Conclusion

It seems in this passage that Spenser would agree with Aristotle that the theory of forms is not contingent, and is not causation. Instead, Spenser posits Chaos as the cause of things coming to be, the source of substance and that which is eternal. He seems to toy with both of the ideas presented by Plato and Aristotle, and at the same time slips in his own metaphysical philosophy which originates with chaos. I did not expect to find a philosophical Spenser in this passage because it is so heavily laden with the thoughts and theories of others; his point of view comes across very subtle in the mish mash of so many Platonic and neo-Platonic references.

In the passage, Spenser throws around the word form so often that it is hard to keep up with which definition he is using at the time, which is precisely why scholars reading this piece should know the way in which the words has been used and defined over time. Elizabeth Fowler, a professor at Yale, says it best: “Part of our job as workers in a discipline that prizes historical consciousness is to understand that context in which the Faerie Queene understands itself.” Her words carry the weight of why it is important to know the ancient texts and ideas- because we should strive to understand the poem in its own context, rather than our own, for that is where the meaning lies.


Sources

1) Plato. The Collected Dialogues. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1987.

2) Pojman, Louis P. Classics of Philosophy. (My copy is missing its first few pages; more information can not be provided.)

3) Spenser, Edmund. The Faerie Queene. Great Britain: Pearson Education, 2001.


<<Prev.  Rationale | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | Conclusion