pianger (dicea) che più versate / lagrime intempestive e senza frutto?” (4.62). She even confidently points out the reason for her misfortune: “I’ so pur ben, che l’usurpato nome / dela celeste Venere m’uccide” (4.64), demonstrating that very exemplary constancy vis-à-vis trials and adversities, which will eventually lead to her apotheosis. However, conspicuously contrary to the steadfast determination of the protagonist, the narrator excels in deviating from both plot and moral agenda of the canto (according to which trials serve the progression of discipline, not as an excuse for making excursuses). Thus his rather long-winded description of the ‘gothic’ setting—the rocky slope and dark caves, the gloomy sea, impenetrable woods, the rumbling wind, the sad procession that slowly climbs the mountain—and the detailed elaboration of the classic elegiac topos of the lament by the sea in stanzas 69–77. As with the description of Psyche’s beauty, the deviation from the main line of the plot represented by this passage appears to endorse an alternative logic of immersion or absorption in descriptive detail and aesthetic materiality, which rivals the official logic of progress and exponential ascent. Stanzas 84–87—Amor’s representation of the sleeping Psyche—provide another excellent example of this ‘secret’ poetic of digression. This passage, without precedent in Marino’s sources,21 confirms the narrator’s inconstant disposition while relating this temperament to a well-developed attentiveness to details. It begins rather innocently with a description of Psyche’s closed eyes, resuming the light metaphors of the previous description (“soli,” “luci”). Then it continues with a sensual yet decorous depiction of the heroine as florid Spring all abloom (“Vedesti ala stagion quando le spine / fioriscon tutte di novella prole, / . . . / Dirai ben tal sembianza assai conforme / ala leggiadra vergine che dorme,” 4.85). Then, finally, it takes a surprising turn with the voyeuristic description of how the breeze first plays with her hair (86) and then blows up her dress just Besomi, Composizione 16. 21 116 Sofie Kluge enough for the lover to see “il confin del bianco piè” and “del’ignuda carne / quanto a casta beltà lice mostrarne” (4.87). Distracting the narrator’s attention from the main thread of the story and simultaneously shifting the reader’s attention away from the moral agenda of the text, this elegant miniature piece of lyric poetry represents another important example of that undirected or excursive, sensual and emotional, ‘material’ and descriptive poetic of digression that I am tracing here. This poetic marks a more or less latent counterweight to the official moral-transcendental purposiveness of the text. The last example of this type that I will discuss here is the sisters’ vivid description of the monster to which they imagine Psyche married (4.135–47). This description begins by following the path indicated by Apuleius, with the lover symbolically described as a snake (“Sappi che quel, che ‘nsu la notte oscura / giacer teco si suole, è un fier serpente,” 4.135). However, it soon turns into a virtual tour de force of horrifying details unprecedented by the sources: wriggling its supple torso (“divincolando il flessuoso seno,” 4.137), the monster appears in most inconstant forms (“più volubili volumi,” ibid.), its menacing and dreadful eyes spewing a strange light that burns the ground in front of it (“Da minacciosi e spaventosi lumi / esce strano fulgor, ch’arde il terreno,” ibid.) as it snortingly spreads a mortal mist of turbid, pestiferous and venomous smoke around it (“di nebbia mortal torbidi fumi / infetti di pestifero veleno / sbuffando intorno,” ibid.) before it lies down beside Psyche in the marriage bed (“a lato a te si caccia,” ibid.). Then follows a series of unpleasantly detailed descriptions of the monster’s vermicular movements (“a sé si sporga e ‘n sé rientre / e ne’ lubrici tratti onda somiglia, / e fuggendo e seguendo il propio ventre, / lascia sestesso e sestesso ripiglia” 4.138), the multi-coloured dewy dragon wings and back (139), and how it vomits the human flesh and blood it has consumed only to lick it up again (“e poiché vomitata ha dala strozza / carne di gente uccisa, ei la lambisce” 4.140), its back and chest covered with plates and stiches, conches and flakes (ibid.). As if these disgusting details were not enough to scare Psyche off, the sisters go on to describe the monster’s three vibrating tongues and tripartite ‘comb’ of teeth (“tripartito pettine di denti,” 4.141) withholding the bloody foam and deadly breath of the mouth corrupting the breeze, destroying the flowers and herbs, and laying the land desolate (ibid.). Then they hypocritically ask Heaven to guard Psyche