The essay investigates the relations between mythology and literature in the treatise and the narrative literature of the XVII century, following the Poetica Sacra by Giovanni Ciampoli. According to Ciampoli, mythology 1) must not be used in serious works, whose aim is to docere and not to delectare; 2) can be used in jocular works, but without ever mix sacred and profane; 3) can be used as a sheer name (reduced to the rethoric figure of antonomasia); 4) can be used in scientific works, in which mythology can replace specific vocabulary and works as a metaphore. Except for a few exception, and although the narrative and treatise production of the Seventeenth century is huge and almost impossible to master, it can be reached the conclusion that mythology is not to be found at all or is used according to Ciampoli’s rules. Anyway, the exceptions are relevant: in Calloandro fedele by Marini the myth of androgyny, in Lucerna by Pona the utilization of the mythic structure of the metamorphosis show a significant presence of mythology; moreover Dicerie sacre by Marino seems to aim at considering christian religion and heathen mythology alike. In other words, Marino’s seems to aim at building a “poetics of metamorphosis”, typical of the myth, instead a “poetics of the conversion”, typical of the Christianity and opposed of the first one, and, as such, supported by his enemies of the circle of Barberini, from Famiano Strada to Giovanni Ciampoli.
|Titolo tradotto del contributo||[Autom. eng. transl.] Metamorphosis vs conversion. The myth in treatises and in the seventeenth century narrative|
|Numero di pagine||25|
|Rivista||RENDICONTI - ISTITUTO LOMBARDO DI SCIENZE E LETTERE. ACCADEMIA DI SCIENZE E LETTERE. CLASSE DI LETTERE E SCIENZE MORALI E STORICHE|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Pubblicato - 2005|
- Giambattista Marino
- Narraive literature
- XVIIth century