Literatura académica sobre el tema "Orlando furioso"

Abstract This article foregrounds human epistemological disorientation in the Orlando furioso with a view to theological implications which, if not rigorously followed up by Ariosto’s verse (too supple to endure rigor), are nevertheless made possible by its discourse. Beginning with the recurring fantasy-inducing impotence of will (madness) that unite the narrator with the characters, the article examines the Furioso’s own transition from romance to epic mode, aiming to highlight the survival of romance and its subversion of the epistemological exhaustiveness of the epic. By turning to the theological implications of the human epistemological condition that the Orlando furioso repeatedly evokes, it suggests how a functional agnosticism could begin to operate beneath the surface of theic humanist fictions and thought.

RESUMO: Este artigo tem por objetivo mostrar como o episódio do Palácio de Atlante é construído de modo a traçar uma espécie de retrato da mente humana obcecada, mais especificamente, da loucura, tema fundamental da obra Orlando furioso (1532), de Ludovico Ariosto. Ao longo do poema, as personagens empreendem quêtes próprias, tentando satisfazer as suas pulsões. Com isso, acabam se embrenhando cada vez mais na selva, espaço labiríntico em que se perdem física e mentalmente. Trata-se de uma obra marcada pelo movimento delirante, circular, e, muitas vezes vão, que desemboca em episódios de loucura (apaixonada e furiosa), e o Palácio aparece como uma síntese dessa pulsação incontrolável e delirante. Dentro dessa construção, a confusão sentimental das personagens e o errar são observáveis na perseguição doentia de projeções. O poeta, então, desenha um vai e vem incessante, que ocorre em um tempo e espaço infinitos. O delirante errar das personagens, que nunca alcançam os seus objetos de desejo, exprime os movimentos da loucura, que atingem o vazio. Além disso, as repetições refletem a energia gasta inutilmente atrás das infinitas metas do desejo. Isso reproduz o caráter monomaníaco da mente perdida e obcecada em uma ideia, da qual parece impossível se livrar. O atravessar de diferentes lugares marca, também, a circularidade presente ao longo do poema, que exprime o drama da ilusão e a dialética entre razão e loucura. Assim, circularidade e repetição formam o movimento da loucura humana e se materializam no Palácio.Palavras-chave: Orlando furioso. Palácio de Atlante. Repetições. Circularidade. Representação da loucura. ABSTRACT: Questo articolo si propone di mostrare come l’episodio del Palazzo di Atlante sia costruito per tracciare una sorta di ritratto della mente umana ossessionata, più precisamente della follia, tema fondamentale dell’opera Orlando furioso (1532), di Ludovico Ariosto. Per tutto il poema, i personaggi intraprendono le proprie quêtes, cercando di soddisfare le loro pulsioni. Di conseguenza, finiscono penetrando, sempre di più, la selva, uno spazio labirintico in cui si perdono fisicamente e mentalmente. È un’opera segnata da un movimento delirante, circolare e spesso vano, che porta a episodi di follia (appassionata e furiosa), ed il Palazzo appare come una sintesi di questa pulsione incontrollabile e delirante. All’interno di questa costruzione, la confusione sentimentale dei personaggi e l’errare sono osservabili nella malsana ricerca di proiezioni. Il poeta, quindi, disegna un incessante andirivieni, che si svolge in un tempo e in uno spazio infiniti. L’errare delirante dei personaggi, che non ottengono mai i loro oggetti del desiderio, esprime i movimenti della follia, che raggiungono il vuoto. Inoltre, le ripetizioni riflettono l’energia sprecata inutilmente dietro gli infiniti obiettivi del desiderio. Questo riproduce il carattere monomaniaco della mente perduta e ossessionata da un’idea, di cui sembra impossibile liberarsi. L’attraversamento di luoghi diversi segna anche la circolarità presente in tutto il poema, che esprime il dramma dell’illusione e la dialettica tra ragione e follia. Così la circolarità e la ripetizione formano il movimento della follia umana e si materializzano nel Palazzo.Parole-chiave: Orlando furioso. Palazzo di Atlante. Ripetizioni. Circolarità. Rappresentazione della follia. ABSTRACT: This article aims to show how the Atlantes’s Castle episode is constructed in order to draw a kind of portrait of the human mind obsessed, more specifically of madness, a fundamental theme of the work Orlando Furioso (1532) by Ludovico Ariosto. Throughout