Debate of the Romance of the Rose (review)

The ever-fertile field of Christine de Pizan studies brought forth David F. Hult's edition and translation of the Debate of the Romance of the Rosein 2010, as part of the series The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe. This volume presents in chronological order, not only the documents that have been commonly associated with the debate, or querelle, but also "various letters, sermons, and fictional works" that furnish a context to Christine's exchange of ideas with her male contemporaries (19). According to Hult, this chronological organization, in contrast to the "documentary" approach taken earlier, particularly by Eric Hicks, renders his publication "more accessible for use in the classroom" and "provides a sense of the dynamic of the positions of the participants" (22).

Jean de Meun's continuation some forty years later of the Romance of the Roseis over four times as long as Guillaume de Lorris's first-person dream narrative from the 1230s. It is no exaggeration to state that it proved to be much more than four times as controversial. In the volume editor's introduction, Hult covers the background and development of the debate that grew to surround this "best-seller that dominated and influenced the literary world of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, both in France and beyond its borders" (12). Deeply disturbed by numerous facets of the Rosethat she deemed morally offensive and misogynistic, Christine applied her skill as a writer and her authority as a woman to counter commentary by Jean de Montreuil that praised the work. In a letter addressed to him, she laid out her critique, which revolved more around "issues condemned by Christian morality" than the defense of women that would later surface in her writings (13). Jean de Montreuil's original encomium is no longer extant, nor is any response he may have made to Christine's letter. Nonetheless, a substantial number of other texts by Jean de Montreuil, Jean Gerson, Gontier Col, Pierre d'Ailly and, of course, Christine herself, have enabled scholars to trace the evolution of the debate, which Hult divides into two main phases: May 1401 to February 1402 and February-March 1402 to November 1402. He frames his presentation of these phases with an opening chapter on "Christine and the Rosebefore the Debate" and two concluding chapters, "Aftermath" and "Christine's Later Mentions of the Romance of the Rose." The ensemble of debate-related documents is complemented by the series editors' introduction that outlines "Traditional Views of Women 500 B.C.E. 1500 C.E." and "The Other Voice, 1300-1700," as well as multiple bibliographies and useful indices.

Hult is to be applauded for assembling this group of documents so that they would be readily accessible in one place for both instructional purposes and scholarly reference. His translation of the debate, predominantly from French with a few instances of translation from Latin, is based for the most part on Eric Hicks's edition of the primary texts. This reviewer has no particular querelle with either its accuracy or readability. As Hult rightfully points out, fifteenth-century French syntax is notoriously complex, and Christine de Pizan, who favored a "more elevated vernacular register," was not necessarily striving for clarity (25). As concerns lyric verse, Hult retains the basic stanzaic structure of the original form, but wisely avoids introducing contrived poetic effects that would inevitably fall short of reflecting the nuances of French versification. Narrative verse appears as English prose. Translation being as much an art as a science, some might have opted for other approaches, other words upon occasion, or a somewhat different treatment of syntax. However, the quality of Hult's translation, his choice of chronological organization, and his selection of texts from outside the debate proper have resulted in an excellent and most welcome addition to the list of Christine's works that were...