Classics and the Western Canon discussion

The introduction to Day 9 is especially notable today because it details a phenomenon that occurred again during the 2020 Covid lockdown:

...they spotted roebucks and stags and other wild animals, who, as though sensing they were safe from hunters because of the widespread plague, stood waiting for them there as if they had been tamed and rendered fearless.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52459487

Emilia is Queen for the day, and she has decreed that the subject of the day's stories will be up to the story teller, as on the first day. She says this is in part so that the next ruler will be more confident about confining the brigata to their customary law. (The reference to liberty and law makes me wonder if there is a political meaning here.)

I didn't find any of these stories particularly strong or memorable, except maybe story 9, Emilia's story, but it's memorable for its anti-feminist stance. It's so harsh in that respect that it provokes "murmuring" among the women. A number of the stories in the Decameron defend the rights of women, but this one does just the opposite. And it's interesting that it's Emilia who tells this one, right after she has advocated liberty as a means to institute confinement.

Dioneo begins the next story, Story 10, by saying that "the beauty of a flock of white doves is enhanced more by a black crow than by a pure white swan..." Might Story 9 be a black crow?

Did any of the other stories in Day 9 strike you as distinctive or important?

Story 9 is quite disturbing, it's the only one openly promoting domestic violence and humiliation. "Love if you want to be loved and punish if you want to be obeyed" looks like advice Solomon would give (see the biblical story where he ordered a child to be cut in two ), the only thing that puzzles me is that Emilia is relating this story.

The other stories were really funny but quite forgettable...

Emilia's story (#9) is indeed horrifying, at least to modern sensibilities. Of course, they would probably consider today's laissez faire attitude toward sex and marriage and sexual identity to be equally horrifying. The past is a different country.

The stories of Philostrato (#3), Fiammetta (#5), and Lauretta (#8) also feature extremes of heartless and cruel behavior that go beyond what seems humorous to me.

Overall, there seems to be a different mix here. Only three stories (Elissa, Pamphilo, and Dioneo) include actual illicit sex. Four (Neiphile, Pampinea, Laurett, and Emilia) are not even love stories.

Emil wrote: "Story 9 is quite disturbing, it's the only one openly promoting domestic violence and humiliation. "Love if you want to be loved and punish if you want to be obeyed" looks like advice Solomon would..."

It sounds a bit like an advice that Machiavelli would give to the Prince.

Thomas wrote: "she has decreed that the subject of the day's stories will be up to the story teller, as on the first day. She says this is in part so that the next ruler will be more confident about confining the brigata to their customary law..."

This disturbing not only stands out as a black crow..(if Dioneo means his story is a black crow, his dirty story is preceded by several other stories, so I wonder if he means something else) and is told by the queen herself on the ninth day.

With little time left on their sojourn, maybe the 'prudent' Emilia imposed this law so that they would be ready to go back to the confines of the customary traditional roles of women at the time. We are given a glimpse of how different the men's response was from the women's - giving the young men a bit of a laugh. We are, however given an alternative of 'Love'
However, loving others for the purpose of being loved seems egotistical and we've seen how ruthless the men avenge their object of love for not loving them back!
The recurring theme of Tit for Tat seems to matter even in love and friendship and although it may be a more moderate way of retribution than God's excessive and unforgiving wrath upon the sinners, it also seems to turn human relationships into mercenary and calculating contracts, where one should take the opportunity to take advantage when Fortune or the stupidity of others allows it.

Emil wrote: "...looks like advice Solomon would give (see the biblical story where he ordered a child to be cut in two ),..."

As I recall the story, that was Solomon's ruse to identify the birth mother? (1 Kings 3:16-28)

Lily wrote: "Emil wrote: "...looks like advice Solomon would give (see the biblical story where he ordered a child to be cut in two ),..."

As I recall the story, that was Solomon's ruse to identify the birth m..."

...a cruel ruse Machiavelli would definitely approve.

Emil wrote: ...a cruel ruse Machiavelli would definitely approve..."


You seem to have read the story differently than I was taught: more as a guise to bring truth to the surface than as an action to necessarily be carried out.

Lily wrote: "You seem to have read the story differently than I was taught: more as a guise to bring truth to the surface than as an action..."


Yeah, Solomon knew that the real mother will step up and he won't have to kill the baby, but threatening to cut a baby in half in order to identify his mother is still a cruel trick, a decent human being wouldn't even think about it.

In our story, Solomon hasn't said " beat the hell out of your wife and she will obey you", he just proved that sometimes the stick is a lot more efficient than the carrot.

Aren't both cases consistent with the Machiavellian "the ends justify the means"?

Emil wrote: "....proved that sometimes the stick is a lot more efficient than the carrot. ..."

...."proved"? ...."demonstrated?"...

Do "boundaries" on applications of truths matter?

Encountered an article this week that Solomon took a risk on his assessment of human nature with his "test," what if neither woman had responded as he is presumed to have assumed would happen... Kind of a fun "what if," "fun" in the sense of challenging one's assumptions...

Lily wrote: "Do "boundaries" on applications of truths matter? "

 Looks like they don't matter for the husband in our story...

Lily wrote: "Encountered an article this week that Solomon took a risk on his assessment of human nature with his "test," "

Interesting, I was thinking about the same thing the other day. Would Solomon trick work in the real world? Is there any mother who would watch a baby being cut in two, even if he's not her own child? I don't think so, in most cases  both women would give up the baby in order to save him.

I did think at this stage that the characters of the individual story tellers might be more prominent, but I am not getting much a sense for any of them, or even who they are attracted to within the group. The individual psychology doesn't seem as important as the narrative means to string a lot of stories together?

Clarissa wrote: "...The individual psychology doesn't seem as important as the narrative means to string a lot of stories together?"

Yes, it feels more like a "framing" device than a .... what narrative technique should I identify here?

Lily wrote: "Yes, it feels more like a "framing" device than a .... what nar..."

The obvious comparison while I have been reading is 'The Canterbury Tales', even though it's unfinished, Chaucer's storytellers do feel integral to the type of tales they choose to share and their interactions are important to the feel of the whole story.