the poem the characters undertake quêtes of their own, trying to satisfy their drives. As a result, they end up deeper and deeper into the forest, a labyrinthine space in which they get lost physically and mentally. It is a work marked by a delirious, circular and often vain movement, which leads to episodes of madness (passionate and furious) and the Castle appears as a synthesis of this uncontrollable and delirious drive. Within this construction the characters’ sentimental confusion and the roam are observable in the unhealthy pursuit of projections. Then the poet draws an incessant coming and going, which takes place in infinite time and space. The delirious roam of the characters, who never reach their objects of desire, expresses the movements of madness, which reach the emptiness. Furthermore the repetitions reflect the energy wasted uselessly behind the endless goals of desire. This reproduces the monomaniac character of the lost mind obsessed with an idea, which seems impossible to get rid of. The crossing of different places also marks the circularity present throughout the poem, which expresses the drama of illusion and the dialectic between reason and madness. Thus circularity and repetition form the movement of the human madness and materialize in the Castle.Keywords: Orlando Furioso. Atlantes’s Castle. Repetitions. Circularity. Representation of madness.

AbstractThe epic poem of Ludovico Ariosto, Orlando Furioso (1516–1532), one of the most influential texts of Renaissance writing, shows not only a precise cognition of early modern cartographic knowledge, as Alexandre Doroszlaï has illustrated it in Ptolemée et l’hippogriffe (1998), but also performs a complex transmedial translation of cartographic depictions. The journeys around the globe of the Christian paladins Ruggiero and Astolfo narrated by Ariosto are, in fact, performative negotiations between literary and cartographic processes. Riding the Hippograph, the hybrid vehicle par excellence, Ruggiero and Astolfo fly over the Earth as if they were flying over a map. Their journeys do not merely transmedially translate the course to the West pursued by Early Modern Europe. Rather, by translating the map Ariosto performs a new geopoetics that turns away from the symbolic dominance of the East (or “Ent-Ostung”, as Peter Sloterdijk has usefully called it) and offers us one of the first poetic versions of modern globalization.

Orientador: Norma Sandra de Almeida Ferreira<br>Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Educação<br>Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-16T16:12:34Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Garcia_AndreAparecido_M.pdf: 3419560 bytes, checksum: 862439b2c9c7c5cffff4b1c168de0107 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010<br>Resumo: O trabalho que aqui se apresenta tem como objetivo principal ou intenção primeira apresentar a obra Orlando Furioso de Xavier da Cunha, editada pela Companhia Editora Nacional de Lisboa no ano de 1895, arquivada no Centro de Documentação Alexandre Eulálio (CEDAE)/Unicamp, buscando compreender não só a trajetória desta edição, como também os aspectos tipográficos e textuais que a configuram. Ainda tem como objetivo investigar os vestígios deixados por Monteiro Lobato, de forma manuscrita, nesta edição de Orlando Furioso, colocando como questões: quais são as intervenções editoriais e textuais que Lobato lança mão com um possível desejo de publicá-la com um livro clássico infantil? Que representação de leitor infantil parece orientar tais intervenções? Que representação do gosto de leitor infantil parece orientar a visão de Lobato como editor nessas intervenções. Essa pesquisa se enquadra no conjunto de trabalhos do grupo de pesquisa Alfabetização, Leitura e Escrita (ALLE) no que diz respeito à investigação dos procedimentos postos e praticados pelo polo da produção, tendo em vista a representação que autores e editores constroem a respeito do público, a qual se destina as obras publicadas, na perspectiva metodológica fornecida pela História Cultural<br>Abstract: The main aim of this material or its first intention is to present the work of Orlando Furioso de Xavier da Cunha, printed by Companhia Editora Nacional de Lisboa, in the year of 1895, filed in Centro de Documentação Alexandre Eulálio (CEDAE)/Unicamp, trying to understand not only the several steps of this printing, but also the textual and typographic aspects which set it up. It still has as aim to investigate remains left