Scan barcode
_annajackson_'s review
adventurous
lighthearted
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
talentedcain's review
adventurous
funny
inspiring
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
reasie's review
4.0
If you read just one Renaissance epic poem, I would recommend this.
Keep in mind while reading my glowing review that this is a 16th century epic poem in translation. Mileage - woo varies.
Definitely more of an interwoven plot than Spenser's dreary Fairy Queen. Ariosto has a sense of fun and I think he gleefully leaves off at as many cliffhangers as possible.
Plus - two female knights! Woot!
The poem is much improved by skipping any part where a seer talks about the glorious future of the descendants of Ruggiero and Bradimante (ie, the author's patrons). He has no fewer than four interludes to their praise, and sadly his patrons did not do a whole lot worthy of praise, or he was not capable of keeping in their good graces AND making these long passages interesting.
Other than that, it's a hoot. Ariosto has an odd axe to grind - a pro-adultery ax! Twice his heroes rescue women who are accused of adultery. One is innocent, but the hero claims he would save her even if she was not, and one is not innocent and, yeah... there are repeated refrains about how a woman who does NOT sleep with her lover is more deserving of punishment than one who refuses to. I suspect (and the biographical sketch in the forward bears out) that Ariosto was having trouble parting the thighs of at least one married woman.
But he's so fun! There are plot twists that actually surprise - as when one hero is carefully hiding among the monster's sheep heard when two random other chevaliers rescue his lady!
Spoiler alert - my favorite part was when Marfisa, deciding that a king who has declared anti-woman laws deserves a lingering death, rides up to him and forgoing her lance or her sword, punches him out.
Lordy it's long - two thick volumes, probably near twice the length of the Fairy Queen - but I can't say I have enjoyed a period text more since Chaucer.
Keep in mind while reading my glowing review that this is a 16th century epic poem in translation. Mileage - woo varies.
Definitely more of an interwoven plot than Spenser's dreary Fairy Queen. Ariosto has a sense of fun and I think he gleefully leaves off at as many cliffhangers as possible.
Plus - two female knights! Woot!
The poem is much improved by skipping any part where a seer talks about the glorious future of the descendants of Ruggiero and Bradimante (ie, the author's patrons). He has no fewer than four interludes to their praise, and sadly his patrons did not do a whole lot worthy of praise, or he was not capable of keeping in their good graces AND making these long passages interesting.
Other than that, it's a hoot. Ariosto has an odd axe to grind - a pro-adultery ax! Twice his heroes rescue women who are accused of adultery. One is innocent, but the hero claims he would save her even if she was not, and one is not innocent and, yeah... there are repeated refrains about how a woman who does NOT sleep with her lover is more deserving of punishment than one who refuses to. I suspect (and the biographical sketch in the forward bears out) that Ariosto was having trouble parting the thighs of at least one married woman.
But he's so fun! There are plot twists that actually surprise - as when one hero is carefully hiding among the monster's sheep heard when two random other chevaliers rescue his lady!
Spoiler alert - my favorite part was when Marfisa, deciding that a king who has declared anti-woman laws deserves a lingering death, rides up to him and forgoing her lance or her sword, punches him out.
Lordy it's long - two thick volumes, probably near twice the length of the Fairy Queen - but I can't say I have enjoyed a period text more since Chaucer.
grubstlodger's review
5.0
This translation really asks questions about the nature of the art. How much of this book is Slavitt’s and how much Ariosto’s?
Slavic takes a Princess Bride approach, chopping out whole cantos to make a ‘good bits’ version. The comparison to Princess Bride is furthered by his fondness for bad puns, silly rhymes and some anachronistic humour.
In some ways it doesn’t matter who’s book it is, as long as I enjoyed it. Which I did enormously. It is such an epic, daft story with sea monsters and hermits and fair maidens and knights who care more for the rules of chivalry then their lives.
Each knight is described as unbeatable, each horse is the fastest, each weapon or piece of armour is enchanted and each maiden is the most beautiful than all the rest.
We have four main hero knights. On the Christian side is Orlando and Rinaldo and on the Muslim side is Rodomonte and Ruggerio.
Then there are the lesser knights, Astolfo, Gryphon, Sacripant, Marisa and Bradamante - the last two being women.
