The entrance to Hell is about as welcoming as you’d expect:
Per me si va ne la città dolente,
per me si va ne l’etterno dolore,
per me si va tra la perduta gente.
Giustizia mosse il mio alto fattore:
fecemi la divina podestate,
la somma sapienza e ‘l primo amore.
Dinanzi a me non fuor cose create
se non etterne, e io etterno duro.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate.
“THROUGH ME THE WAY TO THE CITY OF WOE,
THROUGH ME THE WAY TO ETERNAL PAIN,
THROUGH ME THE WAY AMONG THE LOST.
JUSTICE MOVED MY MAKER ON HIGH.
DIVINE POWER MADE ME,
WISDOM SUPREME, AND PRIMAL LOVE.
BEFORE ME NOTHING WAS BUT THINGS ETERNAL,
AND I ENDURE ETERNALLY.
ABANDON ALL HOPE, YE WHO ENTER HERE.”
There’s a lot to unpack here, and most all of it is troubling. The first stanza isn’t the problem; it’s a fairly straightforward catalog of what you’d expect Hell to be like: woe, pain, and the lost. As a modern reader, I have an issue that speaks more to my inability to deal with the metaphorical than it necessarily highlights anything questionable in the poem itself. I don’t understand why Evil has to look so…evil. I guess the sense is that evil simply corrupts everything, so that while you may have had the best of intentions in building a city of marble and white, you end up with that Skull Castle on the hill that drips blood. I’ve written elsewhere that Shakespeare gets it the rightest of all when, in Macbeth, he has the doomed Duncan say of Macbeth’s home: “This castle hath a pleasant seat; the air/Nimbly and sweetly recommends itself/Unto our gentle senses.” Duncan is dumb about a lot of things (“There’s no art/To find the mind’s construction in the face./He was a gentleman on whom I built/An absolute trust,” he says of the traitor Cawdor, who aligned himself against Duncan and the Scots with Sweno of Norway. However, Duncan doesn’t appear to learn that things-aren’t-what-they-seem lesson, and decides to stay the night at Macbeth’s house. But then, why shouldn’t he? Macbeth is a kinsman. Duncan has no reason to be wary of Macbeth; he didn’t see the way Macbeth “start[s], and seem[s] to fear/ Things that do sound so fair” when Macbeth is told that he’ll be king while the current king still lives) and it’s easy to knock Duncan for trusting his heart about Macbeth; but we have the benefit of not being a character in a play. We know the ending. Duncan does not — nor can he. And I’m now really not writing about The Inferno. Let’s get back to it.
The first stanza tells us that we’re absolutely not going to find a good time through these gates. The second stanza gives us even more reason to be terrified: God made Hell. This is Bad News Bears, guys. If Hell were a construct of Evil, there’s hope that it can be vanquished by Good at some point. There’s a sense that Good’s entire raison d’etre would be to eradicate Evil wherever it can (while knowing that, algebraically, it can never entirely wipe out Evil, because Evil needs Good and vice versa; we’ve all seen the opening credits to that Tom Cruise/Mia Sara masterpiece, Legend). But if Hell — this place of eternal woe, pain, and loss — is created by the Guy whose supposed to be on our side? If, as Dante suggests, Giustizia mosse il mio alto fattore (“Justice–” i.e., God “–moved my maker”) — then…what?
And what are we to make of the phrase e ‘l primo amore — “and primal love”? Primo can also be translated as “first” — which, for me anyway, takes away only about 0.0000001% of the creepiness factor. “Primal” sounds…well, primal. Like it can’t be reckoned with (and that about sounds like the God I know from the Old Testament). “First” sounds like there might be some sort of softening later; a reasoning that happens. (That…doesn’t sound so much like the God I know from any of the Testaments.) That there can be any amount of love contained in eternal punishment smacks of the very worst of parenting. My mom made terrible parenting decisions on a regular basis, backed by her mistaken idea of what I needed as a human being (punishment) and what her motivation was as a parent (love). Instead, though, she was simply a bitter, angry, hurting (in both senses: as in, she was in pain, and she caused pain) human being whom circumstance unfortunately put in charge of children, of sons, of not-yet-men and her entire experience of men had left her so bruised and broken (sometimes literally) that she was dead-set on allowing either my brother or me to turn out that way. We were not going to be like the men she knew, even if she had to beat it out of us. Of course, I love being here; and if there was a mechanism for pre-knowing — if, somehow, I existed before I existed and was told, “You can have a shitty and painful childhood filled with equal parts terror and wonder, or you can…not,” I’m picking the shitty and painful for those brief pockets of wonder. But I resent that those appear to be my only options.
