[WARNING: ] Source Post for The Most Honest Journ*list to Ever Live

Sources for my "The Most Honest Journ*list to Ever Live" posts in case you want to skewer me for any inaccuracies or if you want to read up on Pietro Aretino himself. Just keep in mind that I'm very sensitive and if you point out any mistake I made then I WILL KILL MYSELF and It'll be ALL YOUR FAULT

"Pietro Aretino, the Sourge of Princes"

Edward Hutton, 1922

"The Divine Aretino"

James Cleugh, 1966

Both are biographies of Aretino and so contain much the same information. Hutton's work includes an obvious Catholic moral bias, but is also the more thorough one.

"Aretino's Pornography and Renaissance Satire"

Saad El-Gabalawy

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1347699

"Crafty Whores: The Moralizing of Aretino's Dialogues"

IAN FREDERICK MOULTON

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41557045

"Aretino and the Harvey-Nashe Quarrel"

David C. McPherson

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1261501

All three of these focus primarily on the 16/17th century English literature world's relationship with Pietro Aretino's work. Early on, Aretino was as respected as any other Renaissance Italian author might be, but as England entered the 17th century and religious conflict became popular, many began to see Pietro's literature as too obscene. This is showcased in the second article, which analyzes a translated portion of Aretino's Dialogues; during translation, the work gains a heavy moralizing message and several scenes are censored as to not offend contemporary sensibilities.

"'Lingua Eius Loquetur Mendacium'"

William T. Rossiter

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27095415

"'E poi in Roma ognuno è Aretino'": Pasquino, Aretino, and the Concealed Self

MARCO FAINI

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26400104

The first article analyzes Aretino's relations to Henry VIII's court and possible connection to the Venetian state. The second analyzes satire in Renaissance Italy, and how many authors would claim certain identifies as to keep attention away from themselves should one of their works not be taken well by the powers-that-be. Aretino had large influence on the satirical world of Italy in his day, even serving as one of the "concealed selves" referred to in the title.

"Some Character Aspects of the Satirist (Pietro Aretino)"

Maurice N. Walsh

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26301764

This article psychoanalyzes Pietro in an effort to better understand his character and personality. I tend to not put too much stock in psychoanalysis anyway, but I had some major issues with this article especially. Throughout, the author attempts to paint Aretino as an insecure narcissist constantly trying to please higher ups in an attempt to satiate his ego, but I think that's a mischaracterization. Aretino was most certainly a narcissist, and fairly insecure, but it never manifested in any effort to seek the approval of authority figures.

Aretino's constant flattery of higher ups was much more of an effort to manipulate them into supporting his lifestyle, rather than any ego-driven attempt to gain their respect. He even considered much of the upper classes and their ways of life to be beneath himself. If Aretino was ever trying to gain the approval of any large group of people, it was the lower classes, who he constantly appealed to through his lambasting of their rulers, often positioning himself as a speaker of "truth" and deliverer of it to the masses.

The author of this article also takes anything Aretino says in his letters at face value, which is a common mistake and one I've seen in in a couple of the articles listed here, but is nevertheless one that shouldn't be made.

"A History of the Papacy During the Period of the Reformation"

Mandell Creighton, 1894

This is what it is on the tin: a history of the Papacy during the period of the Reformation. I only read a single chapter of it, as I exclusively used it as a source for the small section on Pope Adrian VI's election, so I can't speak to the wider work.