Reasonable folk can differ on this, as we apparently do. Not provable
regardless. You see the Retraction as written in the same persona as the
Tales at large, I see it written in a different persona entirely (we
inescapably wear personae--different ones for different occasions. I'm
guessing that Chaucer experienced this one as a closer fit to his own
personhood.).
At 12:10 PM 9/20/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>From: "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> Tweren't I that used the term. I don't think that I referred to Chaucer's
>> attitude towards Jews at all.
>
>> >Ergo: to talk of Chaucer as 'anti-Semitic, as y'did, is to be
>anachronistic
>> >and, what's more, to be not conscious enough of the rather insane
>> >complexities involved. As I say, pedantic, but pertinent...
>> >
>> >ColinGHughes
>
>To be a little pedantic on my own account, having used (which I now
>unreservedly withdraw) the term antisemitic, I did so with reference to
>"The Prioress's Tale", not to Chaucer (or even "Chaucer") 's views. The
>tale is retailed by the Prioress, who isn't (to say the least) an
>unequivocally admirable figure as she's presented in the Prologue. It's
>not, after all, given to an "admirable" character such as The Poor Parson.
>
>But if Mark will forgive me for returning to this, I think the issues of
>when Chaucer speaks, when "Chaucer" speaks, and when a character speaks
>+are+ relevant to how we respond to The Recantation.
>
>For all of me, the closest I feel myself coming to the words of
>Chaucer-the-Man are in his preface to his Treatise of the Astrolabe, when
>he talks of writing it for "Little Lewis my son".
>
>Robin Hamilton
>
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|