And finally — why must I, or you, or Dante abandon any hope, let alone all? Why would God create a place absent any sense of grace at all? That Dante makes it through Hell (oh, spoiler alert) at all means that he must have kept some sense of hope about him. Is Dante saying that hope is bad? That there is a chance that one can find oneself beyond saving? And that, once stuck, hope is not hopeful, but cruel?
Maybe I make sense of it this way: I have a friend going through something paralyzingly painful. Her trust in herself and her own sense of truth has been undermined. (While on one hand Eleanor Roosevelt may be right, that “no one can make you feel inferior without your consent,” it’s also true that you wouldn’t even be in the position of having to give or not give consent in the first place if there wasn’t some asshole trying to make you feel inferior. It’s a two-way street sometimes, Eleanor; accidents happen.) These are terrible things to lose — or, in her case, have taken from you. Because they were. “So what do I do?” she asks. And then, because it’s an email, and because I can’t interrupt her, she eventually reaches a place of hope: “Maybe the situation will change back. Maybe he’ll change his mind.” And that’s a toxic hope right there. That only leads to stasis: I won’t move at all, and maybe no further damage will happen, and maybe the situation will rectify itself. But that is rarely true; and when it is true, it’s the exception, and not helpful. Maybe not all hope needs to be abandoned. But maybe useless hope needs to be abandoned. (“Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye, old friend, I can’t make you stay. I can’t spend another ten years wishing you would anyway.” — Patty Griffin)
For Dante — and, I guess, for any of us — the best way out of Hell is through (tm Robert Frost). (I also enjoy Winston Churchill’s “If you’re going through Hell, keep going.”) Regardless of the warning above the gate, Dante and Virgil enter Hell. And it’s loud:
Quivi sospiri, pianti e alti guai
risonavan per l’aere sanza stelle,
per ch’io al cominciar ne lagrimai.
“Now sighs, loud wailing, lamentations
resounded through the starless air,
so that I, too, began to weep.”
Later, Dante describes the sounds as il qual s’aggira/sempre in quell’aura sanza tempo tinta (“whirling on forever in that air forever black”). I think Dante, the poet, thinks that Dante, the Lost, has been given an opportunity: to experience Hell, to witness all the punishment he is susceptible to, if he continues on his wayward path. I think, also, as we’ll discover later, Dante wants to work out a lot of frustrations against people he doesn’t like very much, too. The circles of Hell — and by the way, we haven’t even entered the First Circle yet; we’re still in Hell’s antechamber — allow Dante to catalog his grievances. It’s rare that someone gets off easy in Hell; it’s rare that someone is punished more than what Dante perceives the sin to be.
Dante introduces the reader to the concept of the Neutral Angels. These are angels who took no side in the War in Heaven, the one where Lucifer challenged and lost against God. These neutral are forever punished as Eternal Footmen; they guide the damned to the boat that will take the damned across the river, and to the start of their journey to whichever circle of hell is appropriate to their transgression. However, there are those in Hell who never even get to go to a circle. They’re doomed to forever wait in the ante-chamber. In Dante’s theology, there’s a belief that there are those souls who aren’t even worthy of Hell: Questo misero modo/tegnon l’anime triste di coloro/che visser sanza ‘nfamia e sanza lodo (“This miserable state is born by the wretched souls of those who lived without disgrace yet without praise.”). And of those wretched Neutral Angels, Virgil tells Dante Caccianli i ciel per non esser men belli,/né lo profondo inferno li riceve (“Loath to impair its beauty, Heaven casts them out, and the depth of Hell does not receive them.”).
What I find even more horrifying about these Antechamber Damned is this description (and we haven’t even reached circles Eight or Nine yet, where the real hardcore shit goes down):
Questi non hanno speranza di morte
e la lor cieca vita è tanto bassa,
che ‘nvidiosi son d’ogne altra sorte.
“They have no hope of death,
and their blind life is so abject
that they are envious of every other lot.”
These people are envious of both the blessed and the damned. All the damned. Stupidly they believe that anything else is better than where they are.
I think deep pain can cloud our judgment that way. I should be kinder to those in Hell’s antechamber. I think often my thoughts in these rambles about this poem trivialize what Dante is hoping to achieve. I lower the quality of discourse by trying to make it about my puny life, rather than about Dante’s elevated expectations about salvation and grace. But here, too: I have been in places that I thought were as low as I could get, and I’ve wished for some sort of resolution, whether it be awful or merciful. Not death so much. I was never suicidal. (There is too much about life that I love; “clocks ticking….and Mama’s sunflowers. And food and coffee. And new ironed dresses and hot baths….and sleeping and waking up” — it’s the “waking up” part that always kills me in Emily’s monologue. Lewis Carroll also writes about death as a kind of sleep in the prologue poem of Through the Looking Glass: “We are but older children, dear/Who fret to find our bedtime near.”) I was as trapped as these damned by the expectation that there was some resolution due me, and looking enviously at others who had achieved some sort of closure. I think closure is just a false way of marking time.