by Monteiro Lobato in a manuscript way in this publishing of Orlando Furioso, asking the following questions: what are the publishing and textual interventions used by Lobato as a possible wish to publish it as a childish classic book? What sort of direction is taken by Monteiro Lobato, concerning the expectation of his readers? This research is fitted in the set of works from grupo de pesquisa, Alfabetização, Leitura e Escrita (ALLE) about the investigation of the proceedings taken and practiced by the production pole_, considering the representation that authors and publishers build about the public, to which the work is directed in the methodological perspective supplied by the Cultural History<br>Mestrado<br>Educação, Conhecimento, Linguagem e Arte<br>Mestre em Educação

Este trabajo aborda por primera vez de forma sistemática y monográfica el papel desempeñado por los personajes femeninos en el Orlando furioso (1532) de Ludovico Ariosto (1474-1533), evidenciando su carácter profundamente innovador respecto a la tradición, incluida la caballeresca ferraresa, y en buena medida también respecto al contexto cultural de las cortes renacentistas en Italia. Con tal fin se conjuga el enfoque comparatista y de fuentes con el análisis descriptivo e interpretativo para elaborar una tipología de las distintas figuras definiendo sus funciones tanto individualmente como en su interacción recíproca y respecto al conjunto de la trama. Desde este último punto de vista se demuestra también el papel de auténtica protagonista desempeñado por Bradamante, la figura femenina a la que el poema de Ariosto dedica no solo más espacio, sino también una mayor continuidad en la acción, y a la que asigna una riqueza superior de intervenciones en el plano privado y público. La tesis se estructura en tres partes, precedidas por una introducción metodológica que plantea el problema y delinea el status quaestionis, que muestra el carácter parcial de los estudios realizados sobre el tema hasta el momento. En la primera parte se analiza la presencia de los personajes femeninos en la tradición épica occidental – desde los poemas homéricos hasta la Chanson de geste, pasando por la Eneida y la Tebaida – y en las principales obras que mantienen una relación de intertextualidad con el Furioso, como las Metamorfosis y las Heroidas de Ovidio; paralelamente se toman en consideración algunos lugares fundamentales de la representación femenina en otros géneros y épocas de la literatura occidental, para llegar, a través de la poesía provenzal y las obras de Dante, Petrarca y Boccaccio, a la querelle des femmes, que especialmente desde la segunda mitad del siglo XV involucró a intelectuales y escritores. Este recorrido permite delinear los precedentes y el contexto cutural del que partió Ariosto, eligiendo una vía eminentemente original. La segunda parte está dedicada al análisis detallado de los personajes femeninos del poema, vistos individualmente y clasificados en grupos y subgrupos temáticos: en cada uno de los cuales se ponen de manifiesto tipologías, relaciones intertextuales y características siguiendo un orden que culmina con las figuras más significativas: las de Angelica y Bradamante. Por último, en la tercera parte se estudian las funciones de los distintos personajes dentro de los episodios en los que intervienen, teniendo en cuenta su relación con otras figuras – masculinas y femeninas – y la perspectiva de la trama en su conjunto así como del telos del poema. Un espacio se dedica asimismo a las figuras femeninas históricas citadadas en el Furioso y a las damas de corte que configuran el público elegido por el poeta para su obra. En las conclusiones se evidencia, en fin, la complejidad de la óptica ariostesca sobre la mujer, encaminada a desenmascarar cualquier postura unívoca y cualquier prejuicio, mostrando las dos caras de los falsos contrarios (de aquí también la presencia subterránea de duplicaciones y figuras desdobladas). Los resultados de este análisis hacen aflorar, pues, aspectos hasta ahora descuidados de la obra maestra del Renacimiento literario italiano y despejan el campo de los intentos de encuadrar a Ariosto en los estrechos márgenes de la filoginia o la misoginia.