L'œuvre lyrique de Richard de Fournival ed. by Yvan G. Lepage (review)

HUMANITIES 405 French literary theory, and it is appropriate that her first chapter was originally published in French in Poetique in 1977 as 'Modes et formes du narcissisme litteraire.' She seems equally at home with the Italian avant-garde in her accounts of Gruppo 6} and of Paolo Volponi's La Macchina Mondiale, as well as with the North American scene, both literary and critical. The book offers a good blend of critical theory and practice, and the distinctions between different types of metafiction are well thought out. At times, though, the claims of metafiction are pressed too hard. For Hutclteon self-conscious fiction is not merely a type of fiction or a tendency within its history, but the quintessence of it. This line of argument verges on asserting that metafiction is morally and aesthetically better than other types: better aesthetically because it raises fictiveness and hence creativity to its highest power, and better morally because it forces the reader to participate more actively in the fictional process - to become, in fact, its co-creator. Another version of the argument opens by conceding to the realist critics that the novel is indeed a mimetic genre, and that their only failure is to define too narrowly the object of the mimesis, whiclt could and should include the novel-writing process itself. Thus the highest form of realism and the highest form of fictiveness are one and the same. After all, 'life is fictive, of our making, as well' (p 19), just as fiction is itself a reality. Of course, paradox is announced in the book's title, but I remain unsatisfied by this one, as well as by the slightly comic figures of the Lazy Realist Reader, passively sitting in his armchair being pandered to by his author, or the Rearguard Realist Critic, firmly entrenched in his nineteenth-century prejudices, while their counterparts are out being healthily narcissistic and vigorously participatory. The ideas of Watt, Auerbaclt, or Lukacs deserve more serious treatment than they get, and the polemical edge of the book is sometimes harsh. Alter's perspective on self-conscious fiction as an alternative tradition is more balanced, but Hutcheon's theoretical virtuosity will be appreciated even by those who remain sceptical of some of her ultimate claims. (GRAHAM Goon) Yvan G. Lepage, editor. L'Quvre lyrique de Richard de Fournival. University of Ottawa Mediaeval Texts and Studies 7 Editions de J'Universite d'Ottawa. 175. $6.00 paper A modem edition of the lyric works of Richard de Foumival is something medievalists everywhere will welcome. P. Zarifopol's 1904 edition, while meriting some praise from the present editor and others, does not go very far towards making these texts accessible to the modem reader. A. Ieanroy, writing in Romania in 1904, says of Zarifopol's edition that the manuscripts are 'reproduits en general d'une fa~on tres exacte: and 406 LETTERS IN CANADA 1981 Yvan G. Lepage finds Zarifopol's description of the manuscripts, his presentation of the relationships between them, and his treatment of biographical material to be competentand thorough (p 16). However, one must readily agree with Lepage that Zarifopol made many unnecessary corrections to his texts and in particular badly distorted the strophic organization of 'Qant jou voi' (Zarifopol chanson 13, Lepage chanson XI). The greatest failing of Zarifopol's edition is its lack of notes and glossary. Lepage quotes Jeamoy's article in which he says that Richard's poetry is so difficult that a complete translation would not be unwarranted. The failure to provide notes and a glossary thus leads Jeanroy to say: 'Or cette fa~on de garder pour soi ses lumieres, en laissant Ie lecteur plonge dans les plus troublantes perplexites, a quelques chose de tout afait desobligeant .' Lepage's edition with its complete and well-ordered critical apparatus is thus an important addition to the published work of Richard de Fourniva!. The editor of Richard's lyric works must work with fourteen manuscripts , none of which contains all of the twenty-one songs attributable to the poet. Ms A (VATICANA, Bib!. aposto!. vaticana, Reg. lat. 1490) contains the most, sixteen songs, eight of which are 'unica.' Further, it appears to...