The Divine Comedy, by Dante Alighieri (written 1308-1321)
Amazon; B&N; Goodreads; TV Tropes; Wikipedia

I'm sure if I'd read this in the 14th century, I would have loved it. But reading it in the 21st century, there's a lot of history and cultural references that just go over my head, and a whole way of viewing the world that is somewhat alien to a modern perspective. Nevertheless, it's one of the most classic pieces of literature in the history of the world, which is one of the reasons I've always wanted to read it. It has had incalculable influence on art, literature, history, religion, and culture in general, in the centuries since it was written. It's given us many of the ideas we now take for granted about the afterlife, even if it borrowed a great deal from earlier sources (including Greek or Roman mythology). But a lot of it was Dante's original ideas, and original ways of blending old ideas. So... it's kind of interesting, even if I don't fully follow everything in the story, and even if some of it seems... not really boring, but more sort of under-explained. Much of it is stuff that would probably be pretty straightforward (including the allegorical stuff) to people in Dante's time, and they might find it amusing, or offensive, or sagacious. Perhaps even revolutionary (and definitely politically charged). But for me, it's just sort of... random.

Of course, everyone says it's better in the original Italian, but since I don't know Italian, I have to read an English translation. The copy I have was published in like 1933, which was more than six centuries after it was written, though reading it- finally- in 2013, I almost feel like the eighty years since it was published make it feel just as dated as do the six centuries- well, now seven centuries- since it was written. I should probably mention that it's supposed to be an epic poem, and it certainly doesn't read like prose, but it doesn't really read like my idea of poetry, either. No doubt "poem" meant something slightly different in the 14th century than it does now. Though the difficulty in translating it couldn't help with that. I should also say there have surely been countless translations both before and since my copy was published. (I actually own another copy, published in 1946, translated by Henry Francis Cary. I'm not sure, now, why I chose to read my other copy, but after I finished reading it, I read just a bit of the final canto in the copy I didn't read, and kind of wished I'd chosen that one, instead. Maybe someday I'll give it a try, but probably I wouldn't even consider it for quite a few years.)

The book is divided into three parts: Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso (Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise). Probably the most famous of these three parts is "Inferno," often referred to as "Dante's Inferno," so that some people who have heard of both "Inferno" and "The Divine Comedy" may not even realize the one is actually a part of the other. Anyway, in my copy, "Inferno" was translated by John Aitken Carlyle, "Purgatorio" by Thomas Okey, and "Paradiso" by Philip H. Wicksteed. I should also say that the original title of the book was "Commedia" (The Comedy), and that "comedy" didn't mean in the 14th century what it does today. Essentially, it just meant a story with a happy ending (as opposed to a tragedy). The word "Divine" wasn't added to the title until 1555, more than two centuries after Dante's death.

The book has an introduction that explains some things about Dante's life and the world in which he lived. And there are various other notes before the story actually begins, including stuff about the whole thing being allegorical. (The allegory is pretty much lost on me; I can sometimes see it if it's pointed out in the notes, but not just from reading the story itself. Of course, people back then just inherently looked for allegory in everything, so I'm sure it was easier for them to see.) And notes about how Dante's vision of Hell was divided into nine circles (which you probably already vaguely knew). But there are other divisions I wasn't aware of... the nine circles are actually divided among three different classes, and um... there are perhaps some other subdivisions, and a certain degree of overlap between them, which I don't really grasp. I also need to say that each part of the book is divided into 33 cantos (kinda like chapters, but they're very short), with the first part- Inferno- having an extra introductory canto. At the start of each canto (in the copy I read), there's a summation of what happens in the canto, and at the end of each canto, there's a list of footnotes about various things that are mentioned in the canto. I'm afraid I don't find much of this to be particularly helpful. Some notes may explain things I already sort of knew, while others don't do much except refer you to other works (to which I don't have access, and would be too lazy to check, if I did). Other notes explain things in a way that sums up some historical information, but which I don't fully grasp. Some I may not grasp at all. But I suppose some of the notes are reasonably helpful... and then there are things I may read in each canto that I'd like an explanation of, but there's just no footnote on it at all. It just seems so random, what the editors expected the reader to already know or not know. Some of that may be just words that have fallen into disuse in the last 80 years, but some of it may go beyond that. (In many cases, it may simply be that my own education is insufficient; I daresay this is the sort of book that is rarely read by anyone but classical scholars who are more likely than the average person to already possess certain prerequisite knowledge.) In any event, it got to the point that I got tired of constantly turning ahead a page or two every time there's a footnote indicator in the text, especially considering the odds that the explanation would do nothing to enhance my appreciation of the text. So I mostly stopped bothering with that. I guess I don't need to understand everything Dante was talking about, in order to follow the gist of the story. I also never read a canto's summary before reading the canto itself, and only rarely skip back to read it afterwards. (When I do, I tend to think, "Yeah, that's pretty much what I thought happened, though it still doesn't make a tremendous amount of sense to me.")