<br>This dissertation studies, for the first time in a systematic and monographic way, the role of female characters in Ludovico Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso (1532), highlighting its extremely innovative characteristics compared to tradition, included the chivalric tradition of Ferrara, and in part also compared to the cultural context of the Italian courts of Renaissance. The fundamental role of Bradamante, to whom Ariosto reserves a more constant presence and richer interventions both on private and on public level, is proved as well. The dissertation is divided in three parts, each preceded by a methodological introduction delineating the status quaestionis, from which the incomplete nature of the existing studies on the subject emerges. The first part of the work analyses the presence of female characters in the Western epic tradition and in the main works which are in a relationship of intertextuality with the Furioso. Simultaneously, some fundamental passages of the representation of women in Western literature are retraced up to the fifteenth/sixteenth century querelle des femmes. This path allows to delineate the precedents and the cultural context from which Ariosto moved. The second part of the dissertation is dedicated to a detailed analysis of the female characters of the poem, which are classified in groups and subgroups: for each of them the typologies, the relationship of intertextuality and the characteristics are analysed. Finally, in the third part, the functions of the different characters in the single episodes are faced, in relation with the other – male and female – figures both from the plot perspective and in the epic telos of the poem. The conclusions underline the complexity of Ariosto’s approach, aimed at unmasking every univocal position and every prejudice, and to show the two sides of false opposites (from which duplications and double figures originate). The results of this analysis show hitherto neglected aspects of the masterpiece of Italian literary Renaissance and clear the air of any attempt to enlist Ariosto among the misogynists or the philogynists.

This thesis describes the importance of the amateur academy as a centre for the consumption of both literary and musical works in cinquecento Italy. By occupying a middle space between the public and private spheres, the cultural environment of the academy lends itself particularly well to the practice of analytical "readings" of texts through music. In their musical lezioni of selections from Ariosto's chivalric epic Orlando furioso, Jachet de Berchem, Vincenzo Ruffo, and Jan Nasco show themselves to be concerned with many of the same issues as contemporary literary critics (the explication of imagery and metaphor), but at the same time they also create complex emotional and psychological readings of the subjectivities of the poem's central characters in a manner that lay outside the scope of the writings of Ariosto's contemporary commentators. The association of all three composers and their music with the Accademia Filarmonica di Verona thus suggests that composers indeed had an important rôle to play in academic discussions of literary æsthetics, and that the madrigal can be seen as a form of literary criticism that preserves some aspects of academic discourse that have otherwise been lost. My analysis, in turn, represents a new way to interpret madrigals and draw meaning from them in the context of this discourse.<br>Cette thèse décrit l'importance des académies amateures en tant que lieu de consommation d'œuvres musicales et littéraires dans l'Italie du cinquecento. En se positionnant entre les sphères publiques et privées, l'environnement culturel des académies fut très propice à la « lecture » analytique de textes par la musique. Lors de lezioni musicales d'extraits de l'épopée chevaleresque Orlando furioso d'Arioste, Jachet de Berchem, Vincenzo Ruffo et Jan Nasco se montrèrent sensibles aux mêmes problèmes que les critiques littéraires contemporains (l'interprétation d'images et de métaphores), mais en même temps, ils ont également créé des interprétations émotionnelles et psychologiques complexes des subjectivités des personnages principaux d'une manière qui va au-delà de celle des critiques contemporains sur les écrits d'Arioste. L'association de ces trois compositeurs et leur musique avec l'Accademia Filarmonica di Verona suggère donc que les compositeurs eurent un rôle important à jouer lors de discussions académiques sur l'esthétique littéraire, et que le madrigal peut être vu comme une forme de critique littéraire préservant certains aspects du discours académique, autrement perdu. Mon analyse représente donc une nouvelle façon d'interpréter les madrigaux et interprète leur signification via le contexte de ce discours.

