Chaucer: An Oxford Guide.
Boffey, Julia
Chaucer: An Oxford Guide. Ed. by Steve Ellis. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 2005. xxiv + 644 pp. 24 [pounds sterling]. isbn:
978-0-19-925912-0.
The publication of yet another guide to Chaucer's works--and
one that weighs in at nearly four pounds, even in paperback--risks
provoking a tart Chaucerian response: 'Hoo ... namoore of
this!'. But Steve Ellis's substantial collection of specially
commissioned new essays contains much to win over the resisting reader.
Ellis aims to uncover (primarily for undergraduates) a Chaucer who is
not 'boring' or 'irrelevant', and his assembled
materials demonstrate not just Chaucer's variousness and
complexity, but the ways in which the history of Chaucer scholarship and
interpretation are serious critical topics in themselves. There is much
here for readers of all levels and persuasions.
A section on 'Historical Contexts' is the first and
meatiest of five constituent parts. Fourteen essays cover Chaucer's
life, fourteenth-century society, politics, and culture, and matters
like 'identity' and 'nationhood', while
'Chaucer's Language' and 'Literacy and Literary
Production' are treated in informative and accessible ways by Donka
Minkova and Stephen Penn, respectively. Most contributors to this part
of the book draw instances and illustrations from Chaucer's
writings into their various overviews. David Griffith's discussion
of 'Visual Culture' is particularly effective in anchoring a
combination of information and methodological discussion in the detail
of selected portions of text.
Five essays on 'Literary Contexts' survey different
'backgrounds' to Chaucer's work--classical and biblical,
English, French, and Italian. These are richly learned, but also fresh
and thoughtful, and they fulfil an important role in ranging beyond The
Canterbury Tales to explore other parts of Chaucer's ouvre. The
focus narrows a little in the following section of 'Readings',
where most of the essays (with the exception of those by Marion Turner
and Barry Windeatt) use selected tales to demonstrate the strategies and
fruits of their allotted critical approaches. The eight essays here are
usefully representative of current trends in Chaucer criticism, but
their historical contingency is neatly confirmed by an introductory
discussion of 'Modern Chaucer Criticism' (by Elizabeth
Robertson), and by their juxtapositioning with the fourth section of
essays, called 'Afterlife', which returns us to Chaucer
reception from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries. In this
context, the twenty-first-century Chaucer who offers himself up to
readings variously carnivalesque, psycholanalytic, postcolonial, queer,
postmodern, feminist, or new historicist, simply takes his place
alongside numerous other Chaucers who have come and gone in space and
time. Included in the 'Afterlife' section are discussions of
the history of Chaucer editing, and of 'Chaucer and his
Guides' (entertainingly outlined by Peter Brown). The book
concludes with an excellent section on 'Study Resources', both
printed and electronic, which complements the annotated lists of further
reading at the end of each essay.
What is new or distinctive about this collection? First, its scope
and size allow for wide-ranging coverage, for apparatus of a genuinely
informative kind, and for essays of a length that permits contributors
to be something other than superficial. Secondly, it succeeds in
combining high-quality scholarship and learning with illuminating and
wellhandled critical readings and discussions. A number of the essays
(Barry Windeatt's discussion of 'Postmodernism', in
particular) might profitably be recommended to non-Chaucerians for the
deftness with which they articulate particular theories or
methodologies. Finally, and crucially, its well-chosen topics and
contributors have been brought together in a shape that invites readers
to think and to explore. Virginia Woolf 's assessment of Chaucer,
quoted here in Stephanie Trigg's essay on 'Reception:
Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries' (p. 531), is pertinent:
'There can be no more forcible preaching than this where all
actions and passions are represented, and instead of being solemnly exhorted we are left to stray and stare and make out a meaning for
ourselves.'
Julia Boffey
Queen Mary, University of London