The nature of human individuality has been deeply investigated since the Greek Antiquity. The notion of character discussed in the ancient texts can be accepted as static until Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics introduced the character with a potential to change in order to reach perfection through effort. If one looks at the texts before Aristotle in that sense, it is possible to talk about ‘character’ in Homer’s Iliad only to a limited extent because gods held responsible from all the human actions. Parties in the Trojan War gained power or backed off according to the interference of gods to the war. These interferences put humans in a passive condition simply by claiming that they ‘were strengthened’ or ‘left weak’ by gods. Later on, the introduction of the ‘self’ with The Republic formed a philosophical ground for further investigation on human nature. Plato explained ‘character’ as static so to say that it is a sum of traits the human individual is endowed with from birth. According to Plato, gods could only be held responsible for the good, it is the irrational part in human soul that is responsible for what is considered as not good. Additionally, he also claims that some humans are born with special characteristics to become philosophers and they should lead the way to the others in order to take them out of their ignorance. The importance of education is emphasized in Plato’s work but it is also implied that the souls who are not virtuous by their nature will not be able to handle the truth and will choose to remain in dark. The myth of Er in book 10 serves as a good example to see how Socrates defines souls with permanent characters that in afterlife they choose a coherent new life with their characteristics over and over again.
The understanding of character as dynamic, which results as explained from a series of choices and experiences, is present in Dante’s Divine Comedy with a higher resemblance to Aristotle’s dynamic character, but exercises different theological implications as the departure from antiquity to medieval ages and even early Renaissance takes place. Although Dante shows his familiarity with the Greek philosophy and literature by including names like Homer, Plato, and Virgil to his journey, his interaction and knowledge on the philosophical texts of antiquity is still not very clear. Nevertheless, it would not be wrong to claim that Dante’s notion of character also shows similarities with Plato’s in the sense of the endowments from birth. Dante renames what Plato calls the irrational part of the soul as desires. It is the strong emphasis on ‘free will’ that makes Dante’s understanding of character dynamic. Humans, naturally endowed with blinding desires, have also the intellect to control those desires in order to lead a virtuous life that is to say, in order not to sin. Based on Christian theology, Dante’s journey in his fictional afterlife serves as a detailed analysis on the nature of human desires and the success or failure of humans to overcome their possessions in this life according to their ability to use their intellect. Unlike the souls in the myth of Er that are destined to repetition even if they have the chance to choose, Dante’s souls in Divine Comedy vary from the static ones to the ones who are able to come to a realization and subject to change. The notion of free will is what makes character, as explained in the question, something attained and shaped, not something given.
Dante’s journey can be read as a metaphor to his self-realization that is to say the pilgrim Dante in Divine Comedy experiences a change in his character throughout the journey. After the loss of his pure earthly love Beatrice, he deviates from the peaceful state he was in and becomes possessed by the desire to know about his position in the cosmos. In such a state, blinded by his desire, he finds himself in a forest that is the start of the journey he was called to, by the same reason that made him lose his sight. In the divine context of the journey Beatrice, a pure soul from the heaven, sent Virgil to guide Dante through the circles of Inferno and the terraces of Purgatorio to lead him to the Divine Love. The loss of the earthly love he found strength in, caused him to rely too much on his intellect, but the transformation of that love to a courtly love guided his way to find answers that he could not reach only with his intellect but by using his intellect as a medium.
The concept and importance of reason is introduced right at the beginning of the poem when Dante and Virgil are in front of the Gate of Hell, Virgil says to Dante: “…where you will see the miserable people, those who have lost the good of the intellect.”[1] From that point, the journey in Inferno sets out examples of souls who were not able to use the good of their intellect because they were surrendered to their humanly desires or even worse, the souls being punished after the Gate of Dis that used their intellect viciously. The case with Ulysses in Canto XXVI serves as a good example of how Dante implies a balance for human character that should both be virtuous and able to control his desires with the powers of his intellect. Ulysses says while he is telling his story to Dante:
“Consider well the seed that gave you birth:
you were not made to live your lives as brutes,
but to be followers of worth and knowledge.”[2]
From those lines it is understood that Ulysses is a virtuous character concerning the greatness of worth and knowledge, but he is so obsessed with reaching the knowledge by means of his intellect that he drives his ship to unknown waters where death finds him and his comrades. In a way it is possible to say that Ulysses’s story is a confrontation for Dante with his own desires. Grasping a greater knowledge is one of Dante’s desires that actually makes him place himself as the first character in such a journey. He also believes in the strength of poetry and he also confronts his that obsession in literature in Francesca’s story by claiming that a literary piece can be as blinding as such to commit unexpected sins. From that perspective, it is possible to see the change in Dante’s character as passive in the beginning to being dynamic. In Inferno, where the static souls condemned to misery for eternally are, Dante faints several times after what he sees. He is in a half sleepy mode all the time and he needs Virgil’s guidance, and protection. Inferno is the place Dante himself also considers the sins he possibly committed up until that time in his life, but he still does not know how to handle his desires. Only after Virgil disappears on the Earthly Paradise and Dante confesses his sin to Beatrice, he gets out that half sleepy state and becomes active. In other words, he is not anymore driven unconsciously to the souls who are suffering instead he turns his head to look at the light intentionally, meaning that his character went through a change that he is in control of his own actions from now on.
