#the devine comedy

[ranminfan]

But night is come again, and it is time for us to leave; we have seen everything.

I have been anticipating that type of ending in inferno and I still got chills.

Loved the book very much, so immersive when it comes to the descriptions of the environment.

And I was awestruck by the ending that caught me suprised, was to learn in Dante's hell, the center was as cold as ice, quiet like the dead, and windy.

A total opposite to the firey center I was imagining.

[the-way-we-were]

Francesca da Rimini

Photography by the-way-we-were (2025):

Art by William Dyce National Galleries of Scotland: National Edinburgh - Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

[glazedeye-s]

dante and virgil in hell, by william-adolphe bouguereau // the song of achilles, by madeline miller

[teratotally]

(Reblogs appreciated!)

I feel like I should explain.

These are my ocs, they're doing the poses from the Dante and Virgil painting, but they're not Dante and Virgil.

[mando-lore]

Classical literature honestly rated, part 1

Are some classical books overrated? Definitely! Do some people read classical literature and say it is good just to seem like an intellectual? Yes! Are there secretly hidden gems in the big pile of this overrated shit? Of course! I have read a great deal of classical literature and here is my honest opinion:

PS: some authors had a series, like Agatha Christie and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I’ve picked the most popular books from them.

Frankenstein, Mary Shelley: 10/10

My expectations for this book were incredibly low. I have always despised how Frankenstein and his monster were depicted in the media. Old man in a lab coat, Lightning, IT’S ALIVEEE, some green man with bolts in his head. But it was absolutely not that! Frankenstein is the story of a young man with a god complex who creates his own ‘adam’. It all turns out into some bloody murder thriller, with the best dialogue I’ve ever encountered. 

A Study in Scarlet, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: 7/10

Alright, I’ve seen the tv adaptation of the book in Sherlock, but it does not compare to its original. First of all, Sherlock Holmes is an actual good character, not some asshole? He was the first literature character that I related to. And how Watson is the one writing his story down makes it feel real somehow. It is also very interesting to read how crime-scene-investigations went in that time period. (a puddle of the killer’s blood? Gross, mob it up!). But, though it is a short story it feels quite slow.

The Devine Comedy, Dante Alighieri: 5/10

So, Dante’s Devine Comedy shaped the modern view on heaven and hell. The things he described in this book were so graphic that artists based their depiction of hell on it. And truly, the storytelling is creative (Dante himself is the main character who makes a journey through the rings of hell all the way to paradise), and the descriptions are quite graphic (murders get boiled in a river of blood! yey!), but it is a very long book that feels so slow, it’s like you yourself are walking down the rings of hell yourself. I did not get further than Inferno (the first part of three, about the rings of hell) and I would rather be boiled in blood than read on. 

The Great Gatsby,  F. Scott Fitzgerald: 9/10

This... this book blew me out of the park. Before reading this I had never even touched a classical book before. The phrasing is incredibly poetic, the characters are all wonderful, the scenes are described so well it is like you are standing in the middle of them. The emotions and the mystery of the main story added to this pile of things finishes it off perfectly. But I swear if I see one more line from this book quoted by some hipster blog or stolen by that Atticus guy, I’m going to [spoiler redacted]. 

Les Miserables, Victor Hugo: 7/10

It took me reading this book hours every day for 3 weeks straight to finish it but man was I glad I did it! The many complicated (complicated in the good, Shakespearian sense) characters with all their own complicated (again, in a good way) storylines are iconic. Iconic, that’s the only word I can find for it. And poetic. Some lines are so beautiful and inspirational I had to underline them. But that good old Victor Hugo, Uncle Vic, HE DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO SHUT UP. I love the book, I do, but when I was on page 1800 reading about the history of the sewer system in Paris, I almost closed the book for good. Also, I skipped that whole Waterloo business. It was bullshit.

Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens: 3/10

I tried. I really did. I had to read an English novel for my English course and I choose Oliver Twist. I played in a musical about it, I saw the movie... but the book. Dear god. It was TOUGH. I have read a total of 5 chapters, maybe? And I have never even touched a Dickens ever since. 

The Odyssey, Homerus: 7/10

I guess it depends on which translation you get, but I loved mine. I could taste the wine, sweet as honey. I could smell the olive oil on their skin. Though the book is almost entirely event-based and Odysseus cheats on his wife several times, it is overall a fun story about a likeable hero. Though, I read the Geronimo Stilton version when I was little and I liked that one far better.