Dante also shows a brief bit of dark humor, directing our attention to another group of damned waiting in the antechamber: Dante sees a banner racing in the sky above the crowd, carried by no one, with nothing written on it. Damned to follow this banner for eternity, in the cramped crowded Babel that is the antechamber is a line of people — sì lunga tratta/di gente, ch’i’ non averei creduto/che morte tanta n’avesse disfatta (“so long a file of people that I could not believe that death had undone so many”) — racing after the banner. These people, believing in nothing; passionate about nothing; nihilist and atheists; are forced to forever chase after an empty banner through a crowded room of wailing and gnashing souls. But Dante isn’t done yet with these unbelievers: he has them eternally stung by bees and wasps. Since they were determined to feel nothing in life, they are condemned to feel pain in death. And since their passion (or, if you will, blood) fed nothing in their life, their blood (or, if you will, passion) feeds the writhing worms that cover the floor of the antechamber of Hell.
That’s what passes for a joke in Dante. It’s going to happen a lot, the deeper we get. Dante considered himself driven by Divine Passion — his love for Beatrice being one aspect of that; his need to get down his vision of Hell being another. He can’t bear the listless.
Virgil and Dante make their way to the banks of the River Acheron, where those damned who have somewhere else in Hell to be are waiting for Charon to ferry them across. When Charon does arrive, he’s not pleased to see Dante. E tu che se’ costì, anima viva,/pàrtiti da cotesti che son morti (“And you there, living soul, move aside from these now dead.”). Charon tells Dante he’ll have to find another way across the river; più lieve legno convien che ti porti; “a lighter vessel must carry thee.” But Virgil commands Charon, compelling him to carry him and Dante across the river. vuolsi così colà dove si puote/ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare (“It is so willed, where Will and Power are One. Ask no more.”)
Dante then meditates for a bit about the seemingly neverending rush of souls who wait on the banks of the river to be carried further to damnation:
Così sen vanno su per l’onda bruna,
e avanti che sien di là discese,
anche di qua nuova schiera s’auna.
“Thus they depart over dark water,
and before they have landed on the other side
another crowd has gathered on the shore.”
Virgil explains, chillingly, that pronti sono a trapassar lo rio,/ché la divina giustizia li sprona,/sì che la tema si volve in disio: “They are eager to cross the river, for the justice of God so spurns them on their very fear is turned to longing.” Their fear of being in Hell, of knowing that they’re about to be relegated to eternal and horrifying punishment, is turned to longing. I don’t even know what to do with that sort of theology. I’ve certainly been in a position where I was eager to be punished; but those were situations where I hoped that, by enduring the punishment, I could move on past it, and to something better. There’s no hope for these souls in Hell. Even Virgil, doing a solid for the Virgin Mary and Beatrice, can’t escape the fact that once he and Dante reach Purgatory, Virgil has to head back to Hell, and Dante gets to go on through.
It’s a curious poem, this. And in some ways ultimately I think it’s not meant for me. Or us. It’s written when the world was a different place, and we were different people. Its message is bleak and bitter — which somehow also carries with it some comfort. I try to make as much of the poem cleave to my own understanding as I can; however, ultimately, I think at best the poem and I can only walk parallel to each other.
Dante finds himself overcome by all he has seen and experienced. Canto III ends with the line e caddi come l’uom cui sonno piglia. “and I dropped like a man pulled down by sleep.”
Next week, Canto IV.

4 comments
Comments feed for this article
15 March 2010 at 8:20 pm
pseudoswashbuckler
The concept that Hell is actually God’s creation is one that we really can’t handle (“we” basically includes most modern readers regardless of faith). We’d much rather think of it as some Castle Grayskull built by Lucifer in opposition to everything good in the universe. Simpler, yeah? But that Hell and all its tortures came from the Good Guy?
And that’s a point where the poem’s ideas first became totally alien to me: its idea of divine justice.
Dante weeps, even faints. Virgil says knock it off: to bear sympathy toward the damned is to show moral weakness. What the hell? It’s lacking faith in God’s idea of justice, to think that sinners ever suffer more than they deserve (even if one of them is being whirled around in a tempest *forever* just for being kind of a slut). It follows logically, I just never liked it.
And that longing to be punished? Those damned really do think father knows best (“Boy, I was a real prick, please hurt me *forever*). That Poet Dante finds this to be pretty crazy at first, too, helps me cope as I read it–I’m not supposed to accept that morality, at least initially.
With this in mind, you’re right, God in Dante is very much like He is in the Old Testament–The Alcoholic Father God, to quote Lewis Black.