from her husband’s anger, launching another vivid description of the monster’s body in contorted movement, raising the neck up high, erecting M L N 117 the ‘ruthless crowns’ of its head (“erge del capo le spietate creste” 4.142), and shaking its noisy scales. After voicing the conviction that the monster may temporarily hide its “natural brutezza” (4.143), but will not contain its “cruda rabbia” (ibid.) for long, the wicked women intensify the psychological pressure bringing the pregnancy into play. They now suggest that Psyche’s growing belly will only make her an even more attractive prey (“Allor fia, chi nol sa? che fuor d’inganni, / preda a suo modo opima, ei ti tracanni,” 4.144). Invoking the oracle’s omen, they now raise the stakes presenting their sister with the choice between escaping or being buried among the feral bowls of the “osceno mostro” (“o col tuo scampo a noi / consentirai, d’ogni sospetto sciolta, / o tanto attenderai che tu sia poi / nele ferine viscere sepolta?”, 4.146). Finally, they remind her that, in case she should choose the latter destiny, the monster will not only swallow her, but also her unborn innocent child (“teco trangugi l’innocente pegno”, 4.147). There can be no doubt that this indulgence in the wealth of descriptive detail marks a significant deviation from the main line of the plot. It represents an important facet of Marino’s poetic of digression, the constitutive elements of which may be summed up as: fascination with external beauty (Amor’s first view of Psyche), horizontal, earthly perspective (Psyche’s exposure on the mountain), idle sensuality (sleeping Psyche) and exaggerated, violent materialness (the monster). While not completely cancelling it out, these characteristics fundamentally challenge the exponential ascent toward perfection through purposeful suffering proposed as a both aesthetic and moral ideal in the prose allegory and poetic prelude of the text. They hence become a vehicle, in the text, for testing the relative strength of myth and allegory. The resulting ambiguity of perspectives reflects the generic double bind of the canto. Digressively descriptive in structure yet, at times, also demonstratively didactic,22 the fourth canto oscillates between proliferating, sensual, material myth and teleological, moral, transcendental allegory with a concluding—but certainly not definitive—propensity toward the ideal of exponential ascent suggested by Psyche’s final apotheosis (“e meco dopo tante aspre fatiche / nel teatro del ciel sposata è Psiche,” 4.290). This oscillation marks the canto as a text that finds its identity somewhere between both symbolic modes. It is an allegory with ‘mythomaniac’ tendencies or a myth that is more than a myth. This 22 See, for instance, the moralizing maxim concluding the sisters episode: “E così chi di fraude si diletta / ne’ propri lacci suoi cade ale volte” (4.195). 118 Sofie Kluge interpretation appears to be confirmed by its mise-en-abîme insertion into the macrostructure of L’Adone. A myth-within-the-myth, the “Novelletta” (the only canto entirely occupied by a single mythical narrative)23 is cast within a reflexive framework that renders its mythicalness different from that of traditional myths and highlights its potential as a tale that points beyond itself toward its spiritually fulfilling transformation into an edifying moral allegory. Rhetoric of Ambiguity and Hindrance The discursive double bind of the fourth canto is echoed on multiple levels in the text, notably in what may be termed its rhetoric of ambiguity.24 Illustrating both the psychomachy of a protagonist who stands at a crossroad in her life (“Contrarie passion, tra cui s’aggira, / in quel semplice cor fan guerra interna,” 4.149) and the ambiguity of a text that oscillates between myth and allegory, we find a number of rhetorical figures relating to schism or suggestive of discord. As the following list demonstrates, antithesis characterizes the canto from beginning through the end: “altra Venere novella / casta però, modesta e verginella” (4.14); “lo sdegno / che siam dette io lasciva, ella pudica” (4.18); “Dato al lungo digiun breve ristoro” (4.95); “Caldo desio rinvigorisce il sesso, / freddo timor le calde voglie opprime; brama e s’arretra, ardisce e si ritiene, / bollon gli spirti e gelano le vene” (4.161); “io stabil tronco e tu volubil fronda?” (4.168); “seco d’amor le dimostranze alterna, / e d’allegrezza astutamente infinta” (4.186); “un mostro scorsi, / ma mostro di beltà pur troppo bello” (4.187); “fervido sol gelida bruma” (4.216); “Di nozze tali / figlio nascer non può, spurio più tosto” (4.244) The antithetic makeup of the text evolves around conceptual dichotomies such as lasciviousness-chastity, desire-fear, volatility-constancy, sorrow-joy, monstrosity-beauty, and hot-cold. Essentially supportive of the black-and-white moral logic of the prose allegory and poetic prelude, these dichotomies may be related to the question of the relative strength of myth and allegory. Unlike the oxymoron and chiasm, both of which suggest a dialectical intertwinement of opposites that points 23 Compare cantos V and XIX, both of which contain a whole range of different myths functioning mostly as exempla to illuminate, ex contrariis and ex similis, the main action. 