Dracula, Bram Stoker: 7,5/10

Another book I thought would be horrible, based on its depiction in the media. Seduction, Crosses, a vampire seeking his lost bride. Absolutely not. Stoker is sometimes so exact in its description of horrors I got nauseous. The characters, both men and women, are likeable, and the book is set up as if it is a collection of information on Dracula and how to defeat him. Like a manual, how creative! Though, if it were up to me I’d have chosen a different set-up, with a different starting point and a different main character. But, that is just taste I suppose.

The Murder on the Orient Express, Agatha Christie: 6/10

Have you seen the movie? Did you like it? It’s exactly the movie. The main character, Poirot does some thinking aloud, but otherwise, he does not really explain his deductive thinking. This makes the book detailed on some points and vague on others.

1984, George Orwell: 5/10

The classic! The..... boring. Though the ideas that Orwell proposes of a dystopian future are perfect, the story in which it is presented is very boring. A love-affair, seriously? People are DYING George! The ending is very interesting, though.

Any play by Shakespeare: fuck off/10

Listen, I love Shakespeare. I read his sonnets, I’ve seen multiple plays and movies of Shakespeare. But to actually READ Shakespeare’s plays? What the hell! I read one scene of Hamlet (which I adore very much) and I had to lie down for a moment. “That’s just because you’re perhaps not used to reading such difficult literature” shut up you elitist jerk. English may not be my native language but I am still damn good with it. I believe Shakespeare’s plays are meant to be SEEN by the public and READ by the actors. 

[seacrowisland]

Langblr Secret Santa

Hiya my dear @genderqueerfujioka , I’m your Secret Santa and here to spread some Langbrl joy! Since the Langblr coordinator told me you were interested in Italian and Literature I thought, I might share a short introduction to Italian Literature with you as it is the thing I’m currently studying in university. However, when stalking your profile, I couldn’t help but notice that you are very interested in learning Swedish at the moment, which is why I have created a second gift for you. This way, you can decide which language you want to focus on today and keep the other one for Boxing Day or New Years. (Or open it right away as well.)

If you want to be a pro at Italian Literature (or seem like it) you have to know these three drama queens:

From the left to the right they are Dante Alighieri, Giovanni Boccaccio and Francesco Petrarca (also known as Petrarch). They are also called the “tre corone” which means “three crowns” and even though they published all of their works in the 14th century they are still considered the finest literature one could possibly read. (They are like Italian Shakespeares basically and everyone’s obsessed with them.)

Let’s start with the first one, shall we? Dante was a pretty cool guy. Born in 1265 in Florence he first became a politician, but since he choose the wrong party (there were two oppositional parties in Florence at that time and they were at each other's throats) he had to flee from Florence in 1301, which the other party used to deny him entrance into the city for the rest of his life. (If he had paid enough money maybe they would’ve let him back in but he wasn’t really interested in that.) Dante then basically founded Italian Literature as he used the “volgare” (the language of the common folk in Florence at that time) as the language of his stories. (Before him it was all Latin, from then on all the authors wrote in the Florentine accent because through Dante it became cool.) His most famous work is “La Divina Commedia” (“The Divine Comedy”) in which Vergil, a Latin poet, as well as one of his lovers, Beatrice, lead him through the three realms of the dead. (Hell, Purgatory and Paradise.) Sort of ancient fantasy literature which also teaches about theology, philosophy and also about science at that time. He died in 1362.

Boccaccio was a little bit more chill, he was also a politician (born in 1313 in Florence as well) but instead of getting send into exile he kept calm, travelled a lot and wrote a set of 100 novels called “Il Decameron” (from deka=ten and hemera=day because it takes place within ten days). The novels are all centred around a group of ten young people that flee from the plague in 1348 and lift in the countryside for ten days. (Obviously, the plague wasn’t over within 10 days but it’s a story after all.) During those days they each told a story every day and then the one who had told the best story was selected king or queen of that day. The novels all take place among normal, upper-class people (merchants most of all) and are focused on the intelligence of the characters, which was something quite new at that time. Boccaccio was also obsessed with Dante and literally wrote a biography about him, there was that much enthusiasm. (Even though Dante didn’t return it.) He died in 1375.

