I'll second Kevin's thought on the Epithalamion, with a small
addition: for years I taught a senior undergraduate course in Sidney
and Spenser, where we read, first the Defence of Poesy and Astrophil
and Stella, then the Amoretti and the Epithalamion. That format
worked very well, but probably because in Canada we had full-year
courses. In America it would have to be taught as two back-to-back
courses, before and after Christmas. It did make many students
enthusiastic for Spenser's richness and complexity. As for Hannibal's
point on biography, I've been trying to find my copy of Bill Oram's
book on Spenser, which I seem to remember did rather a good job on that?
Roger
On 7 févr. 09, at 08:33, Kevin Farnham wrote:
My suggestion, as one who received a BA in English without ever
reading a word of Spenser, is this: work to include a study of
Epithalamion in any course that covers the 1500-1700 period.
Epithalamion is small enough that it can be taught as a unit within a
survey course.
Steven Willett noted that Shakespeare has an advantage over Spenser,
because he produced small self-contained works. Epithalamion is the
perfect Spenserian work for college undergraduates, since... well,
are not the college years quite an amorous time of life? And are we
not in an age where especially young people in ways "revel" in Nature
(my graduate student son cares more about saving creatures than
humans from the consequences of global warming)?
If I was a professor, and I wanted to introduce Spenser, I'd
definitely select "Epithalamion." Is it not a microcosm that exhibits
all the best of Spenser's genius?
Kevin
-------
Judith H. Anderson wrote:
> Hi, all--
> I've loved your reflections and connections, but in line with Jim's
> message below, what is anyone or everyone doing about this? What
> little moves have or could be taken, perhaps most effectively on
> one's own turf? What are the root causes, and could they be
> redirected to at least a small extent? Just a thought.
|