24 Compare Pozzi’s observation (“Guida”, 75–87), that the linguistic-semantic structure of L’Adone is built around the dichotomy eccessi armonici (symmetries, “bimembration,” correspondences, “dittologies,” diptychs, chiasms, bifocality, etcetera) / eccessi disarmonici (change of normal syntactic order, antithesis, etcetera). M L N 119 beyond contradiction, antithesis represents a static contraposition of opposites that underpins the moral dichotomies of the allegoria. Nevertheless, antithesis is an important element of that rhetoric of ambiguity, which dominates the lyric canto, where the, as it were, ‘frozen’ dichotomies are complemented by the more dynamic relation of opposites implied in such figures as the oxymoron and chiasmus. Whereas I have only found a few pure examples of the former (“cadavere vivo” (4.35); “qualunque umanità fora inumana” (4.154); “l’amaro addolcir” (4.217)), the latter occurs quite frequently in more or less perfect forms: “tu dunque onda alo scoglio, io scoglio al’onda?” (4.168); “spendendo i giorni in gemiti dirotti / e consumando in lagrime le notti” (4.196); “se sia del popol dele ninfe alcuna / o dele dee nel numero s’ascriva” (4.199); “amar ciò ch’ama e ciò che vuol volere” (4.212); “Con cor tremante e con tremante piede” (4.229) Graphically and semantically suggestive of crux, chiasm is thus the more frequent in the second half of the text. This may indicate an intensification of psychomachy and schism, yet, remembering the dialectical element of this figure, it may also suggest an impending synthesis of opposites. If it is allowed that the rhetoric of ambiguity emerging from the occurrence of antithesis, oxymoron and chiasm reflects the generic double bind of the canto, the important thing is not so much to decide between these interpretations. The important thing is to recognize how the frequency of such figures underscores the importance of this issue, pointing to the canto’s essentially unresolved tension between myth and allegory. A symptom of the same tendency that determined the digressive structure of the text, the rhetoric of ambiguity represents an, as it were, discreet questioning of the moral agenda of the text. It is essentially a symptom of the indecision that characterizes the deeper levels of the text and counterbalances its outward confidence (as flaunted by the prose allegory). Even if trial and discipline, according to the explicit argument of the text, must be considered catalysts for and not hindrances of progress, the notable occurrence of figures of discord hints at the potentially equivocal nature of these phenomena as agents of both promotion and obstruction, progress and retardation. This leads us to the most characteristic stylistic feature of the text, the hyperbaton. A transposition of words into abnormal syntactic positions, the hyperbaton is, in its moderate version, characteristic of all poetic expression, which often needs to subordinate word order to the demands imposed by meter, rhythm and rhyme. However, when 120 Sofie Kluge transposition becomes so elaborate that it obstructs the act of reading, the hyperbaton must be considered an important clue to something beyond such decorative considerations. As the following list of examples suggests, such obstruction is quite frequent in the fourth canto of L’Adone where words that belong together syntactically are sometimes extremely wide apart: “Crede ciascun, che stupido s’affisa / . . . / novo germe di stelle in nova guisa / veder” (4.14); “Deh, che mi val [ . . . ] / poter dela via bianca e stellante / a mio senno varcar l’eccelse cime?” (4.19); “Dal carro, che con morso aureo l’affrena / scioglie, ciò detto, le canute guide” (4.37); “Deh placa, o mare, i tuoi furori alquanto, / . . . / . . . / . . . . , accogli.” (4.72); “Se provocò del ciel l’ira severa” (4.76); “Dela vista il difetto adempie il tatto” (4.98); “è più ch’altro leggiadro un giovinetto” (4.110); “Già più volte predetto il ver ti fue” (4.171); “fa la ninfa degli antri aspro tenore” (4.179); “e vince ogni dolor saggio consiglio” (4.182); “dal cui dente crudel morte non scampa / chiunque il morso avelenato offenda” (4.257); “orribil sì che poco è più l’inferno” (4.266); “Io, sano già dela ferita