The lesser of two evils

Cicero, the greatest of all Roman statesmen lived in a time of deep political turmoil.

There were civil wars, conspiracies, the overthrow of the republic, and murder of Julius Cesar. Cicero was a great champion of the republic and was deeply concerned with the amount of powers given to Julius Caesar, and after his death, Mark Antony. Antony has been described as, "the greatest soldier in the world"
        Antony soon became an unstoppable juggernaut following the death of his friend Caesar, in particular thirsting for the blood of Cicero. The great statesman tried to play Julius Caesar's son, Octavius, against him. For this Petrach remarks, "If you accept Octavius, said he, we must conclude that you are not so anxious to be rid of all tyrants as to find a tyrant who will be well-disposed toward yourself". Petrach is rebuking Cicero for using Octavius when he might take as much power as his father, but Cicero is well versed in the golden mean of Aristotle. He takes the lesser evil between Octavius and Antony and tries to achieve a balance. His plan would not work, and in the end Cicero died defending the ideals of the republic.
         In his letters to Cicero, Petrach also remarks that it would have been much better for a philosopher like Cicero to "grow old peacefully" and not have participated in civic affairs. While this is a good thing to think and philosophies in the countryside, Ciceros contributions to the state are invaluable. Had he not been involved, the traitor Catalina might have overthrown the government earlier, and many of the ideals of the roman government might not have survived. So Cicero chose the lesser of two evils, became involved and paid for it with his life.

The True Greatness of Humanity

One of the great thinkers of the Renaissance was Pico della Mirandola.  He presented this great  discourse called the Oration on the Dignity of Man.  In it, he presented 900 theses that he wanted to publicly dispute with other scholars.  Interestingly, this discourse wasn't published in his lifetime because of backlash from the Catholic church over the proposed public disputations. 

He says lots of great things in this publication.  Most importantly, he argues that humans are the best thing ever created by God. Why? Solely because they have the ability to choose for themselves what they will become. Pico recognizes what a great power this is and presents his argument quite beautifully. 

He starts by trying to imagine what the Creator must have been thinking when he created humanity.  In the words of Pico posing as God: "It will be in your power to descend to the lower, brutish forms of life; you will be able, through your own decision, to rise again to the superior orders whose life is divine." This sentence inspires a very provoking train of thought. The true greatness in humanity is not just that they can choose to be great- man can choose to be whatever he wants! The greatness equation is not complete unless humanity can choose to descend to the lowest depths as well as ascend to the greatest heights.

This is why the period of the Renaissance was so wonderful and dignified! Humanity had reached a fork in the path: choose to be mere animals or rise above all their weaknesses and choose the high road. Gratefully for us, humanity chose to be great.

However, that same choice is also left to each of us. Greatness? Or mediocrity?
The dignity is in the choice, not the options.

More Curiosity than Capacity

Michel de Montaigne said in his anthropological account Of Cannibals, “I fear me our eyes be greater than our bellies, that we have more curiosity than capacity. We embrace all, but we fasten nothing but wind.” I believe that this speaks to a tremendous failing of the Renaissance voyages of discovery. Being confronted with dozens of new and diverse cultures from which to learn, Renaissance explorers chose instead to invalidate the experiences of other by holding their own aloft.

No doubt motivated by the newfound philosophy of humanism, which allowed for the glorification of the individual, those claiming to seek understanding in reality sought only a confirmation of their superiority. Montaigne speaks to this quite directly in his essay, a dramatic break from the trend seen in the essays of Sir Walter Raleigh and even the fictional account Utopia by Thomas More. Rather than claiming that these “savages” needed anything from him, Montaigne instead purports that his countrymen had much to learn from these people that he describes as “noble”, “generous” and “untainted”.

Humanism, as understood by Montaigne, is not the glorification of some individuals over others. It is seeing purpose and beauty in all things, even and especially those that differ from our own understanding. In this aspect, this period experienced a tremendous failure. The great scholars of the time had their sights so firmly focused on the past in attempt to recapture its grandeur that they failed to see the tremendous opportunities for learning that were in from of them. They sought to learn, to mark on maps, to collect accounts of strange peoples and things without any interest in understanding a different world view. Embracing all, but fastening on nothing but wind.

Perspective, Petrarch, & Potential

How man viewed himself in the 14^th-17^th centuries largely shaped their actions and their work.  The Italian scholar, Francesco Petrarch, sparked the flame of the Renaissance when he discovered letters written by the Roman philosopher, Cicero.

