SANDY BARDSLEY. Venomous Tongues: Speech and Gender in Late Medieval England. (The Middle Ages.) Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2006. Pp. 214. $49.95

2007 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 569-569
Author(s):  
M. E. Mate
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Medieval England ◽  
Late Medieval ◽  
Late Medieval England ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Middle Ages

The Medieval Literary Beyond Form, ed. Robert J. Meyer-Lee and Catherine Sanok. Woodbridge, Suffolk: D. s. Brewer, 2018, xii, 276 pp., 30 b/w ill.

Mediaevistik ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 337-339
Author(s):  
Albrecht Classen
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Literary Text ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Medieval England ◽  
Late Medieval ◽  
Critical Studies ◽  
Political Interests ◽  
Late Medieval England ◽  
The Middle Ages

We can always use critical studies that question both what constitutes a literary text in the Middle Ages and what form those texts have, as is the case with the essays collected by Robert J. Meyer-Lee and Catherine Sanok. They define form as “a historically contingent set of attributes defining privileged texts as literature so that the latter may serve particular social, economic, and political interests” (4). They hasten, however, and quite correctly, to warn us about the difficulty in being overly specific in light of the contingency of such formal criteria, which might undermine the entire effort here to some extent, even though they then emphasize again that the articles “meditate upon the question of the relation between form and the literary” (6), as it manifested itself in medieval and late medieval England, which is supposed to be the exclusive terrain covered here, thought that is not always true. Taking us back to this deliberate (?) seesaw, they then return to highlight that in the pre-modern world the differences between literary and non-literary were rather fluid (8). What might then be the focus of this book? The sub-heading of the book itself leaves us a bit puzzled: “Beyond Form,” so why does the introduction then highlight formality issues so centrally?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document