Nobody for the Man of Law’s Tale? surprising…
So here I am, taking a class in which we read some Chaucer–but why the Man of Law’s Tale? Who cares about a medieval woman who placed all her faith in jesus and the story, oh the story could have put me to sleep, eternal sleep until at last my lorde awakest mee. Really though, perhaps Chaucer needed an editor to tell him what not to write, or at least what not to send to the scribe.
Wife’s tale: Okay! Miller’s tale: also ok; Man of Law’s Tale: way way–so far away from being acceptable as a part of the English canon.
Hmm. . . yes, but after reading Franco Moretti, we should all know the value of reading non-canonical texts; if we didn’t we would be unable to make any comments on any of the large issues confronting a sociology of literature. I remember you liked Moretti’s essay on the Bildingsroman that we read for Lisa Lowe’s class. I’ll have to lend you Signs Taken for Wonders sometime, it’s pretty awesome. I can’t honestly say that I’ve read the Man of Law’s tale but maybe I should as a means of avoiding grading these papers.