<p> This dissertation explores operatic adaptations of Orlando <i>JR furioso </i> in the eighteenth century, particularly as they relate to the Arcadian Academy. Whereas the seventeenth century witnessed only a handful of <i> Furioso</i>-themed operas, the eighteenth century was a veritable geyser of operatic Orlando; dozens of libretti were produced on the subject, leading to an eighteenth-century craze for the crazed, staged Orlando. The most celebrated and most diffused operatic adaptations of the <i>Furioso</i> were produced by members of the highly influential Arcadian Academy, an institution that aimed to establish a literary (and therefore social, cultural, and political) reign of good taste and reason throughout the European continent. This dissertation probes why and how Arcadians, self-proclaimed harbingers of eighteenth-century reason, were so invested in the operatic depiction of a Renaissance madman. I am interested not only in the intertextual threads of operatic Orlando that is, how librettists and composers translated sixteenth-century sensibilities to the eighteenth-century stage&mdash;but also how these intertextual threads can be read for their broad cultural resonances. Operatic Orlando, in his many permutations, is emblematic of the complexities and contradictions espoused by the Arcadian Academy, and, as such, is crucial to the shaping of an eighteenth-century ethos.</p><p> This dissertation consists of five chapters. The first chapter explores the different ways in which Arcadians understood madness, in its myriad manifestations. Rather than focusing specifically on opera, I cast a wide net in my discussion in order to holistically approach Arcadian theories and practices: through an examination of early Arcadian writings I identify threads and currents that likely formed the text/texture for the operatic Orlando craze. Chapter 2 focuses more specifically on Arcadian opera, if such a concept truly existed: drawing from the works of scholars of music history such as those of Freeman, Strohm, and Smith, I explore the conventions of eighteenth-century opera and contextualize them within the frame of the Arcadian Academy and its reform culture. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 form the analytical body of the dissertation, as they each probe the conditions and textual questions of specific adaptations of the <i>Furioso</i>. I consider the libretti discussed in each of these chapters to be `ur-adaptations,' in that they were each performed&mdash;and often modified&mdash;numerous times in diverse locales, serving as textual bases for many of the eighteenth-century <i>Furioso</i> adaptations. In these chapters I perform both historical analyses and close readings of texts, as well as musical analyses and examinations of related textual objects. Thus in Chapter 3 I read Grazio Braccioli's libretto <i>Orlando furioso </i> (1713) as well as his related libretto <i>Orlando finto pazzo </i> (1714), and explore the musical settings of composer Antonio Vivaldi as they were performed at the Teatro Sant'Angelo in Venice; in Chapter 4 I turn to Rome, with Carlo Sigismondo Capece's libretto <i>Orlando ovvero la gelosa pazzia</i> (1711), and follow the work to its London iteration <i> Orlando</i> (1733), which was set to music by George Frideric Handel; finally, in Chapter 5 I analyze Pietro Metastasio's serenata <i>L'Angelica </i> (1720) within the context of the court of the Holy Roman Emperor, and explore its resonances throughout Europe.</p><p>

Dans notre thèse de doctorat, nous nous sommes occupée des interprétations visuelles et morales du Roland furieux au XVIe siècle, en prenant en considération les nombreuses éditions de l’époque, dont le riche paratexte (images, allégories, arguments) a eu un impact considérable sur leur réception « moralisée » et sur la circulation de l’ouvrage. En analysant l’interaction des éléments paratextuels, nous nous sommes concentrée principalement sur le concept de « vice peint », c’est à dire d’images des nains, de géants et d’animaux chargés d’un rôle moral important et ayant un fort impact visuel.Les éditeurs ont, en effet, consacré une attention particulière aux éléments paratextuels qui contribuent à faire du Roland furieux un ouvrage exemplaire du point de vue de la langue, du style, de la rhétorique et de l’éthique, en favorisant la canonisation du poème. Cette canonisation est par ailleurs