Humanism
Martines's article is mainly focused on humanists were influenced by wealth and power when they came up with their ideologies. Humanists, while still taking into consideration Renaissance Christian values of the time also took a major interest poetry from Greek and Roman writers. Poetry for them, according to Martines it was a "shaper of man". He also quotes Battista Guarino who says "the ability to write Latin verse is one of the essential marks of an educated person."
Humanism wasn't for the general public, but only for the privileged elite who were literate and well educated. They especially valued the knowledge of practical history, the ability to speak eloquently, and the ability write well. Patronage was important for humanists who, due to their dependence on the wealthy, would often praise their benefactors, or write in favor of their social interests. What Martines argues here is that it is important to remember the bias of the humanists.
I found the point Martines made about the bias of humanism interesting. You did a good job of summarizing his main arguments. I was curious about how much exposure the lower classes had to humanisms and its ideals during the Renaissance or if they didn't really know about the ideology. Why do you think Martines argues it is so important to remember the bias of humanists?
ReplyDeleteEssential. But I wonder if we have enough here to support that idea of humanism ,or poetry, as a
ReplyDeleteshaper of men." This could be fleshed out. Texel's last question in her comment is a worthwhile one to consider.
The bias of humanists is a good way to put it. This theme carries on throughout history; the elite always gorge in their power. I find it ironic that modern societies have flourished because of their ideas, including the lower classes, even though these elitists, I don't think, were really thinking of all classes when they were coming up with these ideas.
ReplyDelete