e molto / da sì lunga prigion stancato omai.” (4.279) The text abounds in examples of this phenomenon and I only reproduce the most extreme cases to demonstrate the point that I want to make concerning the poet’s use of this stylistic device. The abundance of hyperbata in the text is a very graphic way for him to illustrate the difficulty he finds in accomplishing that transformation of myth into allegory, which is enforced in the prose allegory and poetic prelude, but problematized in the lyric part of the canto. When the poet lays out hindrances for the reading and interpretation of his text it is, in other words, a way of illustrating the difficulty he finds in producing that moral transparency and allegorical decipherability, which the more unequivocal parts of the text present as a both moral and aesthetic ideal. This ideal reflected a contemporary spiritual ideal of exponential ascent toward perfection through trial and discipline. In parallel with the challenging of this ideal through the hedonist trend of contemporary aristocratic culture, the moral decorousness of poetry was challenged through what may be termed the pleasurable liberation of the material elements of poetic language (vehicle of a metaphor from the tenor; noun from apposition; subject from predicate, and so on).25 25 Thus, Marino’s insistence on Psyche’s material effort and suffering may potentially be seen as a critique of the contemporary aristocratic values (beauty, luxury, as markers of innate superiority) that the extravagant style of L’Adone apparently espouses. M L N 121 Read as a dramatization of the troubles associated with the transformation of the proliferating and sensual aesthetic material into an edifying moral allegory, the “Novelletta” canto turns into a complex allegory of both these processes. As such, it illuminates the Adone’s own trajectory, which may be seen as a kind of failed journey to knowledge. Ambiguous Baroque Mythography As suggested at the beginning of this essay, the proposed complexity of the fourth canto of L’Adone needs to be seen within the context of the period’s literary mythography, which was shot through with the essential ambiguity of moral and aesthetic perspectives that characterizes postclassical use of Greco-Roman mythology. In the CounterReformation period this ambiguity grew into a virtual aporia. Now, the ‘disinterested’ mythography cultivated by Renaissance humanists and poets was increasingly confronted with the animadversion against the immorality of the pagan gods characterizing Counter-Reformation cultural politics. Once again, as in the days of early Christendom, ‘purification’ of the ancient pantheon through allegorization (even, in extreme cases, the total abolition of pagan imagery)26 was on the agenda. However, seventeenth-century literary authors were apparently determined to overcome this unfruitful impasse. With the advent of baroque literature, the two mythographic ramifications merged again to form a wholly equivocal unity of myth and allegory, a mythology that carried with it an implicit critique of myth. Literary representations of myth became necessarily two-faced as the opposition between aesthetic and moral interpretations of classical mythology moved inside the individual work. As such as mediation, baroque mythological literature in its various forms (dramatic, epic, lyrical) became a prism for contemplating the problematic interaction of the various forms of myth, an aestheticreflective taking into possession of the various facets of this complex tradition. The result was an aesthetic expression that is simultaneously traditional and innovative, an early modern reconciliation of apparent contradictions through literary art: the ‘modernity’ of 26 Cardinal Paleotti’s De sacris et profanis imaginibus (1582) and chapter 37 of the Jesuit Antonio Possevino’s Bibliotheca selecta (1593) provide examples of this tendency, which Sebastian Neumeister has accurately described as “die Tendenz [ . . . ], im Einklang mit den Beschlüssen des Tridentiums die mit der Ästhetik der italienischen Renaissance eingedrungene ‘heidnische’ Bildlicheit zu reduzieren und, wenn möglich, ganz durch eine genuin christliche Metaphorik zu ersetzen” in Formen & Funktionen der Allegorie, ed. Walter Haug (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1979) 293. 