medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
By coincidence, I'd already ordered a copy of the novel _Women in the
Wall_ by Julia O'Faolain when someone mentioned it on this list. I've
now read it and was rather disappointed. Of course it *is* a novel,
and it *was* written in 1973, when the standards expected even of
"good" historical fiction were not what they are now. (Witness the
film _Anne of a Thousand Days_ from the same era, with those
memorable headdresses on the ladies that look rather like radar
dishes....)
Briefly, the story is about Radegund's unwilling marriage to the King
of France, her founding of the Monastery of the Holy Cross in
Poitiers in the late 6th century, and carries through to her death
some years later. The "women in the wall" are a nun's illegitimate
daughter, who becomes a walled-up recluse to secretly expiate her
mother's sin; when the daughter is killed during a raid, her mother
takes her place.
Unfortunately the novel takes for granted many of the 20th-century
stereotypes about medieval religion and society. The nuns flog
themselves, squabble constantly, and not infrequently have sex with
priests or each other (and no one ever gets caught). Radegund sees
"visions" that don't pass any of Teresa of Avila's tests for
authenticity. Everyone assumes that any claimed "miracle" or "vision"
is absolutely true and marks the beholder instantly as a living
saint. Generally, all the men in the story are selfish jerks, and
none of the women (including Radegund) have the common sense God gave
a goose -- except possibly one of the villains. The novel is also
exclusively focused on the things 20th-century popular culture finds
interesting, such as journeys, politics, and of course the sex --
next to no theology, social issues, or any but the sketchiest
accounts of material culture. I didn't even find it particularly
entertaining.
As I said, it *is* a novel and I didn't expect much from it. I do
have a question, though: I realize that it's set a thousand years
before Teresa of Avila's eminently sensible and down-to-earth advice
on visions, raptures, and excessive penances. But did the Church in
the sixth century actually have that much less experience,
commonsense and understanding of human nature? The novel portrays the
sixth century as having a staggeringly credulous and highly emotional
attitude toward religion, and it seems to me that it must be falling
into the trap of assuming that because medieval people lived
centuries ago, they must have been stupid.
Comments?
(BTW, it turned out to be quite easy to figure out *which* St.
Radegund is commemorated at Exeter Cathedral: the second one didn't
die till 1300, and the chapel was there earlier. Interestingly
though, it's not labeled as such on the current Cathedral map on the
website; it's at the far west end and I'm pretty sure it's the one
labeled as Bishop so-and-so's chapel. I'll be interested to see what
the story is.)
_________________________________________________________
O Chris Laning
| <[log in to unmask]>
+ Davis, California
_________________________________________________________
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|