What is some good Baroque literature?
What is some good Baroque literature?
Caleb Young
Bentley Barnes
EVERYTHING BY LOPE DE VEGA, MIGUEL DE CERVANTES SAAVEDRA, JUAN RUIZ DE ALARCÓN, BALTASAR GRACIÁN, NOT NECESSARILY IN THAT ORDER —ALTHOUGH, THE LAST ONE IS FIRST IN MY PREFERENCE —PARAMOUNT EMINENCES, BIZARRE STARS, AUTHORS IN EXCELLENCE.
HONORIFIC COMMENDATION: THE WORKS BY JUANA INÉS DE LA CRUZ.
Jack Nguyen
Milton, English metaphysical poets, John Lyly, Tasso, Giambattista Marino, Gongora, de Vega, de la Barca.
Cervantes is more of a renaissance writer. He actively criticized de Vega's formal (baroque) irregularities and excessive freedoms.
Julian Harris
>Cervantes is more of a renaissance writer.
NO; MIGUEL DE CERVANTES SAAVEDRA'S STYLE IS PROPERLY BAROQUISTIC, IN ITS EARLIEST PHASE, IMMEDIATELY OUT FROM MANNERISM.
>He actively criticized de Vega's formal (baroque) irregularities and excessive freedoms.
... AND JUAN RUIZ DE ALARCÓN CRITICIZED LOPE DE VEGA'S DUBIOUS ETHICS —I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS IMPORTANT.
Carson Roberts
Which literary historian places him in the baroque?
>JUAN RUIZ DE ALARCÓN CRITICIZED LOPE DE VEGA'S DUBIOUS ETHICS —I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS IMPORTANT
Literary eras are differentiated by comparing their formal and thematic qualities. If writers are opposed in such central formal matters such as Aristotelian unities, it is a fair suggestion that they don't quite fit into the very same Zeitgeist.
John Cox
I read a few latin american books about Cervantes that call him Baroque. It's not like you can't be both renaissance and Baroque, they're both just vague terms invented by critics and academics.
Robert Martinez
What are some Gothic writers?
Aaron Sanders
>terms invented by critics and academics
Eh, no, not really, they were invented long before the criticism and academia as we know them.
It is true that they can be very murky concepts (especially baroque in literature), there I can agree. Still, categorising isn't done just so, without any justification, and I'd like to know it for Cervantes, because all the literary history that I've been taught and books on the matter that I've read sort him into the renaissance drawer, at the end of the day (he is creating at its sunset, but still isn't using what I see as the typical hyper-ornate baroque style and its reflexive and religious themes).
Joshua Morris
>Eh, no
Wrong. The still prevalent notion of 'Renaissance' was invented by Nietzsche's mentor Burckhardt in the mid-19th c. Only a few 20th c histories took issue; Huizinga perhaps presenting the strongest case contra.
John Murphy
Burckhardt was certainly a very important figure in the forming of our modern image of the renaissance, but both of the eras were understood as distinct entities long before him - if nothing else as seen in opposition to each other and to the middle ages and classicism. The stark differences between JS Bach and CPE Bach, or Michelangelo and El Greco, are evident to literally everyone.
Dominic Flores
Are there good English translations of them? If so, which ones?
Kevin Perez
kys bitch
Aiden Taylor
I DO NOT KNOW, SINCE I HAVE READ THEIR WORKS IN THEIR ORIGINAL LANGUAGE; ALTHOUGH, I ADVISE THAT YOU LEARN SPANISH BEFORE READING THEM, OR NOT READ THEM AT ALL, INSTEAD OF READING TRANSLATIVE CORRUPTIONS, ESPECIALLY IN REGARD TO BAROQUISTIC WORKS.
Liam Miller
good poster
Elijah Ortiz
Why especially in this case?
Evan Martinez
>baroquistic
Kevin Anderson
Not that guy, but translations lose the musicality of the structure and the verbiage of the baroque prose. Also, the delicious archaisms.
Is not the same
>La virtud es cosa de veras, todo lo demás de burlas. La capacidad y grandeza se ha de medir por la virtud, no por la fortuna. Ella sola se basta a sí misma. Vivo el hombre, le haze amable; y muerto, memorable.
>Virtue alone is for real; all else is sham. Talent and greatness depend on virtue, not on fortune. Only virtue is sufficient unto herself. She makes us love the living and remember the dead.
Samuel James
The English version gains a semi-colon though.
Jace Jones
NOT VERBIAGE, BUT, RATHER, THE POLYSEMY.
Aiden Clark
Go with the Gong. Góngora is the real shit.
Jack Hughes
>long before him
>stark differences
Are the differences in either case void of influence or of the continuity of thinking (comparing Michelangelo to El Greco is loaded btw to make your theory of consciously known 'eras' in times when they were NOT remarked look 'just so') or do they rather point to a living time as opposed to a dark and dead one- 'Renaissance v. Medieval times', for instance? Also in the case of the Bachs the earlier time is going to have to be seen as the more 'enlightened' due to the elder Bach's superior genius, not that Carl was some slouch or pushover because he clearly wasn't. He just wasn't his dad.
General notions of decay are always opposed to general notions of progress. The idea of decay is far older however- and by millenia; the idea of progress only really takes root via Condorcet in Revolutionary times (1795). I mention this because that is or was your initial argument- progress, howsoever embedded.