16 March 2010 at 4:00 am
Mike Bevel
“The concept that Hell is actually God’s creation is one that we really can’t handle.”
And yet it’s sort of more intellectually consistent with the rest of the Bible than all this weird power struggle crap current Christian theology plays with — that the Devil rules here and God rules there and– what? Really? (I also — and here’s where I sound super-broken — have a little more theological respect for the Rev. Fred Phelps than, say, with most milquetoasty theologians. His views are evil and noxious; but they’re in the Bible. And they’re in the Bible more often than a lot of the love stuff. God really does hate fags — at least the God in the Bible. Still, I’m inviting Fred to my wedding; don’t tell my boyfriend.)
So this started out as a weekly writing exercise, because I used to write all the time and then I stopped. I needed a topic, I’d never read this poem before, and there you go. But each week is tougher than the one before it, because, as you pointed out, it’s just so alien to any of my ways of thinking. I re-read the above, and saw that I dinged myself for trying to relate the poem to my life, rather than relating it to literature holistically — but maybe I’m going to be easier on myself. I can’t deal with Dante as Dante; I find him too toxic.
On a different note, we’re discussing Emma tonight at my group. If you hopped in a car right now (i.e., 5:00 a.m. on Tuesday, 16 March) you might just make it. Maybe. Or a plane. Maybe you’d have to hop a plane. Point is: there’s an Austen discussion and you could spend an evening surrounded by ladies who take Jane pretty seriously.
Pack a jacket. It’s still pretty chilly here. (“Here” being Bethesda, Maryland.)
16 March 2010 at 7:29 pm
pseudoswashbuckler
I’m sure Fred’s idea of Hell would be for him to attend a gay wedding. He and the rest of the Phelps clan would have to dance choreography to Feist at the reception. Maybe *they’re* longing for it, too.
Do keep relating this poem to your personal life: even if it’s an exercise, the results are worthwhile to read, if I may say so. Besides, this sort of dialogue with the Divine Comedy is a large part of why we still bother reading it. Hell, whether literal or metaphorical, is a vast horror to try to make sense of and I think The Inferno forces us to do that. As for Dante’s philosophy, I guess ya gotta take it for what it is.
As my teleportation device is under repairs I cannot make the trip over from Colorado Springs. Perhaps you could do the next best thing and post the meeting notes? Luckily my lady’s always up for a serious discussion on Austen, so in that regard I won’t be deprived.
17 July 2016 at 9:39 pm
Nickname
Guys, up to my senior year in high school, I never “understood” literature’s “deeper meaning”. Then I got lucky to have a great teacher, who managed to get us to read a poem for what it is, to appreciate the art of expression. That and other tidbits of data, like T.S. Eliot telling Ezra Pound that he wrote “The Wasteland” just to prove that it could be done (a “hidden” allusion in every line), so the academics who couldn’t write poetry worth a darn could have a field day, and go “worship their golden idols” of symbolism.
Then in college, somehow, in one poetry class, the ice broke and I found the pond beneath was actually warm and pleasant, and I could enjoy reading “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.” The top lines are a quotation from Dante’s “Inferno.”
And I fully understood:
“Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go, and make our visit.”
And the opening lines:
“Let us go then you and I ….”
And:
“The yellow fog that rubs its back upon the window-panes ….”
And that is the art of the poet, to take a simple proposition, one we a-l-l are familiar with (like the girl whose attention we just cannot capture even for a moment, the “Girl from Ipanema”), and blow it up into an amazing poem of images and colors and thoughts. So J. Alfred (poor guy didn’t even use his first name … was it John? Jonah? Jacob-Jingleheimer? Was his first name Judas??!! AH!! the deeper meaning … maybe in his oblique aspersions cast at women, the mothers of our generations, he was foretelling a world of trans-sexuals incapable of breeding?? The death of everything??) … J. Alfred had his share of problems with women, or with his self-esteem, or with society, or maybe some publisher had just turned down a poem, or maybe, or maybe, or maybe ….
“The yellow smoke that rubs its muzzle on the window-panes
Licked its tongue into the corners of the evening,
Lingered upon the pools that stand in drains …”
Guys, this is hilarious! I just can’t wait to go have a great evening with my best buddy “J.” here!! The kind of evening that is “laid out like a patient etherized upon a table”, and not only that(!), but also an evening which has corners and drains and soot that yellow smoke licks its tongue into … yeah … I bet the girls are great, and really into it! (Dante sounds light-hearted by comparison!)
I’m sure there are some deeper meanings in literature, and some are probably intentional, and I don’t mean to malign academia, and I have never even come close to teaching a course, but must we dissect every writer, in order to understand him? Don’t we have to make a reasonable assumption that he knew what he was writing, and could express it better than any of us?
A poem is not the New York Times crossword puzzle. That thing never rhymes.