Petrarch saw in Cicero’s work what he himself felt: potential.  He saw greatness in Cicero—a man whose mastery of Latin was unparalleled and whose philosophies were praiseworthy.  Addressing Cicero, Petrarch exclaims, “O great father of Roman eloquence!” and proceeds to praise his works that enliven and inspire.  Petrarch’s letters are Renaissance-personified.  He laments, “the shame of failing to cultivate [their] talents,” expressing his disappointment in his fellowmen.  So he proceeds to reawaken himself and others to the ideals of humanism and individualism, thus fathering part of the Renaissance.

What Petrarch saw in Cicero was soon manifest in da Vinci’s Mona Lisa, Michelangelo’s sculptures, Shakespeare’s plays, and Thomas More’s Utopia.  It seemed that when society believed in man, and man believed in himself, he rose to the occasion, producing works that reflected those of their Greek and Roman predecessors.  Pico della Mirandola said it best when he declared, “Let a certain saving ambition invade our souls so that, impatient of mediocrity, we pant after the highest of things and…bend all our efforts to their attainment.”  This humanistic belief didn’t cause a disregard for Higher power but rather a different perspective; in Mirandola’s case, the revealing arts and ideas were more reason to recognize Diety.

Vindication? Or Damnation? The Problem with Context

Photo by Flickr user yaili

It may sound a little blasphemous coming from an undergraduate studying English, but the part I love most about studying old literature isn’t actually reading the text. I often feel like I should have spent more time studying history than English because I get so much more out of piece when I understand the historical context.

The problem with that enjoyment, however, is that we as people have a very hard time getting every aspect of the context down when we start looking backwards. Despite carefully kept records and trustworthy accounts, my little problem becomes magnified when we start going back hundreds of years to the Renaissance and try to accurately guess why people wrote and did things. A good example of this to me is the controversial Renaissance writer Niccolò Machiavelli. His notorious writings have stretched down through the ages to gently mold our pop culture and character tropes with an influence akin to the much more recent H.P. Lovecraft. Because of Machiavelli, we have (for better or worse) House of Cards, Game of Thrones, and The Tudors. His works are the bread and butter of political intrigue and sound like a much more ancient, bitter, and cynical version of How to Win Friends and Influence People. 

But, the jury is still out on whether those words are serious or satire. And the debate centers around the context. 

Machiavelli wrote some fairly horrible things that are offensive to an ethical mind, but it doesn’t seem he spent his whole life living them. He was a republican during a time of monarchy who suffered publicly for his attempts to undermine the authority of the ruling Medici’s. There is a strong foundation for a belief that Machiavelli was one of the world’s most incredible satirists and critics of absolute power. We, however, can't be sure because we just don't fully know. 

You can learn more here.  

"What a Piece of Work is Man"

One of the greatest movements of the Renaissance is summed up in the words of William Shakespeare.  "What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and in moving, how express and admirable, in action, how like an angel, in apprehension, how like a God.” This idea encompasses the idea of humanism that sprung up during the early Italian Renaissance.  The worth of individuals and their accomplishments became of a greater value than they had ever been before.  In addition to this new idea, the focus of these accomplishments shifted to this life, rather than focusing on the next life.  

The idea of individualization is something that sets this time period apart from any other time.  Rather than accrediting accomplishments, talents, and gifts elsewhere, individuals began to take credit.  A very good example of this is when artists began to sign their works.  This was a way in which others were able to recognize and celebrate not only the work, but the individual as well.  Signing artistic works moved away from the “communal mentality of the middle ages” which Drogin recognizes in “Spare Me the Details.”  In short, this new focus on the individual is recognized today as a defining characteristic for the Renaissance, which did allow individuals to be liberated from dogma.  

Da Vinci: Epitome of the Renaissance Man

Leonardo da Vinci was born right at the beginning of the renaissance; perhaps that contributes to his becoming a true renaissance man. He was the illegitimate child of a notary and a peasant girl but nonetheless grew up comfortably in his father’s house reading scholarly texts and learning to paint. He was talented enough to be apprenticed to an artist at 15, and his artistic career took off from there. His paintings, the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper among them, have been greatly admired for centuries. However, this renaissance man’s interests expanded past the creative arts. In fact, his broad interest and study across disciplines contributed to the impressive quality of his paintings.

