Spenser and Logic: Gigantomachia and Contentlessness in The Faerie Queene

Q1 Arts and Humanities Spenser Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1086/717094
J. Curran
{"title":"Spenser and Logic: Gigantomachia and Contentlessness in The Faerie Queene","authors":"J. Curran","doi":"10.1086/717094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Figuring the enforcement of authority against rebellion, the war between the Olympians and the earth-spawned Giants is typically read as a marker of ideology. In The Faerie Queene, Spenser’s abundant allusions to the Gigantomachia can seem straightforwardly ideological, aligning Olympian rule with his virtue-knights, avatars of Elizabethan hegemony, and his giants with subversion. This essay explores another significance for the Gigantomachia, reviewing a different tradition of meaning for the myth-pattern and locating it in the poem—a tradition wherein, rather than liberation in the political realm, the Giants portend the radical oversimplification and even the nullification of thought within the mind. Through conflict with giants, Spenser argues the importance of logic: investigating, idea inventing, discriminating, dialoguing. Giants help clarify the picture of the place of logic, particularly in a Ramist vein, in The Faerie Queene. The foci are the Egalitarian Giant and the correspondences between Orgoglio and Disdaine.","PeriodicalId":39606,"journal":{"name":"Spenser Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spenser Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/717094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Figuring the enforcement of authority against rebellion, the war between the Olympians and the earth-spawned Giants is typically read as a marker of ideology. In The Faerie Queene, Spenser’s abundant allusions to the Gigantomachia can seem straightforwardly ideological, aligning Olympian rule with his virtue-knights, avatars of Elizabethan hegemony, and his giants with subversion. This essay explores another significance for the Gigantomachia, reviewing a different tradition of meaning for the myth-pattern and locating it in the poem—a tradition wherein, rather than liberation in the political realm, the Giants portend the radical oversimplification and even the nullification of thought within the mind. Through conflict with giants, Spenser argues the importance of logic: investigating, idea inventing, discriminating, dialoguing. Giants help clarify the picture of the place of logic, particularly in a Ramist vein, in The Faerie Queene. The foci are the Egalitarian Giant and the correspondences between Orgoglio and Disdaine.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
斯宾塞与逻辑:《仙后》中的巨果与不满足
奥林匹斯神和地球上的巨人之间的战争通常被解读为意识形态的标志。在《仙后》中,斯宾塞对巨人的大量暗示似乎是直接的意识形态,将奥林匹斯的统治与他的美德骑士,伊丽莎白霸权的化身,以及他的巨人与颠覆联系在一起。这篇文章探讨了巨人的另一个意义,回顾了神话模式的另一种意义传统,并将其定位在诗歌中——在这种传统中,巨人预示着思想的激进过度简化,甚至是思想的无效,而不是政治领域的解放。通过与巨人的冲突,斯宾塞论证了逻辑的重要性:调查、观念创造、辨别、对话。巨人帮助理清了逻辑的位置,尤其是在《仙后》中拉米斯派的风格。焦点是平等主义巨人和奥格里奥与狄登之间的书信。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Spenser Studies
Spenser Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Front Matter “Soveraigne place”: Spenser with Henri Lefebvre Thinking through Symbionts: Spenser with Donna Haraway On Dissonance and Late Style: Spenser with Theodor W. Adorno In the Person of the Author: A Response to “Imagined Companions”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1