Anyway... the story is set in 1300 (eight years before Dante began writing it), and the protagonist is Dante himself. Presumably the events he describes never actually happened to him, but I do appreciate the whole author avatar thing (I tend to do that in my own writing, to some extent). I also like the fact that Dante makes so many references that, in his day, would have probably been a good mix of pop culture references and literary, religious, historical, political, and academic references. The fact that most if not all of them go over my head may hamper my ability to appreciate the story itself, but they still enhance my appreciation of Dante as a writer. (And they make me feel less guilty about all the pop culture references I use in my own writing.) I also want to say that I kind of think of the story as fantasy, but I'm not going to put it under that heading, because to do so would just feel a bit... wrong. (But again, the fact that Dante wrote something like this makes me feel less guilty about the religious ideas I incorporate into my own fantasy.) The story takes place over a few days, concluding I believe on Easter of 1300. There are all sorts of poetic allusions to astrological features and whatnot, none of which I followed, even when reading the notes. But at least the notes told me when it happened, though I couldn't quite manage to care. I will say that I don't remember exactly when I started reading this, but it must have been quite early in 2013, and I know at one point I had some vague hope that I might work really hard and finish the book by Easter, myself. Of course, that didn't happen; I actually finished it on Halloween. Yes, I am just that slow. But I do feel it's sort of vaguely ironic, considering how different the two holidays are. (Then again... that's more of a modern perception. We're coming up on All Souls' Day and All Saints' Day, which are probably not so different from Easter, after all.)

Dante (the character) gets lost one day (Maundy Thursday, I guess), and ends up being guided by Virgil (the famous Roman poet who died nearly thirteen centuries before he was born). Dante (the writer) clearly considered him a great master (that is, a teacher, even if they obviously never met in real life), and I like the fact that he used Virgil as such an important character in his story. (Though at the same time, I feel kind of bad that he could perhaps relate so well to someone from almost twice as long before his time as Dante himself is before my time, when I have such a hard time relating to Dante.) Virgil had been sent by Beatrice (a woman Dante had loved- chastely- since they were children, and who had died ten years before the setting of the poem) to lead Dante (the character) through the various circles of Hell, where he meets lots of people who have been damned for specific sins they committed in life. (Some of them were people Dante himself had known, and in fact there's also mention of people Dante expects to go to Hell, who were yet living when the story was written. Of course, many of them were historical figures from before Dante's time, and some were even mythological.) There are descriptions of the different types of sin that lead to the different types of punishment, and I'm fairly sure Dante himself made most of that stuff up, based on his own feelings about how Hell should be set up (I could be wrong, though). I do appreciate the desire to do that, even if I don't always agree with him about what should constitute a sin at all, let alone whether someone deserves to go to Hell for it or how they should be punished. But I reckon I agree with some of it. Unfortunately, it was hard for me to really visualize the stuff he was describing, or to keep track of which circle he was in at any given time. Dante and Virgil just keep moving, and they see lots of stuff and talk to lots of damned souls, and I didn't always follow it. My main concern, aside from my failure to understand certain aspects of ancient or medieval history, was that they spent so little time in each place that none of it really had a chance to make any kind of impression on me at all. Possibly in the original Italian it would have been more striking or memorable, but in English, I found it about as moving and meaningful as staring at an assembly line in a factory. (Okay, a bit more meaningful than that, but still....)