Rugger was my favourite, and he was probably the main character. This was because out of all the hero knights, he was the least likely to succeed. His girlfriend had to save him from at least three enchanted castles; he lost battles with dog-faced men, giants and a sea monster - but he came through at the end and killed Rodomonte.
Rodomonte was a prick. He killed most of Paris single handed and then did some weird thing with the bridge. Rinaldo was a tad boring and Orlando netted a sea monster and then went mad, stripping nake, punching donkeys and tearing people in two.
When the book is full of action or silliness, Slavitt delivers. He loves the coincidences, the improbable action and the ‘boys toys’ element of the knightly adventure.
The translation really does get questionable when he translated Ariosto’s views on chivalry, or Christianity, or the virtue of pure womanhood. Those medieval sentiments do not work with his modern tone.
If the aim of the book was to entertain and introduce me to the world of Orlando Furioso, then the translation did very well. But if it was supposed to be an authentic translation (rather then retelling) then I am very sceptical.
The shish-kabab jokes were funny, but ultimately unsettle the authority of the piece.
Slavic takes a Princess Bride approach, chopping out whole cantos to make a ‘good bits’ version. The comparison to Princess Bride is furthered by his fondness for bad puns, silly rhymes and some anachronistic humour.
In some ways it doesn’t matter who’s book it is, as long as I enjoyed it. Which I did enormously. It is such an epic, daft story with sea monsters and hermits and fair maidens and knights who care more for the rules of chivalry then their lives.
Each knight is described as unbeatable, each horse is the fastest, each weapon or piece of armour is enchanted and each maiden is the most beautiful than all the rest.
We have four main hero knights. On the Christian side is Orlando and Rinaldo and on the Muslim side is Rodomonte and Ruggerio.
Then there are the lesser knights, Astolfo, Gryphon, Sacripant, Marisa and Bradamante - the last two being women.
Rugger was my favourite, and he was probably the main character. This was because out of all the hero knights, he was the least likely to succeed. His girlfriend had to save him from at least three enchanted castles; he lost battles with dog-faced men, giants and a sea monster - but he came through at the end and killed Rodomonte.
Rodomonte was a prick. He killed most of Paris single handed and then did some weird thing with the bridge. Rinaldo was a tad boring and Orlando netted a sea monster and then went mad, stripping nake, punching donkeys and tearing people in two.
When the book is full of action or silliness, Slavitt delivers. He loves the coincidences, the improbable action and the ‘boys toys’ element of the knightly adventure.
The translation really does get questionable when he translated Ariosto’s views on chivalry, or Christianity, or the virtue of pure womanhood. Those medieval sentiments do not work with his modern tone.
If the aim of the book was to entertain and introduce me to the world of Orlando Furioso, then the translation did very well. But if it was supposed to be an authentic translation (rather then retelling) then I am very sceptical.
The shish-kabab jokes were funny, but ultimately unsettle the authority of the piece.
mooberryink's review
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
dominil's review against another edition
5.0
That's it. I'm truly fucked by this wonderful book.
Now what?
-------------------------------------------------------
La recensione vera e propria
Dopo mesi in cui ho letto questo libro ovunque e in qualsiasi situazione e posizione (leggere in piedi su un treno un mattone del genere non è mai confortevole), l'ho finito.
Ho finito quello che credo sia il libro più lungo letto in tutta la mia vita e non mi sono
Ariosto dovrebbe essere portato in trionfo per tutto il mondo, con musiche e festeggiamenti eterni.
Cosa parla questo libro?
Sembra facile, il titolo è "Orlando furioso". Peccato che, in tutto, Orlando sia davvero presente in qualcosa come 7 canti su 46 e in metà sia folle.
Essendo il sequel di "Orlando innamorato" di Boiardo, probabilmente anche con il titolo Ariosto voleva collegarsi a quest'ultimo.
L'autore in realtà dipinge una caleidoscopica umanità, svelando passioni, inganni, lealtà e infedeltà, in maniera originale e freschissima.
Il punto di fuoco è soprattutto Bradamante, che è la capostipite dei mecenati di Ariosto, una donna coraggiosa, che combatte per il suo amore e soffre per questo, in preda ai dubbi della gelosia.
Non solo indossa un'armatura, ma è descritta come superiore ai suoi fratelli e cugini nel combattimento e spesso mostra la sua forza. E' gentile e cortese, non dimentica mai il proprio codice di valori e sa occuparsi di se stessa.