Last but not least Petrarch. (I’m gonna call him that even though his actual name was Petrarca but Petrarch is more common among English speakers.) He was born in 1304 and—not, not Florence, but Arezzo, Italy. As his dad was a politician, who worked close to Avignon, Petrarch grew up in France, in a rural area close to the Mont Ventoux. Why does this matter, you might ask? Well, because Petrarch one day (in 1336) decided to climb up that mountain (most people at that time had better things to do than to climb up random mountains, so it was quite unusual for him to do so) but what made this hike so special is, that he wrote about it in a letter to Francesco Dionigi. In this letter, he has the spectator was in the centre which was a massive cut in the experience of nature and landscapes in the 14th century. Suddenly the entire aesthetic changed because suddenly there wasn’t just nature but a reflection of your innermost self within the things you see in front of you. Petrarch was a poet and also the founder of the (Italian) sonnet (which was later copied by many Englishman and once it was already out fashion picked up by Shakespeare to be cool again, so Petrarch is the reason why people are able to obsess over Shakespeare’s sonnets) but most of all he changed the worldview from being centred on God and his creation to being focused on the self and your feelings. In his poems, the “Canzoniere” (consisting of 366 poems) he wrote about one thing: His love for a girl called Laura. When Petrarch first met her, she was already bound to another man, but that didn’t keep him from loving her. He wrote to her 266 poems “in vita” (so whilst she was still alive) and 100 “in morte” (once she had died), talking about his feelings about her and so on. (By the way, they weren’t just sonnets but also songs and ballads.) I’d also have to mention, that the Italian sonnet differs from the (standard) English sonnet: Both have 14 lines but whilst Shakespeare had three quatrains (abab cdcd efef) followed by a heroic couplet (gg), the original Petrarchan sonnet consisted of a rhyming octave (abbaabba) followed by a rhyming sestet (cdcdcd).

To include some actual Italian, here’s Petrarch's XXXV (35th) poem. (I included an English version below so that you can understand it properly, but I’d definitely encourage you to try and read it the way it is.)

Solo et pensoso i piú deserti campi vo mesurando a passi tardi et lenti, et gli occhi porto per fuggire intenti ove vestigio human l'arena stampi.

Altro schermo non trovo che mi scampi dal manifesto accorger de le genti, perché negli atti d'alegrezza spenti di fuor si legge com'io dentro avampi:

sí ch'io mi credo omai che monti et piagge et fiumi et selve sappian di che tempre sia la mia vita, ch'è celata altrui.

Ma pur sí aspre vie né sí selvagge cercar non so ch'Amor non venga sempre ragionando con meco, et io co llui.

(And now the English version)

Alone and thoughtful, through the most desolate fields, I go measuring out slow, hesitant paces, And keep my eyes intent on fleeing Any place where human footsteps mark the sand.

I find no other defence to protect me From other people’s open notice, Since in my aspect, whose joy is quenched, They see from outside how I flame within.

So now I believe that mountains and river-banks And rivers and forests know the quality Of my life, hidden from others.

Yet I find there is no path so wild or harsh That love will not always come there Speaking with me, and I with him.

So, first of all, you can probably totally tell, that this poem is about how in love he is and even though he’s trying to hide it from people, it’s not really working out the way he planned it. I’m not going to go on about the verse rhythms and stuff like that, but I would like to point out (a) the beautiful form of the Italian sonnet and (b) the connection between the nature (fields, sand, mountains, river-banks) and his feelings, wanting to find a path that hides him from people and most importantly lets him escape love. (But, as he precisely states, there is no such path.)

There are lots of other Italian writers (like Giacomo Leopardi, who totally looks like Eddie Redmayne and was one of the first romanticists or Carlo Goldoni, who was super important for the Italian Drama, which in itself it a whole other story) but if you know the tre corone, people are going to be super impressed and their works are also great reads. Personally, I most enjoy Boccaccio because his stories are quite simple, but Petrarch's poetry is nice too and if you’ve got the time, maybe one day you’ll read into “La Divina Comedia”. (I honestly tried but couldn’t do it.)

I hope you enjoyed your gift! If you want to talk about Italian Literature (or Drama or poetry) you can text me anytime. I know, that this isn’t exactly a vocabulary list or anything like that, but I always enjoyed not only learning my target language but also a few of the cultural backgrounds so hopefully, we’re on the same track here. Happy holidays and have a good new year!

[a-pale-fire]

At the midpoint on the journey of life, i found myself in a dark forest, for the clear path was lost..

Dante Alighieri, Inferno

[awolfinpeopleclothes]

How I came there I cannot really tell, I was so full of sleep when I forsook the one true way.

Dante, Inferno, Canto I, lines 10-12 Translated by Robert and Jean Hollander