The whole journey is fictionalized with a strong reliance on the Christian Theology, that is to say Christian teaching defines human nature as a body that will expire at some point and the souls that found form in that bodies will be judged according to the life they led on earth to find a place in the infinite kingdom of God. The important ingredient in that teaching is the use of human intellect, in other words humans are free to choose whatever action to take on earth, but that intellect is only a medium to grasp the beauties of afterlife because a final understanding of the meaning of existence is a kind of knowledge that only God has. In that respect, human existence finds its completeness only by reaching the Divine Love as Dante puts it with Beatrice’s words:
“The greatest gift the magnanimity
of God, as He created, gave, the gift
most suited to His goodness, gift that He
most prizes, was the freedom of the will;
those beings that have intellect – all these
and none but these – received and do receive
this gift: thus you may draw, as consequence,
the high worth of a vow, when what is pledged
with your consent encounters God’s consent;
for when a pact is drawn between a man
and God, then through free will, a man gives up
what I have called his treasure, his free will…”[3]
The emphasis of Christianity is so strong in medieval ages that it reflects upon literature to a great extent as well. Although based on the Christian theology, it can be claimed that Divine Comedy differs from the other texts of the medieval age in the sense that the set-up of the poem is based on the individual actions, not on God. God is only referred as the Divine Love in Inferno and Purgotorio and with a clearer reference in Paradiso, but the main emphasis of Dante’s journey is more on the consequences of human actions and the importance of free will rather than God’s existence and his rule. In that respect, the text with all its religious mysticism, and also with its modern focus on the individual can be seen as a passage from the late medieval period to Renaissance. It is with Renaissance that the strong influence of religion leaves its place to more humanistic approaches in every field of life as well as in literature. So, it is now appropriate to consider how this change affected the reflection of human character in literary texts by comparing the notion of character in a quattrocento text, The Prince, to Dante’s notion.
First of all, I should state that the notion of character in Machiavelli’s The Prince is not as clear as Dante’s notion to analyze, so to lessen the ambiguity that will occur from the complex structure of such a character, it is important to note that the analysis will focus on the characteristics of the prince. The characteristics that are attained to the public differs from the character of the prince, public is shown in Machiavelli’s text as the viewer of the image of the prince and they favor him or disapprove him according to the image he reflects on those people. Since Machiavelli provides an in depth analysis of the characteristics of the prince I will follow his path.
Machiavelli makes in The Prince a list of characteristics which the prince should have and should not have but the most important entry of the list is the ability of the prince to adopt to the situation he is in, which is prudence as a virtue. He claims in part XV that he offers a new set of values that are for practical use, referring to the ideal characteristics that were attained to the rulers of the republics and principalities before. After listing some of the vices and virtues in that part, such as being cruel, compassionate, religious, courageous, flexible, frivolous so on and so forth, he claims that it would be most laudable if a prince possessed all the good qualities. “But, because of conditions in the world, princess cannot have those qualities, or observe them completely. So a prince has of necessity to be so prudent that he knows how to escape the evil reputation attached to those vices which could lose him his state, and how to avoid those vices which are not so dangerous, if he possibly can; but if he cannot, he need not worry so much about the latter. And then, he must not flinch from being blamed for vices which are necessary for safeguarding his state. This is because, taking everything into account, he will find that some of the things that appear to be virtues will, if he practices them, ruin him, and some of the things that appear to be vices will bring him security and prosperity.” In short, what he claims in this passage is that a prince, although it would be better for him to have all the virtues, should not necessarily be virtuous at all times. What he should really look after is to appear virtuous even if he is not so. He forms his argument on the basis of reality being different from the ideal. In that sense, what he offers is a new set that considers the ‘real’ in terms of the ‘ideal’ rather than considering the ‘ideal’ in terms of the ‘real’. In other words, his approach to character is humanist that is to say he bases his argument on the historical examples and practical activity rather than theory.