passée par l’un des débats les plus acharnés de l’histoire littéraire italienne dans la seconde moitié du XVIe siècle. C’est par une nouvelle analyse des principaux traités de poétique et rhétorique du XVIe siècle que nous avons pu constater que les tenants de ce débat, les « classicistes » et les « modernistes », ont mis au cœur de leur diatribe la capacité de l’Arioste de rendre sous forme visuelle un concept, tout en associant cette puissance visuelle de l’écriture de l’auteur au discours moral du poème et à sa capacité de « delectare » pour pouvoir mieux « docere ». Ces résultats ont été également confirmés par deux lectures importantes du Roland furieux, faites par Campanella et Montaigne, qui nous offrent leur interprétation à la fois « visuelle » et « morale ».Nous avons aussi vérifié l'influence des éditions italiennes sur d’autres éditions réalisées au-delà des frontières de la péninsule. En suivant les étapes de la circulation du Roland furieux en France, en langue italienne, mais aussi en langue étrangère, nous avons pu trouver une confirmation de l’importance de facteurs paratextuels sur la diffusion et la réception de l’œuvre. En partant d’une approche textuelle (les éditions) et formelle (le paratexte) et en passant par une étude interprétative (l’analyse de la valeur « visuelle » et « morale » des éléments paratextuels), nous avons ainsi abouti à la constatation que, par le biais des éditions successives, le Roland furieux devient peu à peu un récipient de préceptes moraux et de fragments iconiques, fait de matériaux de récupération lui donnant une nouvelle cohérence tant au niveau rhétorique qu’artistique et éthique<br>In this doctoral thesis, consideration is given to Orlando Furioso and his visual and moral interpretations of the 16th century by examining the many editions of the period, whose rich paratext, images, allegorie, argomenti, has had a great impact on their ‘moralised’ reception et on the circulation of the work.By analysing the interaction of the paratextual elements, attention has been given to the concept of ‘depicted vice’, that is to say images of dwarfs, giants and animals charged with an important moral role and having a strong visual impact. Indeed, the editors have given special attention to all the paratextual elements qui make Orlando Furioso an exemplary work from the perspective of its language, style, rhetoric and ethics and these have contributed to the canonisation of the poem.Moreover, this canonisation went through one of the fiercest debates in Italian literary history in the second half of the 16th century. Through a new analysis of the principal treatises of the 16th century on poetry and rhetoric, it was possible to see that those involved in this debate, the ‘classicists’ and the ‘modernists’, have put at the heart of their diatribe Ariosto’s ability to bring a concept into a visual form, whilst at the same time associating this visual power of author’s writings with the moral discussion of the poem and its ability to ‘delectare’ in order to ‘docere’ better.These results have also been confirmed by two of the most important interpretations of Orlando Furioso by Campanella and Montaigne, whose interpretations are both ‘visual’ and ‘moral’.The influence of the Italian editions on other editions published beyond the peninsula’s border has also been verified. By following the phases in the circulation of the Italian version of Orlando Furioso in France, but also in a foreign language, it has been possible to confirm the importance of paratextual factors on the circulation and the reception of the work. Starting from a textual (the editions) and formal (the paratext) approach and moving through an interpretative study (the analysis of the "visual" and "moral" value of the paratextual elements), it is concluded that, through successive editions, Orlando Furioso gradually becomes a repository of moral guidance and iconic fragments – raw materials, giving it a new coherence in rhetoric, art and ethics

