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

THE POPULARITY OF THE MIDDLE ENGLISH ROMANCE BY VELMA BOURGEOIS RICHMOND (Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1975. xii + 237 pages. $12.95.) Professor Richmond begins her study by posing a scholarly dilemma: In view of the attitudes of modern readers, how is the earlier popularity of the Middle English romance to be explained? She argues that obviously we are in need of a broader understanding of medieval standards of taste to comprehend why the romance flourished, and she believes that a key factor is the homogeneity of interests and attitudes in all segments of the medieval audience. As she sees it, the controlling vision of the authors of romance is distinctly Christian and shows "the ultimate triumph offirm moral purpose." (p. 24). To support her thesis, Professor Richmond analyzes several romances organized under the rubrics of"Fortune's Heroes," "Fiendish Origins Transformed ," "Friendship and Brotherhood," and "The Delights of Love." She provides four examples for each of the first two categories, three for each of the last two, but she believes that her examples are broadly representative of the general habit of thinking that informed Middle English romance. She devotes her most substantial analysis to "Guy of Warwick," which she considers in a chapter to itself. The book has its merits: Generally Professor Richmond's style is quite readable, and she has provided substantial secondary documentation. However , the book also has some serious flaws. While Professor Richmond's subject is a worthy one, to master it requires a broader understanding of medieval standards of taste than she has provided. There is very little on the roles of Chivalry and courtly love in the romance, except as whipping boys for the doctrinaire authors she posits. Similarly, all aspects of the supernatural are either subordinated to religion or serve primarily as foils, ultimately to be vanquished in the cause of theology. Even medieval attitudes toward religion are sometimes stereotyped or incompletely presented, an especially grave flaw given her approach. Professor Richmond has chosen an interesting subject, one she might better pursue from a broader perspective. While her book provides a compendium of religious interpretations of the tales, her argument remains to be proven. ROBERT L. KINDRICK* •ROBERT L. KINDRICK earned his Ph.D. atthe University ofTexas at Austin. He is Professor and Head of the Department of English at Central Missouri State University, where he has taught since 1967. He is a member ofthe Board of Directors ofthe Missouri Committee for the Humanities. His previous publications have appeared in MidAmerica, Studies in Scottish Literature, and Medievalia et HumanĂ­stica. 90VOL. 33, NO. 2 (SPRING 1979) ...

pdf

Share