Shakespeare notes the amazing potential of humankind in Hamlet, writing, “What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world. The paragon of animals.” Shakespeare could almost have been referring to da Vinci in this passage; da Vinci certainly demonstrated how infinite in faculty a human could be, and he certainly expressed his appreciation of the form and action of humans. He extensively studied anatomy, even dissecting corpses to examine how nerves and muscles work. He was also fascinated by physics and the natural world, filling dozens of notebooks with his observations of the natural world and ideas for inventions. There is incredible precision in da Vinci’s works because the artist incorporated his knowledge of the sciences into every detail.

In his Oration on the Dignity of Man, Pico della Mirandola discusses how part of what makes humans such high and noble beings is their ability to shape themselves into whoever they want to be. Raised an artist to eventually become a true renaissance man, a welder of the arts and sciences when many would have declared them separate entities, da Vinci certainly carved his own identity. There was so much he wanted to learn, he seldom finished the projects he started, but he was overall content with his accomplishments. This wide scope of genius and dedication to connecting the arts and sciences continue to serve as a testament to the versatility of human achievement.

Public Speaking: They Had to Do It Too

The Renaissance was a time of great change in technology, belief, values, and even language. People changed the way that they talked to each other and reverted to older grammar rules from the time of ancient Rome. This language change was very significant as it required the ideal Renaissance man, who had to be intelligent and knowledgeable in various fields as it was, to be an eloquent orator.

An example of the type of speaking that was expected by intellectuals at the time is Pico della Mirandola's (pictured above) speech Oration on the Dignity of Man. In his speech, Mirandola expresses the values of humanism, as it was starting to become more known at the time, and expresses the ideas of it in a way that, today, we would probably just see as rambling with some fancy vocabulary words thrown in there, but at the time, was considered brilliant rhetoric. The way he speaks lets his audience know that he knows what he is talking about as well as who he is talking to. He references scripture and uses it to back up the beliefs he is defending, helping him to better persuade his primarily Christian audience.

When humanism was on the rise, the philosophers of the Renaissance had to be able to speak well when their values were tested by religious leaders. The church of the time was very much against humanism and how it contradicted their long-held beliefs regarding the nature of man. However, with their expert oration skills, the philosophers of the Renaissance were able to keep their new ideas alive and thriving throughout the era. 

Chaos vs Order: The Motivation Behind the Voyages

The Renaissance Man. He had effortless style in his dressed, he was well versed in subjects ranging from math to rhetoric, and most importantly he was a sovereign individual. His ancestors lived in a world where sovereignty remained in the hands of the state and it's constituents were born into their destinies as predicated by fate (or the state). After being introduced to sovereignty, the Renaissance Man saw beyond the tyrannical order that bound his ancestor's destinies and followed his natural instinct to explore the chaos of the outside world. He continually waded through the unknown waiting for an idea to grab hold of him. The drive to comprehend and create resulted in the voyages of people like Sir Walter Raleigh and Michel de Montaigne.

Every individual needs order and consistency in their lives to remain sane. But, when order become tyrannical people are tend to either wreak havoc where they are just to have something to put back together, or set off on an adventure to understand and put together all the unknown puzzle pieces outside of their domain. Leaving the tyranny of the Tower of London in search for gold is not just Sir Walter's story, but an archetype of human behavior. While the description of his adventures is not honest, his narrative of their quest into chaos lives on.

Michel de Montaigne lived out this archetypal ideal as well, however seemed to gain more from his journey than just a bedtime story. Montaigne encountered the unknown when he met the "Cannibals." He could have recoiled in the face of so much chaos and labeled them as barbaric like many other voyagers of his day, but instead he had the courage to take one step further into the dark. By taking the time to observe and contemplate the seemingly chaotic traditions of the natives, Montaigne was able to organize all the new information he observed and concluded that the Tupinamba Indians were very similar to the people he new in his homeland.

This level of understanding would not have been possible without the enlightenment that resulted out of the Renaissance. As an individual continually exposes themselves to chaos and makes a sincere attempt to put in comprehensible order, they will move closer to reaching their full potential of Being. 