Questo lavoro si propone di indagare le modalità di lettura e ricezione dell’Orlando Furioso di Ludovico Ariosto nel Cinquecento. Gli interpreti interrogati sono tutti raccolti nella famosa edizione illustrata proposta a Venezia nel 1730 dal tipografo Stefano Orlandini con il titolo: Orlando Furioso di M. Lodovico Ariosto; delle annotazioni de’ piu’ celebri autori che sopra esso hanno scritto, e di altre utili, e vaghe giunte in questa impressione adornato, come nell’indice seguente la prefazione si vede. Le testimonianze di ricezione coprono poco meno l’arco di un secolo: dai primi documenti importanti come quelli di Lodovico Dolce e Tullio Fausto da Longiano (pubblicati entrambi nel 1542) fino al commento di Alberto Lavezuola, apparso nel 1584, lo stesso anno del Carrafa di Camillo Pellegrino, dialogo che difendeva la Gerusalemme Liberata di Torquato Tasso (uscita nel 1581) a spese del Furioso e infiammava la guerra critica tra tassisti e ariostisti. Grazie agli sforzi promozionali degli editori il romanzo cavalleresco d’Ariosto fu accolto come il classico della poesia narrativa italiana che fino allora era mancato, l’equivalente mo¬derno dell’epica di Omero e Virgilio. Dopo la morte d’Ariosto, e nonostante il successo, il poema diventa gradualmente un problema critico e teorico. La diffusione della Poetica di Aristotele contribuisce prepotentemente a riportare in primo piano il problema della codificazione dei generi. Gli interpreti e i lettori del Furioso furono inevitabilmente portati a confrontarsi e misurarsi con le categorie elaborate dai moderni interpreti di Aristotele, le annotazioni dei quali favorirono non poco il passaggio dal romanzo ariostesco al poema tassiano, e cioè da una forma aperta, caratterizzata da un soggetto fantastico, dal gioco con il tempo e lo spazio, ad una forma conclusa e lineare, dominata dall’ordine narrativo e dall’impresa collettiva, orientata ad un unico fine. La difesa dell’Orlando Furioso e la teorizzazione dei generi sono state accompagnate dal crescente influsso del modello ariostesco sull’epica contemporanea e da un’ampia propaganda editoriale. È stato Lodovico Dolce, con la sua attività di commentatore, a farsi principale paladino dell’Ariosto a fianco di Gabriele Giolito che, a partire dal 1542 e fino agli anni Cinquanta, è stato il più importante editore dell’opera ariostesca. La prima delle pubblicazioni giolitine portò alla fissazione di un formato destinato a divenire standard per le edizioni successive. Tra i paratesti che accompagnarono il Furioso ebbe enorme fortuna la Brieve dimostrazione di Lodovico Dolce annessa a tutte le edizioni giolitine e utilizzata anche da editori concorrenti come Valvassori e Valgrisi. Pubblicato in quasi quaranta edizioni del poema, il commento di Dolce fu il primo e il più fortunato di una serie di paratesti che contribuirono a consolidare la tendenza della critica alla canonizzazione del poema. Attraverso il confronto delle comparazioni di certi episodi del Furioso con quelli dell’Eneide, Dolce dimostrò l’affinità e la provenienza classica delle ottave ariostesche, ignorando volutamente gli autori imitati da Ariosto, fatta eccezione per Virgilio e Ovidio, quest’ultimo rilanciato proprio in quel periodo come il modello classico più vicino alla forma romanzesca. A sua volta Clemente Valvassori dichiarò, nella dedica del 1553, che Ariosto aveva addirittura superato gli antichi: «In questa nostra lingua Volgare, ha col suo Orlando Furioso rilevata l’Eroica composizione a tanta altezza, a quanta giammai s’alzasse per Virgilio, ed Omero nella loro favella». Il poema non rappresentava soltanto la più alta realizzazione dell’epica moderna, ma, essendo scevro di tutti quegli aspetti appartenenti al mondo pagano propri dei poemi di Omero e Virgilio, era decisamente più edificante. Anche Simon Fórnari nella sua Spositione sopra l’Orlando Furioso si sofferma con particolare insistenza sulla capacità di Ariosto di imitare Omero e Virgilio adattandone la materia alle esigenze diverse del tempo in cui scrive. Attraverso una serrata esemplificazione delle sue tesi, Fórnari può alla fine capovolgere in positivo le accuse dei primi detrattori del Furioso affermando che, come Omero e Virgilio sono stati modelli per l’epica antica, così Ariosto, poeta moderno, ha tutte le carte in regola per essere considerato modello dei poeti che verranno dopo di lui. Analoghe, anche a distanza di molti anni, le argomentazioni di critici che includono il Furioso entro il genere epico, sia che si muovano sulla stessa linea apologetica di Fórnari, come Alberto Lavezuola, sia che tentino, come Orazio Toscanella, di individuare favole morali e significati riposti che garantiscano il riferimento allusivo alla tradizione.