122 Sofie Kluge L’Adone does not consist in the rejection of moral mythography and the embrace of sensuality or vice versa. Meta-moral rather than antimoral, meta-sensual rather than pro-sensual, it encompasses the two things presenting its mythical subjects in an equivocal and nuanced manner. Instead of easy solutions, Marino’s epyllion offers complex statements, adding layers and layers of signification and compiling semantic forms upon semantic forms. This encyclopedic or polyhistoric attitude essentially reflected the mediation of Renaissance literary heritage and Counter-Reformation suspicion of ancient myth. Yet it also reflected a renewed enquiry into the ontological status, cultural function, and adequate aesthetic representation of myth, arisen with the new humanist translation of the great ancient mythological texts (including Apuleius’ novel as well as Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Heroides). What was the legitimacy, role, and value of this quintessence of unrestrained human imagination? Even though we find such enquiry at the basis of all the mythological genres of the period, the erudite mirror of myth created by Marino arguably took pride of place as the medium for this meditation. A testimony to the poet’s wrestling with pagan myth in order to subject it to the ideological control represented by moral allegorization—as expected of, or directly imposed on authors during this period—the “Novelletta” canto explores ancient mythology on the backdrop of ambiguous postclassical mythography. It epitomizes the baroque dialectical entwinement of both major trends of this tradition. Putting moral and poetic versions of the same myth into play, juxtaposing them without choosing definitively between them, the fourth canto reflects the period’s conflict between moral and aesthetic approaches to pagan culture as well as the solution of this conflict through literature. It presents a baroque, non-conciliatory synthesis of the opposing parties that is not an aestheticist solution to contemporary cultural dichotomies, but an aesthetic reflection of them. The “Novelletta” canto does not claim the convergence of poetic and moral mythography and the cultural paradigms they represent. Instead, it lets their confrontation reflect various contemporaneous conflicts associated with the aesthetic writing of myth. And by so doing, it points, however obliquely, toward literary modernity. A tale of the precarious situation of pagan myth in the heated religious climate of the seventeeth century27 and a complex allegory of the unresolvable 27 See Rainer Stillers, “Mythologische Poetik in der Dichtung Giovan Battista Marinos” in Mythos und Text, ed. Sigfried Jüttner (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1997)1–17, which presents Marino’s use of myth as an overcoming of the dichotomy of ‘philosophical’ content M L N 123 conflict in baroque poetic between the aesthetic and moral functions of art, Marino’s version of the Amor and Psyche myth indirectly suggests one of the great aesthetic, social, and political utopias of early modernity: the establishing of literature as a (potentially) critical institution (ideally) exempt from the agendas of political and religious institutions. However, as is well-known, and as the preceding analysis confirms, the dream of aesthetic independence was far from realized when Marino wrote his L’Adone in the early 1620s, and would not be so for the next couple of hundred years. Although it anticipated important features of literary modernity, the baroque remained a period of transition, documenting contemporary tensions through an aesthetic reflexion of these that took the indirect forms of self-reflection, ideological indecision, generic double bind, and rhetorical ambiguity. These meta-aesthetic qualities, which are, of course, universally characteristic of Baroque literature, essentially represented an act of mimicry: faced with the contradiction between Renaissance and Counter-Reformation views of ancient culture, especially myth, literature withdrew into itself. Not—it is imperative to stress—into escapist self-absorption, but into a contemplation of cultural contrasts, controversies and divisions that assimilated to them exactly in order to be able to reflect them and, in the long run, transgress them. Perhaps it is not wholly adventurous to speculate, that the Holy Office intuited the subversive element thus ultimately inherent in Marino’s Baroque mirror-of-myth judging it yet another evidence of the poet’s ‘heresy’.28 University of Stockholm versus aesthetic form characterizing the mythological tradition of the Middle Ages and Renaissance (9–10). As allegories of beauty/art/poetry, he argues, Marino’s myths achieve a “Konvergenz von Darstellunsgform und Darstellungsinhalt” (10). 28 As the polemic surrounding the work of the Spanish Baroque poet, Luis de Góngora (Marino’s contemporary and very likely influenced by him), shows, the seventeenthcentury line between aesthetic innovation—particularly as based on formal matters—and heresy was very fine indeed. See Sofie Kluge, “Góngora’s Heresy: Literary Theory & Criticism in the Golden Age,” MLN 122 (2007): 251–72.