Patronization of Renaissance Art Takes Many Forms

The renaissance granted the world a new outlook on what art consists of. In the past, only such organizations of power such as the church or the wealthiest of kings could afford to pay for the artists, labor, and materials necessary to create significant pieces of art. What the Renaissance brought to the world was a new take on art. While the church still held influence across Europe, wealthy merchant families, such as the Medicis, were able to commission some of the worlds best artists to create sculptures, paintings, and other works of art that were not necessarily confined to religious inspiration. We see artists such as Bernini who was solely contracted by the church to perform

               We see some of these fantastic artists such as Michelangelo creating masterpieces such as “The Creation” which was obviously contracted by the church. However, during this time we begin to see paintings such as “The Mona Lisa” by Leonardo Da Vinci that redefined how we see art. Da Vinci also stretched his limits by trying new inventions, performing anatomical surgeries on corpses to better understand how the body works, and other such activities that were not commissioned or even approved of by the church. I believe religious art is a beautiful thing, however, I am impressed with how the works of art during the renaissance were able to take on a wider scope than simply worship. This form of art was quite rare in the centuries preceding the renaissance because few patrons could afford the economical and political costs of funding masterpieces not affiliated with the church.

Improvement Through the Love of Learning

From our discussions on the paper by Pico dela Mirandola, it is clear that the renaissance was a period in which there began to be a focus on the potential and divinity of man. Transitioning from the Middle Ages where man was viewed as unclean and unworthy before God, it appears that the Renaissance was a complete turn around in almost all aspects of societal culture.
For example, we can begin by looking at what Mirandola discusses about man having immeasurable potential.

We then can look to other sources that show a significant focus being placed on self improvement through learning. In the excerpt from Utopia, book two, titled "Utopians' Love of Learning", we read of Sir Thomas Moore's experience in a classroom as students are learning. I was very interested in the overall tone that he writes with. Looking beyond the positive things he has to say about this amazing learning experience that he was observing in students, one can also read between the lines to note the positive attitude he is writing with, as if there is hope for the future that he can't contain. This is what I feel and think of when I read of the Renaissance period.
From numerous sources one can find this same optimism for the future, and positive attitude about the nature and potential of man. Rather than a focus on the bare necessities of Middle Age life such as war and food, people are beginning to seek out more, whether it be in learning, in self improvement, or in seeing the good in others. Further evidence of this attitude of improvement and "expansion" can be seen in Sir Walter Raleigh's documentation of the discovery of Guiana. As one reads between the lines, they are able to understand that this time period was one of exploration and discovering new and better things, physically and spiritually.

Montaigne's Difference Between Novelty and Nature

            Michel de Montaigne was a French essayist of the Renaissance. One of his essays is titled “Of a Monstrous Child” focuses on the concept prevalent in the Renaissance that men have a greater worth and dignity that was previously not believed in the Middle Ages, when men were considered “cogs in the universe” instead of a central part of the universe such as was believed in the Renaissance.

            The essay “Of a Monstrous Child” recounts the experience of Montaigne observing the relationship of a deformed child (the deformity was the abscess of an underdeveloped conjoined twin) and his uncle, who was leading him around the town in which they lived seeking donations for the “freak show” of nature that he has marketed as. Montaigne’s moral of this essay is that though there is something that is not understood because of its oddness, anything alive is still created from God: “Those that we call monsters are not so to God, who sees in the immensity of His work the infinite forms that He has comprehended therein; and it is to be believed that this figure which astonishes us has relation to some other figure of the same kind unknown to man.”

            On the concept of infinite worth of men, this essay further proves that the Renaissance mindset shifted from only the holiest religious man was worth something in God’s eyes to anything created by nature (and therefore God), no matter its strangeness, has dignity and is worth respect.

            Montaigne ends his essay with a citation from Cicero whose philosophical writings also inspired the humanism movement: “What he often sees he does not admire, though he be ignorant how it comes to pass. When a thing happens he never saw before, he thinks that it is a portent.”

Papal Patronage: Leo's Luxuries

Known for his cheerful disposition (and his spending of the Church's coffers), Pope Leo X is an interesting figure within the period known as the Renaissance. Simultaneously a genuine holy man, a luxurist and a politician, Leo has become a controversial figure in this modern era. The most infamous reason, of course, was his excessive spending. Two years of his papacy had led to every florin and ducato that his predecessor Julius II had ever obtained vanishing into thin air. His own personal income would make most company CEO's jealous, with a recorded income of 580,000 ducats one year, which translates into the modern US dollar as 102.5 million. When finally realizing how quickly money was going down the drain, he resorted to such measures as selling the robes and hats of cardinals, pawning off items of the church and even statues of the apostles themselves. It is hardly surprising, then, that his successor Pope Adrian VI became known as a severe penny pincher.