Intorno a lei si ha una girandola di cavalieri, dame e cavalli, che si ricongiunge perfettamente alla fine, tragica e quasi stonata rispetto alla gaiezza di tutto il romanzo.
Ora, mi si potrebbe accusare di essere molto parziale verso le donne, che ho dimenticato che questo è un poema cavalleresco e che i cavalieri sono uomini, ma la realtà è che l'azione è mossa dalle dame varie, che scappano, inseguono, amano, tradiscono. Angelica in primis, ma anche Doralice, è la causa della maggior parte dei duelli e degli incontri tra gli altri personaggi, che a causa sua muoiono o stringono improbabili alleanze. Ci sono dame che muoiono pur di conservarsi fedeli al proprio amato, mentre altre cambiano partito allegramente ogni due per tre, senza curarsi di nulla.
La cosa entusiasmante?
Ariosto NON le critica MAI. Le dipinge in maniera realistica e le difende dalle accuse di leggerezza (pur pensando che siamo leggermente irrazionali) mostrando che, per ogni donna che tradisce, esiste un partner che l'ha tradita o la sta tradendo. Rivendica per loro una libertà di azione che è molto moderna. Inoltre, ci sono vari tipi di personaggi femminili, ognuna ben caratterizzata e con un diverso destino e una storia diversa, senza mai alcun genere di pigrizia da parte dell'autore. Le donzelle tutte casa-e-chiesa non vengono mai criticate dalle donne guerriere, ma tra tutte c'è grande amicizia.
Anche i rapporti umani sono fantastici e vari, tanto da sembrare assurdi a volte, ma è la caratteristica dell'umanità. Le amicizie possono condurre al sacrificio o sfilacciarsi, gli amori sono passionali (niente donna-angelo qui!) e crudeli, l'odio si trasforma in affetto e il desiderio in odio.
Tutti i personaggi sono in balia dei loro sentimenti e si comportano in maniera razionale, basta pensare a Orlando.
L'ambientazione è fantastica, con quel pizzico di ironia che la rende gradevole e fa amare le invenzioni di Ariosto. Soprattutto ad Astolfo, cavaliere britannico, si accompagnano i caratteri più fantasy, forse per alludere al ciclo arturiano. Il viaggio sulla Luna, all'Inferno (anche se brevissimo), il giro intorno alla terra sull'ippogrifo (che purtroppo non ha nome ç.ç) sono un ottimo intervallo, soprattutto se in mezzo alla narrazione delle battaglie. Maghe e stregoni ci sono soprattutto nella prima parte e hanno lo scopo soprattutto di portare l'attenzione sulla casa d'Este, con profezie varie.
Passando alle parti meno buone (si fa per dire), forse dovrei spendere due parole sulla guerra.
Teoricamente, tutto si compie durante l'assedio di Parigi a opera dei Saracini ed è per questo motivo che i cavalieri dei due schieramenti si incontrano. Per mia fortuna, sullo scontro effettivo si spendono molte meno ottave di quanto ciò che ho detto prima faccia pensare.
Il problema
Ora, comprendo la difficoltà di rendere una guerra in parole, il fatto che sono assuefatta da quelle in technicolor, quindi sono più che portata a sorvolare su questo.
Un'altra cosa è che alcune parole e frasi idiomatiche presenti non sono chiare e mancano di note (ma questo è più che altro un problema di edizione. Accidenti a voi, italianisti!), quindi rendono faticosa e pesante la lettura, che non è già facile, essendo in poesia.
A parte questo, invito seriamente a non farsi spaventare dalla mole e a leggerlo, perché avrete dei ricordi bellissimi di questa esperienza e porterete con voi sempre questo libro.
maidenknightbradamant's review
adventurous
funny
fast-paced
5.0
Ariosto 👏🏻 Said 👏🏻 Trans 👏🏻 Rights
Please forget that this book is a classic and appreciate it for what it is— a raunchy, silly, dramatic episodic epic, but without the dreariness that “epic” may imply. This book was so fun and very easy to read in short chunks. It also wasn’t, in the end, a type of book I really like analyzing, though I loved reading it.
Please forget that this book is a classic and appreciate it for what it is— a raunchy, silly, dramatic episodic epic, but without the dreariness that “epic” may imply. This book was so fun and very easy to read in short chunks. It also wasn’t, in the end, a type of book I really like analyzing, though I loved reading it.