KARL JASPERS FORUM

TA33 (Mancuso)

Commentary 4

GIAMBATTISTA VICO
by Rob Weedon
6 February 2001, posted 20 February 2001

Only to express my pleasure at the current inclusion of Vico into the discussion [TA33 C2].

On p. xi (Abbreviations) of Roland McHugh's Annotations to FINNEGANS WAKE [Revised edition] appears the following:

(quote)

Certain items appearing frequently in Finnegans Wake are glossed merely by a tag. The full explanation would necessitate inordinate repetition of data such as the following:

Giambattista Vico (1668 -- 1744) is the author of Principi di Scienza Nuova (The New Science), in which is expounded his theory that a common cyclical pattern identifies the histories of diverse nations. The cycle consists of (i) the age of gods, represented in primitive life by the family life of the cave, to which God's thunder had driven man; (ii) the age of heroes, characterized by the continual revolutionary movements of the plebians against the patricians; (iii) the age of people , the final consequence of the levelling influence of revolutions. The three ages are typified by the institutions of birth, marriage and burial, respectively, and followed by a short lacuna, the ricorso (resurrection) linking the third age to the first of a subsequent cycle. These four periods are illustrated by the four books into which Finnegans Wake is divided, and also by concise references to attributes to the ages (e.g. their institutions).

Annotations simply states 'Viconian cycle' in such instances.

(close quote)

Admirable in its way, this has perhaps misdirected dippers into Finnegans Wake toward 'the big picture' rather than (as I take TA33 C2, to favour), a Buberesque sense that "I-THOU" & "I-IT" have more validity than "I" in isolation. But:-

I am everyone

who dwells in my memory;

we ride together.

Dialogue begins

here in foetal memory --

original face.

A good deal after

The Beginning was the Word --

and it was loaded.

It seems possible, even likely, that we are tricked by the (Western) languages we inherit into an invalid (*) view of ourselves qua individuals. It's not hard to find -- for example in the cast of characters in "Paradise Lost" -- the components of a single 'human', and we dream in much the same way 'socially'. One doesn't have to be crazy to be 'legion' -- it suffices to opine athwart prevailing assumptions for it to seem so. Napoleon's view of History as 'anything two historians agree on' applies to much we don't generally call 'historical' -- but what, after all, is not historical ?

(*) the pun wasn't intended -- some other 'note' in my 'chord' chipped in. [What else is new ?]

This whole thing is delicious ! I perhaps should be more 'serious' about the Forum -- but 'cheerfulness keeps breaking through'. I haven't enjoyed a discussion so much in many years. The likelihood of my ever contributing 'seriously' is remote -- but you all are contributing very handsomely to me, & for that I'm much obliged.

------------------------

Rob Weedon