The Benefits?
Just because he spent enormous sums of money does not mean he did no good. In 1513 he reformed the University of Rome such that all of the faculties which had been shut down due to budget cuts were restored, all of the professors teaching there had their pay increased as well as hiring teachers from across the continent. His donations helped establish the first Greek printing-presses within Rome, and he gave stable jobs within the clergy to important artists and poets at the time, the most famous of whom being Raphael. He donated millions of modern dollars annually to hospitals, war veterans as well as many other sick and inflicted. The highest salaries paid at that time were given to Musicians to lend their voice (or their instrument) to the Church Choir, and it was under his guidance that the common folk, regardless of language, could join the Choir in song.

Regardless of whether or not he was truly a hedonist as some accused him of being, Leo was a significant factor in the development of music and other arts during his time.

Somewhere Between the Man and the Madness

In the Renaissance, man was regarded in a much lighter sense then he had been before. Of course, as is usual in the world, that didn't mean the same thing to every person, even in the same field. Humanism has no finite, structured meaning now, just as it didn't back then. Comparing the works of Italian, Niccoló Machiavelli and Spanish, Miguel de Cervantes is a great indication of that. These two men we both prominent writers during the Renaissance period, but their views on the ideals of the time couldn't be more different. 

Don Quixote de la mancha by Andrey Zhelkovsky (2005)

Cervantes viewed man as a being whose potential was being above all the malice and drudgery of the world. His version of man had the responsibility of overcoming the negativity that surrounded him in and ever-darkening world. He felt that the real success was not climbing a social ladder but proving that man truly was not fallen and could be kind and virtuous.

Machiavelli, being a politician, had a different sense of man as a being that held no moral responsibility for his actions. His version of man had the duty to take any measures in order to achieve his potential. He felt that "it is better to be fear than be loved." He saw the darkness in the world and felt that there was no way to overcome it, and a man had a better chance of success if he used the darkness to his benefit.

The idea of humanism in the Renaissance was a relatively new concept: the idea that man had potential and was more than a depraved, fallen being. However, the ways that people felt that man could best reach this potential was vastly different. It's common to believe that there was a sense of unity in past eras of the world that isn't found today, but in reality, there always has been conflicting ideas, even when the foundation of the belief is the same.

Learning Practices During the Renaissance

Schools today are the primary way in which students learn to converse about, defend, and argue against ideas and practices. Schools in the past have not been much different in their objectives, but the way in which they brought about that learning is considerably contrastive to the ways students learn today.

The Renaissance

In Silva Rhetoricae: Content/Form, the third paragraph talks about how students of the Renaissance were instructed in imitating works that had been previously written and discussing how the form contributed to the piece. It is this process of imitation that so greatly sets their learning from the modern way of teaching.

During the Renaissance, there was a lack of books and other resources. The printing press had been invented, but books were still rare and expensive. Much of the time it was the instructor only who had a copy of the work they were studying. The instructor would bring the book to class and read it to the students, then they would discuss what the writer could have meant. It was the job of the students to memorize the entire work, as this was the only way they could have continuous access to it. They were then asked to revise it and make it better (remember that they were reading classical greats such as Aristotle and Cicero). They could change the format (i.e. from prose to poetry), include dialogue in an otherwise dialogue-free text, or they could translate it into another language. Again, they were all the while attempting to improve it. This caused the students to constantly reflect on word usage and whether the form of the original piece was the best possible form for the intended message.

Many master writers were taught in this way, including William Shakespeare and Alexander Pope. By dissecting the writings of Classical Greats, they were able to hone their own craft and emerge as Greats themselves.

Welcome to Rhetoric and Civilization!

This blog is for students of English 212, "Rhetoric and Civilization" held Fall semester 2018 at Brigham Young University, taught by Dr. Gideon Burton.

Blog Purposes

• Responding to readings
• Exploring the themes for a given historical period
• Raising topics and bringing in sources from self-directed learning
• Developing content regarding a focused topic for an end-of-semester, "finished" post
• Learning to use a 21st century communications platform, especially to bring in social and multimedia aspects of education.

The blog is not a digital dropbox by which an individual student delivers homework to the instructor. As detailed below, students will be required to read an respond regularly to one another's posts, providing an opportunity to profit from fellow student's independent learning and to refine their own thinking.

Regarding the specifics of the blogging assignment...