Chaucer and the Ethics of Time by Gillian Adler (review)

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
Arpit Gaind
{"title":"Chaucer and the Ethics of Time by Gillian Adler (review)","authors":"Arpit Gaind","doi":"10.1353/cjm.2023.a912677","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Chaucer and the Ethics of Time by Gillian Adler Arpit Gaind Gillian Adler, Chaucer and the Ethics of Time (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2022), x + 230 pp. In Chaucer and the Ethics of Time, Gillian Adler examines temporality and structures of time in the works of fourteenth-century English poet Geoffrey Chaucer. Adler picks five of Chaucer’s seminal works, organized as five separate chapters with an introduction and a conclusion, addressing themes of morality, aesthetics, and epistemological structures in order to show the “temporal ethics” (2) of time in Chaucer’s poetry. Chaucer and the Ethics of Time demonstrates the ways in which Chaucer argued for ideas of subjectivity, free will, and chance that govern human individuality. Drawing from Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy and Augustine’s Confessions, Adler examines how time is experienced and the role of “intentionality” in understanding the past and its relevance to the present. According to Adler, the active transformation of the “now” and shaping how memory is structured govern Chaucer’s project of human ethics (7). Adler also explores Chaucer’s reworking of the moral and social discourses on temporality in the Middle Ages, where wasting time was considered a “sin of acedia.” In “The Process of Time in the Parliament of Fowls,” Adler starts with the writings of Shakespeare while giving a vivid description of the medieval notion of wasting time as a sin and expressing time as a virtue (124). However, Adler shows how Chaucer, in his works, departs from such a binary of sins and vices and points toward a more complex relationship that temporality shares with human subjectivity. The author points out the use of subversion in Chaucer as a way to move toward ambiguity showing temporal discourses as neither “productive” nor objectively accurate. Adler draws upon Chaucer’s work on poetic form and its impact on temporality by distinguishing between “story” and “narrative.” The former, for Chaucer, is a depiction of events, and the latter is about the structure of those events and the retelling of the story. For Adler, the dichotomy of story and narrative in Chaucer’s work is of great significance, as it shows the representational practices of language and literature during the Middle Ages; the poet created both “tales on time” and “tales about time” (17). Another theme of significance in Chaucer and the Ethics of Time is the question of “anachronism.” Adler argues that Chaucer’s works counterpose the wholeness and singularity of time and reasons for the ruptures and “fragmentations” that emerge in the human experience of time (39). For instance, in “Seeing Time and the Illusion of Control in Troilus and Criseyde,” Adler draws upon Chaucer’s Translation of Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy in Troilus and Criseyde. Adler demonstrates well how Chaucer constructs time and its impact on the Thebes-Trojan “historical continuum,” as well as what the city of London as a fantasy means for the reader (61). In “‘What may ever laste?’: Narrativising Transience in the House of Fame,” Adler examines the range of literary devices—such as “allusion” and “cataloging”—employed by Chaucer in showing the “temporal dimensions” of fame (96). Adler does an excellent examination of House of Fame to demonstrate Chaucer’s concern with ideas of existentialism, eternity, and desire. Adler’s reading of Chaucer’s works shows a keen interplay between the form and discourse of the latter’s writings and the characters he drew upon. The text examines Chaucer’s outlook on the role of insecurity at the heart of human [End Page 199] experience and how that helps the reader understand the period in which Chaucer was writing. In the “Nonlinear Time in Chaucer’s Frame-Narrative and the Wife of Bath’s Prologue,” Adler draws upon the Canterbury Tales and specifically the Wife of Bath’s prologue to show how narratives are framed conceptually as an instrument of analysis in Chaucer’s work. The prologue becomes an instance, Adler argues, where characters’ dispositions toward memory, nostalgia, and future time become a way to narrate the story. Returning to Chaucer’s use of ambiguity, Adler shows how the chronology of events becomes a significant aspect of critique in the...","PeriodicalId":53903,"journal":{"name":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2023.a912677","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reviewed by: Chaucer and the Ethics of Time by Gillian Adler Arpit Gaind Gillian Adler, Chaucer and the Ethics of Time (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2022), x + 230 pp. In Chaucer and the Ethics of Time, Gillian Adler examines temporality and structures of time in the works of fourteenth-century English poet Geoffrey Chaucer. Adler picks five of Chaucer’s seminal works, organized as five separate chapters with an introduction and a conclusion, addressing themes of