In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

134ARTHURIANA strength with feminine beauty. Given the attention to gendered language and detail in the analysis ofGalahad, I found flat-footed Kraemer's claim that Malory's intentions for Percival's sister 'are not readily discernible' (81). Kraemer follows Hynes-Berry in ranking Percival and Bors as below Galahad and Percival's sister in purity but above Lancelot in the ability to resist sin. While there is no need for Kraemer to fashion himself a source critic, his argurment would carry more weight had he compared Malory's grail seekers with their predecessors in the Queste del Saint Graal, noting differences which bring them in line with English models of sanctity. Kraemer concludes that the generic features present in the 'Sankgreal' establish saintly standards the reader and Lancelot know before the quest begins. For Malory's contemporary audience, the 'adventures in pursuit ofthe grail impart not only a chivalric morality, but a morality applicable to all readers' (65). Early on Kraemer uses wills to establish the popularity ofsaints' lives in fifteenthcentury England. This evidence inadvertently points to issues in methodology that nag me: Despite the presence of Vorágines Legenda Aurea and other collections in wills, Kraemer limits his analysis ofthe genre to Lydgate, Capgrave, and Bokenham. Given the conservation nature of hagiography, I need further evidence that these authors in fact constitute a school. Is their use ofnoble lineage, chastity, and miraculous intervention in any way typical of fifteenth-century English lives, or in any way distinct from the use of those attributes in the thousand-years history ofthe genre that predates the Morte1! My memory also suggests that even in fifteenth-century England saints' lives survive in three languages. What evidence did Kraemer miss in ignoring the Latin and French vitae owned by 'English' readers? I recognize that my questions complicate terms, but I remain convinced that Kraemer's book is not a complete study of Malory and fifteenth-century 'English hagiography. KAREN CHEREWATUK St. Olaf College R. M. LiUZZA, Beowulf: A New Verse Translation. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2000. Pp. 248. isbn: 1-55111-189-6. $7.95 (US), £3.95 (UK). SEAMUS heaney, Beowulf: A New Verse Translation. New York and London: WW Norton &L Company, 2000. Pp. xxxi, 213. isbn: 0-393-32097-9 (paper). $13.95. These two verse translations, despite their claim in the title, are no longer 'new,' but have been critically acclaimed, Liuzza's by fellow Anglo-Saxonists, and Heaney s by a formidable array ofprestigious newspapers. Heaneys translation, moreover, has won the Whitbread Award. Consequently there seems to be little to do for this reviewer but to join in the chorus ofpraise for these two eminently readable verse translations. I shall do so summarily here at the beginning ofmy review: yes, both translations are reliable, accurate, accessible, fluent, excellent, direct, and sophisticated, to use the adjectives employed by previous critics. This litany oflaudatory adjectives is applied to both translations and thus raises the question whether and how they differ from each other. It is this latter question this review attempts to answer. REVIEWS135 The cover illustrations provide a first clue to the differences between these two translations. Heaney has chosen the back ofthe head and the shoulders of a warrior armed in silvery chain mail, while Liuzza opted for a landscape in sepia tones depicting craggy sea cliffs overhung by a few stunted trees. Heaney thus foregrounds the hero, the warrior ethos, the interlinked complexities of reward and revenge, while Liuzza concentrates on the windswept headlands that are home to Grendel, Grendels mother, mutatis mutandis to the dragon, and finally to Beowulf's beacon. Heaney's depiction of the warrior from behind demonstrates that the hero is ultimately unknowable, and the many lines and surfaces of Liuzza's illustration point to the complexities of the poem as a whole. The illustrations suggest that Heaney will take an individualistic approach to the individual Beowulf, while Liuzza will attempt a holistic approach to the entire poem. Some ofthe sentiments the two translators express in their introductions bear out this surface impression. Liuzza is careful to take into account all ofthe latest scholarship on Beowulfvíhen he speaks about the poem's manuscript, about the...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 134-137
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.