The language used in this passage to describe the "spirit" conversing with Manfred seems to contain purposeful ambiguities as to the nature and source of the being with which Manfred communes. When first being described by the abbot the spirit is defined in an almost explicitly demonic context: an "infernal god"whose eye "glares forth the immortality of hell". Halting here in the passage leaves one with the certainty that this being who stands between Manfred and the abbot is a "fiend". However, shortly after this passage the "fiend" is addressed by the abbot as "unknown being" (a step up from demon, no?) and once given list to speak is named as "spirit" by the text denoting who is speaking. Spirit has an entirely different feel from "infernal god", spirit evokes images of so-called "pagan" river gods and other forces which have agency in nature and man's life. Halting here would leave one somewhat confused as to the true nature of this being, yet further down the spirit speaks and names itself "the genius of this mortal". The word "genius" here is reminiscent of the classical concept of muse, as evoked by Milton and Homer. This trinity of definition is further confounded when Manfred names the spirit's associates "angels". This casts the earlier statements of the spirit in a new light, is it beckoning Manfred towards his salvation and heaven?
These questions concerning the nature of Manfred's "spirit" (which may be cleared up by earlier passages of the poem) left me with an enjoyable sense of unease and uncertainty at the end of the scene, and suggest that perhaps the distinction between angel, muse, spirit, and Devil is not that definite.
No comments:
Post a Comment