A German writer seems to have caused a bit of a furore by suggesting that not only do today's Italian students struggle to understand Dante Aligheri but that the 14th-century master poet was left way behind in the immortality stakes by William Shakespeare.
A major difference between the two writers is that Dante was wrapped up in his own times and obsessions, while Shakespeare wrote for all times and left himself out of it.
In my readings of Italian history – inspired by last year's travels on the Odyssean Coast – Dante's Divine Comedy seemed to get so many mentions that I thought I'd better have a go at it.
But, even in Robin Kirkpatrick's slangy translation for Penguin Classics, I have to confess that I've been finding it close to impenetrable – and that's with also reading the footnotes that take up about a quarter of this edition.
Of course, Shakespeare was writing quite a bit later than Dante – things move on. It would, for example, be futile to start comparing the guitar playing of Bert Weedon with that of Eric Clapton.
So let's be honest... Dante's achievement was probably pretty remarkable for its time. But today one wonders if it's really worth the hard work of trying to figure out what he's on about.
Shakespeare can also be hard work... but he's still worth it.
No comments:
Post a Comment