Um, and eventually they get out of Hell, and into Purgatory. And it's basically just more of the same, meeting different souls and talking to them. Except these souls weren't really damned or punished, but they also weren't rewarded with entrance into Heaven. But it did seem possible that they would be so rewarded, eventually- if people still living prayed for them. Or whatever. Anyway, generally the souls in Purgatory were happier than the souls in Hell, which makes sense. But there's not much I can think to say about any of that. Like Hell, Dante divided Purgatory into different classes and circles, which I also failed to follow, even when looking at the notes. I did enjoy one part, in Canto XXI, when Dante and Virgil meet the soul of a first century poet named Statius, who expressed his reverence for the poet Virgil, whom he didn't know he was talking to. Dante himself was amused by that, in the story. And I guess Statius joined the two of them in their journey for awhile. Eventually they reach the Garden of Eden, in Canto XXVIII. In Canto XXX, Virgil leaves Dante (I'm not sure when Statius left), since he is not permitted to enter Heaven himself. From this point on in Purgatory, and throughout Paradise, Dante is guided by Beatrice herself.

Dante (the writer) divides Paradise into different circles (based on virtues rather than sins), which are represented by the sun and moon and planets, though they're arranged according to the Medieval astronomical concept of their positions, rather than by what we now know to be their actual positions. And beyond all that, there are levels that I guess are defined by something other than astronomical objects. But as usual, I followed none of this. Dante and Beatrice meet various souls (including saints) and angels. Beatrice (and other inhabitants of Heaven) explain various things to Dante, some of which seem to be a mixture of scientific and religious concepts. Yet again, I failed to fully comprehend what they were talking about. And eventually they see God, though if I understand the text correctly, He exists as a single point of light. Or something. So He doesn't actually talk to Dante. But of course looking upon Him, Dante understands a great deal about love and life... things he's unable to express, because mortal minds are incapable of that level of understanding, but of course it's all supremely beautiful. (And in the end, God appears to be more than that single point, though his appearance isn't really described in any way that was clear to me. And I'm a bit disappointed because the whole "single point" thing reminded me of something I'd already written, in my own book, about God himself describing His own existence, prior to the creation of the Universe.) I was kind of surprised that after this final revelation, the story just stops. I mean, I figured we'd see Dante (the character) return to Earth, but we don't. I guess Dante (the writer) wasn't interested in anticlimaxes.

So, final thoughts. Um... throughout the book (or at least in the first two parts), there are lots of souls that are surprised to see a person who's still alive, traveling in the worlds of the afterlife. And Dante often asks souls who they were in life, but rather than tell him their names, they basically give their life stories. (I guess he can figure out the answer to his question from that, because they were obviously people he'd heard of, but I hadn't. Once again, my education is woefully lacking, but we're talking about thousands of years of history, I can't know everyone!) And throughout the book, Dante uses lots of metaphors which are very poetic, but which I can't visualize. Which I think makes it kind of ironic that there are also lots of times he doesn't even bother describing things, he just says it's impossible to describe or impossible for him to recall exactly what he'd seen. Either way, I feel that if the point of the book is for us to gain a greater understanding of things (about life, God, how to avoid sin, etc.), that point would be better achieved by writing less poetically. Also, he often seems to say that there are things (such as Beatrice's beauty or the latest wonderment of Heaven that he beholds) which are more glorious than he had described previously, as his own discernment of such things continues to be enhanced, the more he learns. Or whatever. I get that, but at the same time... it gets kind of old. It's like, if I say "Wow this is the most beautiful thing I've ever seen" and proceed to describe it in amazing poetic detail, but then the next five times I mention it I just say "Wow this is more beautiful than that," "Wow this is more beautiful than that," etc... at some point it kind of loses its impact, you know?

The last paragraph there sounds like it's all criticisms, and maybe it is. But I don't want to conclude this review on that note. I will reiterate that my own understanding and knowledge is inadequate, and that this must be better in Italian- in Dante's own words- and it would have been way better if I lived in Dante's time rather than my own. Even so, I'm glad to have finally read it. I definitely appreciate the style of thinking behind Dante's writing, in a lot of ways, even if I didn't always understand his style of expressing that thinking. He's got some very interesting ideas, and I hope I don't sound too immodest in saying that (what I perceive to be) the thinking behind his writing reminds me of the thinking behind my own writing. (I think he was a much better writer than I could ever be, even if I do prefer my own stories. I read this far too late in life- age 37-38- for it to have a direct influence on my thinking or writing, but doubtless the influence it has had on others over the centuries has ended up influencing me, without my even realizing it.) Anyway... I feel bad that so much of the story either went over my head or just bored me, and that I didn't find it to be the transcendent experience that Dante obviously intended. There were certain parts that, while reading them, I either agreed or disagreed with, but either way found quite interesting... even if later I couldn't specifically recall those parts. But I do feel that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And I can't even imagine what the world would be like if this had never been written.