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

STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER and not inaccurate. The decision by the editor to include them in his volume was a wise one, certainly. Formally,John Gower's Literary Transformations comes off somewhat better than does Studies inJohn Gower. Perhaps because Beidler's book is glued and not sewed, its pages are solidly affixed (University Press of America take note), and do not annoy the reader by pulling out in handfuls. Typographical errors are present, the most serious beingJournal of English and Germanic Philosophy for Philology on p. 81. Others, however, should be corrected as follows: "unequivocably," p. 14; "gristly" for "grisly," p. 17; "foothaste" for "foolhaste," p. 27; "Metamorphoses" and "perservering," p. 33. On the whole, then, Beidler's collection makes a solid contribution to the field of Gower studies. Coupled with the translation of Wickert's influential volume, it represents a strong advance in our available knowl­ edge oflate-medieval poetry in England. Chaucer scholars, as well as those at work in other areas, will stand to benefit directly from the presence of both books on their library shelves. R. F. YEAGER Warren Wilson College PIERO BOITANI, English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Cen­ turies. Translated by Joan Krakover Hall. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Pp. x, 309. $42.50. With the writings ofNorthrop Frye, Walter Ong, Wayne Booth, and other recent critics, discussion of the narrative process has taken on a new dimension. Just as the emergence of the concept of transformational grammar has converted linguistic analysis from static to dynamic, the emergence of the concept of narrative transformations has become the starting point for transactional criticism. Major transformations ofstruc­ ture and style occur in the passage from oral to written narrative. These transformations alter radically the relations between author and audience. Piero Boitani's lively study is well versed in both American and European contributions to transactional literary theory. The first half of his book 152 REVIEWS treats pre-Chaucerian and non-Chaucerian narrative; the last half is de­ voted to Chaucer. In his final essay, on Chaucerian narrative, the theoreti­ cal bases of his own criticism are most clearly set forth. When the earlier narratives are considered in the light of this conclusion, their role as precursors to Chaucer's literary achievement becomes clear. Boitani's first chapter, "The Religious Tradition," explores the didactic narratives of the homiletic and penitential traditions. The commentary is more descriptive than analytical, detailing the variety in the stories and tracing the drift from instruction toward entertainment. We are dealing here more with authorial intent and the preservation of manuscripts than Boitani's treatment allows, because "solas" has no doubt always existed alongside "sentence," but there is no doubt that in extant materials the sermon was the first "seedbed of themes for storytelling," and narrative appears to have developed gradually away from exemplification toward mimesis. The earliest legends, in the "Katherine group," were written more for devotion than for entertainment. Later collections like the South EnglishLegendary and the GoldenLegend introduce drama and fantasy to please the audience. St. Erkenwald, Patience, and Cleanness mark the emergence of a conscious literary art. The next chapter, "The Comic Tradition," chronicles a further move­ ment from the exemplary toward the entertaining. The characteristics of the religious narratives were determined by the intentions of the clergy; those of the comic tales, by the demands of the laity. Since all we have preserved in this vein (exclusive of Chaucer) are Dame Sin'th, the Fox and the Wolf, and two or three other pieces, the chapter is necessarily short, but Boitani concludes by observing that such narrative was not without its exemplary intention; it simply made its point by ridicule rather than by admonition. In his third chapter, "The World of Romance," Boitani adjudges the English non-Chaucerian romances on the whole inferior to their French originals. To please their bourgeoise audiences, their makers stripped them of formal requirements, structural complications, and subtleties of sen. Commentary on the individual romances is sensitive and informed. Boitani follows Derek Brewer and other recent critics in finding the chief contribution of the non-Chaucerian romances to be their achievement of natural dialogue that made possible the...

pdf

Share