Although Machiavelli explains the prince’s character endowed with the virtue of prudence, the ambiguity of the character still remains because the analysis of the character is accessible only through the image of the prince. Machiavelli talks about the importance of imitation for the prince in part VI: “So a prudent man must always follow in the footsteps of great men and imitate those who have been outstanding.” Machiavelli suggests that the prince should imitate the great men if he fails to sustain the borders of his power. This imitation process can be questioned since it is not clear how that process works for the prince. My suggestion is that it works reciprocally. First, the prince starts to imitate the great men, than if he also has similar virtues but were unable to exercise them before, he becomes one of the great men. Without having the know-how it is not easy to imagine a prince becoming successful only by imitating. But Machiavelli relates this form and reality contrast only to appearance, because if a prince can make people believe that he is virtuous as the great men he imitates, then he will be seen as successful although he is not. So, the matter comes to create an illusion on the other eyes. If the ambiguity of the character of the prince could only be reduced to the virtue of prudence than one could easily agree with Machiavelli, but he also claims that nobody, even the closest person to the prince should not know his true character. That is why I leave the discussion on the notion of character for Machiavelli here and continue with the comparison of Dante’s notion of character to Machiavelli’s notion of character as a mixture of the image and the self relying on Machiavelli’s description in part XV.
Both Dante’s and Machiavelli’s notions of character are dynamic because Dante’s reason also applies for Machiavelli. But the use of reason differs to a great extent in two texts. While Dante uses reason to reach an understanding of the transcendence, Machiavelli offers the use of intellect for the earthly life. Dante argues that intellect should be used to control the animal like desires of the person but Machiavelli suggests that the prince should be a fox and a lion at the same time. Dante is ready to hand back his intellect to the great creator in the end, but Machiavelli defines no greater authority for his prince and even encourages him to enlarge his power if he is already able to sustain what he rules. Those examples show that the characters in both texts are subject to change by using their intellect but the difference lies on the point where they turn to. In that respect, Dante’s notion of character is a part of a divine design based on Christian theology, whereas Machiavelli’s notion of character lacks that religious ingredient and it is totally down to earth.
At this point, I would like to introduce a short analysis of Michelangelo’s David that can be related to both Dante’s ‘character’ in the sense that David is a biblical character as stated in the Bible: “skillful in playing (the harp), a man of valor, a man of war, prudent in speech, and a man of good presence; and the LORD is with him.”[4], and also to Machiavelli’s ‘character’ because it still serves as one of the best forms in sculpture. As discussed above, imitation and form are the most striking qualities of the prince. In that sense, David, just like Machiavelli wants his prince to be, is considered to be the finest form of art because it mimics the divine creation. The artistic discipline that David is categorized in is built on the knowledge of the male human form. The sculpture is not in true proportions to human body, with the head and the hands larger than normal form. This is claimed to be as Michelangelo’s mannerism, and it suits to the discussion of the dynamic notion of character as stated in Aristotelian system regarding the character’s authenticity that the character must never be absolutely perfect. We can see the traces of this claim in Dante simply with his argument on defining the human character as a part of divine design that can never be complete without reaching the Divine Love. And, also Machiavelli severally states in his book that since this is the earthly world that the prince is operating, there is no such thing as ‘ideal’. As a last note, it is also important how Michelangelo gives character to David. Unlike Verrochio’s and Donatello’s Davids, Michelangelo has depicted David before the battle over Goliath. He managed to give an expression to David’s face showing his state before the battle as tense, but tense in a mental sense. That is a really impressive aspect of the sculpture because it shows that emotions can also be attributed to the sculpture else than the detailed works on the shape of the body.
In conclusion, the notion of human character was one of the main issues of literature and other arts starting from the late medieval ages and throughout Renaissance. From a historical context, it is possible to claim with the above analysis that medieval ages formed a basis for the appearances of some ideas in Renaissance as in the case of the notion of free will that later affected the birth of humanism after the church loses its strength. From Dante to Machiavelli the great shift occurs in the notion of character with the loss of emphasis on religion that also can be felt in the texts of Machiavelli’s contemporaries. That kind of a change can also be noted in the art scene for example by the presentation of nude biblical figures, like David, with a great influence of the pagan Greek Antiquity. Also, regarding the notion of character, sculptures gained dynamism with contrapposto style of posing the human form, which Michelangelo also used for David. Contrapposto is a technique that enables a movement for the sculpture from the stone that it is attached to, metaphorically speaking, that is the idea present in the texts with humans being free to choose their actions and the work of art in analysis as well as the general source of Renaissance: the movement.
