I have to compare Iago in othello to Ambrose's message in St. Augustine's Confessions.
Ambrose's message is to not take the Bible literally, but figuratively so that he can understand the deeper meaning.
I must say how Iago's lesson is the opposite of what Ambrose teaches, which would be to take things literally and not figuratively, but I'm sure what this means, or how to go about it.
I don't know if I agree. I read Ambrose's message to be things simply stated may be true, and things eloquently stated may be false, and of the two, truth is easiest stated simply.
I agree with you on Lago: Take things as they are stated, not to look for some deeper or mystical meaning.
So as I see it, they are not far different. Think on this.
It is quoted in Augustine's confessions, "the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." if this is so, then I believe Ambrose is telling Augustine the the letter, or the law, or exact words in the bible aren't meant to be taken literally, but figuratively in order to obtain spiritual life and understand God.
How then is Iago teaching the opposite lesson to this then? to as you say, take things as they are stated?
what would specific examples be?
I'm so sorry but I'm just having trouble understanding
Laura, see the dissertation I posted on the new post. One note here: the message Iago gave (not to look deeper than his message) was not the lesson Iago gave...he was an evil man, but on the face of his words, he espoused good. Of course he didn't want folks to look deeper.
To compare Iago in Othello to Ambrose's message in St. Augustine's Confessions, you can focus on how they each approach the interpretation of messages or texts.
Iago, as a character in Othello, is known for his manipulation and deceit. He consistently presents himself as trustworthy and honest while scheming behind the scenes. His intentions are often hidden or disguised. In this context, you can argue that Iago's lesson or approach could be taken as advocating for a literal understanding of messages, where the surface meaning is accepted at face value without questioning or delving deeper into the motives or intentions behind them.
On the other hand, Ambrose's message in Confessions suggests a contrasting approach. Ambrose encourages figurative interpretation of the Bible, implying that taking texts literally might not yield a comprehensive understanding of their deeper meaning. He stresses the importance of exploring symbolism, allegory, and metaphorical aspects to gain a more profound insight into religious teachings.
To illustrate how Iago's lesson opposes Ambrose's, you could examine their differing attitudes towards ambiguity in messages. Iago manipulates by exploiting the literal interpretations of others, utilizing their implicit trust in the surface meaning of what he says. In contrast, Ambrose invites readers to engage in a process of interpretation, uncovering hidden meanings and nuance beneath the explicit words.
In your comparison, you could delve deeper into the characters themselves, analyzing their actions, motivations, and the consequences of their approaches to interpreting messages. By examining specific examples from the play and the book in question, you can draw connections between Iago's literal manipulation and Ambrose's call for figurative understanding.
Remember to support your arguments using evidence from the texts, such as quotes or specific scenes, and to analyze the implications and outcomes of each approach to strengthen your comparison.