<br>Almost immediately upon its publication in the definitive third edition in 1532, Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso became an important site, frequently a hotly contest one, of critical investigation, and it has remarne such throughout most of the history of its reception. It was the first poem in the European literary tradition to sustain an ongoing debate about its canonicity. Early critics such as Giovanni Battista Giraldi Cinzio and his protégé Giovanni Battista Pigna were interested in legitimating Ariosto’s poem through a variety of strategies, including affiliating it to canonical works of antiquity, many of wich had originally influenced Ariosto’s shaping of the Orlando Furioso’s narrative. Legitimating the Orlando Furioso in this way also contributed to the ongoing process in the cinquecento of arguing for the value of the vernacular language in which it was written. The canonization of the Orlando Furioso as a new kind of vernacular classic was simultaneously a victory for the italian language and for Ariosto’s hometown of Ferrara. By the middle of the cinquecento Ariosto was readily referred to as the Ferrarese Homer and often represented in classical profile wearing the laurel crown, a simboli marker that his own poetic excellence had mathced that of the classical touchstones. Even in early descriptions of the poet’s life, biographers emphasized what they perceived to be a Virgilian track to his career in his progress from smaller poetic genres to his larger poem. A crucial point of contention in these first debates on the Orlando Furioso’s status as a vernacular classic was the poem’s narrative design, specifically the extent to which it resembled a classical epic and/or a medieval romance. Bembo had promoted Petrarca and Boccaccio as models for Italian lyric and prose, respectively, but there was no idealized equivalent for narrative poetry in the vernacular. As early as 1540s, Ariosto’s poem was positioned to satisfy the need for such an Italian model. It was in these same years that Italian critical discourse was being shake by the reception of Aristotle’s Poetics and Horace’s Ars poetica, whose strictures of a unified narrative design were contradicted by Ariosto’s poem. Accordingly, the Orlando Furioso landed at the center o fan acromonious debate between neoclassical Aristotelians who found Ariosto’s narrative wanting in epic features and other critical readers who sought to justify the romance qualities of its narrative design. The primary criticism against the poem was that its plot focused on many actions of numerous characters rather than a single unifying action of one heroic character. In addition, many Aristotelians interpreted the intermittent interventions of the narrator into the narrative as a breach of epic decorum. Finally, the poem lacce verisimilitude. Strategie sto efendi the Orlando Furioso against these criticism varied. Some readers emphasized those features of the poem that did indie recall classical epic, for example, its many allusions to Virgil’s Aeneid and the occasional allusion to Homeric poetry. Ariosto’s re cycling of classical similes from Virgil and Homer was a case in point. In this way, these classicizing critics countered that the Orlando Furioso, despite appearances to the contrary, was much more epic than the untutored reader might regognize. An intriguing tactic adepte Lodovico Dolce, among others, was to affiliate the Orlando Furioso with those poems of antiquity that were themselves somewhat less than faithful to the canonical standards of classical epic narrative. Ovid’s Metamorphoses played an important role in this renard. This strategy proved so successful that subsequent Italian translators of Ovid’s poem frequently created the impression in their renderings that the Latin work was a romance-epic poem akin to Ariosto’s. Moreover, Venetian publishers packaged these italianized classics in editions that in many ways looked like the Orlando Furioso in order to capitalize on Ariosto’s poem’s critical fortune. This proved a successful marketing ploy, for readers had begun to expert that literary narratives, even classical ones, should conform to the parameters of Ariosto’s poem. By the second half of the sixteenth century, the Orlando Furioso had become the touchstone of narrative art. In the and, although critics could not always agree on what to call it (epic, romance, romance-epic) and chete or noti t should be canonized a vernacular classic, Orlando Furioso’s popularity surged among general readers.