morality, aesthetics, and epistemological structures in order to show the “temporal ethics” (2) of time in Chaucer’s poetry. Chaucer and the Ethics of Time demonstrates the ways in which Chaucer argued for ideas of subjectivity, free will, and chance that govern human individuality. Drawing from Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy and Augustine’s Confessions, Adler examines how time is experienced and the role of “intentionality” in understanding the past and its relevance to the present. According to Adler, the active transformation of the “now” and shaping how memory is structured govern Chaucer’s project of human ethics (7). Adler also explores Chaucer’s reworking of the moral and social discourses on temporality in the Middle Ages, where wasting time was considered a “sin of acedia.” In “The Process of Time in the Parliament of Fowls,” Adler starts with the writings of Shakespeare while giving a vivid description of the medieval notion of wasting time as a sin and expressing time as a virtue (124). However, Adler shows how Chaucer, in his works, departs from such a binary of sins and vices and points toward a more complex relationship that temporality shares with human subjectivity. The author points out the use of subversion in Chaucer as a way to move toward ambiguity showing temporal discourses as neither “productive” nor objectively accurate. Adler draws upon Chaucer’s work on poetic form and its impact on temporality by distinguishing between “story” and “narrative.” The former, for Chaucer, is a depiction of events, and the latter is about the structure of those events and the retelling of the story. For Adler, the dichotomy of story and narrative in Chaucer’s work is of great significance, as it shows the representational practices of language and literature during the Middle Ages; the poet created both “tales on time” and “tales about time” (17). Another theme of significance in Chaucer and the Ethics of Time is the question of “anachronism.” Adler argues that Chaucer’s works counterpose the wholeness and singularity of time and reasons for the ruptures and “fragmentations” that emerge in the human experience of time (39). For instance, in “Seeing Time and the Illusion of Control in Troilus and Criseyde,” Adler draws upon Chaucer’s Translation of Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy in Troilus and Criseyde. Adler demonstrates well how Chaucer constructs time and its impact on the Thebes-Trojan “historical continuum,” as well as what the city of London as a fantasy means for the reader (61). In “‘What may ever laste?’: Narrativising Transience in the House of Fame,” Adler examines the range of literary devices—such as “allusion” and “cataloging”—employed by Chaucer in showing the “temporal dimensions” of fame (96). Adler does an excellent examination of House of Fame to demonstrate Chaucer’s concern with ideas of existentialism, eternity, and desire. Adler’s reading of Chaucer’s works shows a keen interplay between the form and discourse of the latter’s writings and the characters he drew upon. The text examines Chaucer’s outlook on the role of insecurity at the heart of human [End Page 199] experience and how that helps the reader understand the period in which Chaucer was writing. In the “Nonlinear Time in Chaucer’s Frame-Narrative and the Wife of Bath’s Prologue,” Adler draws upon the Canterbury Tales and specifically the Wife of Bath’s prologue to show how narratives are framed conceptually as an instrument of analysis in Chaucer’s work. The prologue becomes an instance, Adler argues, where characters’ dispositions toward memory, nostalgia, and future time become a way to narrate the story. Returning to Chaucer’s use of ambiguity, Adler shows how the chronology of events becomes a significant aspect of critique in the...
《乔叟与时间伦理》作者:吉莉安·阿德勒(书评)
吉莉安·阿德勒,《乔叟与时间伦理》(加的夫:威尔士大学出版社,2022年),x + 230页。在《乔叟与时间伦理》中,吉莉安·阿德勒考察了14世纪英国诗人杰弗里·乔叟作品中的时间性和时间结构。阿德勒选择了乔叟的五部影响深远的作品,分为五个独立的章节,包括引言和结论,讨论道德、美学和认识论结构的主题,以展示乔叟诗歌中时间的“时间伦理”(2)。《乔叟与时间伦理》展示了乔叟如何论证支配人类个性的主体性、自由意志和机会等观念。从波伊提乌的《哲学的慰藉》和奥古斯丁的《忏悔录》中,阿德勒考察了时间是如何被体验的,以及“意向性”在理解过去及其与现在的关联中的作用。根据阿德勒的观点,对“现在”的积极转变和对记忆结构的塑造支配着乔叟的人类伦理计划(7)。阿德勒还探讨了乔叟对中世纪关于时间性的道德和社会话语的改造,在中世纪,浪费时间被认为是一种“绝望之罪”。在《家禽议会中的时间进程》一书中,阿德勒从莎士比亚的作品开始,生动地描述了中世纪的观念,即浪费时间是一种罪恶,把时间表达为一种美德(124页)。然而,阿德勒展示了乔叟如何在他的作品中脱离这种罪恶与罪恶的二元对立,并指出了时间性与人类主体性之间更为复杂的关系。作者指出,乔叟对颠覆的使用是一种走向模糊性的方式,表明时间话语既不“富有成效”,也不客观准确。阿德勒通过区分“故事”和“叙事”,借鉴了乔叟关于诗歌形式及其对时间性的影响的作品。对乔叟来说,前者是对事件的描述,后者是关于这些事件的结构和故事的重述。在阿德勒看来,乔叟作品中故事与叙事的二分法具有重要意义,因为它体现了中世纪语言和文学的表征实践;诗人创作了“关于时间的故事”和“关于时间的故事”(17)。《乔叟与时间伦理》的另一个重要主题是“时代错误”问题。阿德勒认为,乔叟的作品反对时间的整体性和单一性,以及人类时间体验中出现的断裂和“碎片化”的原因(39)。例如,在《特洛伊罗斯与克里塞德》中,阿德勒引用了乔叟翻译的波伊提乌的《特洛伊罗斯与克里塞德的哲学慰藉》。阿德勒很好地展示了乔叟如何构建时间,以及它对底比斯-特洛伊“历史连续体”的影响,以及作为幻想的伦敦城对读者意味着什么(61)。在“什么会永恒?”阿德勒考察了乔叟在展示名声的“时间维度”时所使用的一系列文学手段——比如“典故”和“编目”(96)。阿德勒对《名人堂》做了出色的考察,展示了乔叟对存在主义、永恒和欲望的关注。阿德勒对乔叟作品的阅读表明,乔叟作品的形式和话语与他所借鉴的人物之间存在着密切的相互作用。本文考察了乔叟对不安全感在人类经历中的核心作用的看法,以及这如何帮助读者理解乔叟写作的时期。在《乔叟框架中的非线性时间——叙事和巴斯的妻子的序言》一书中,阿德勒借鉴了《坎特伯雷故事集》,特别是《巴斯的妻子》的序言,展示了叙事是如何在概念上作为乔叟作品的分析工具而被构建起来的。阿德勒认为,序言成为了一个实例,角色对记忆、怀旧和未来时间的倾向成为叙述故事的一种方式。回到乔叟对模棱两可的使用,阿德勒展示了事件的时间顺序如何成为批评的一个重要方面……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Comitatus: A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies publishes articles by graduate students and recent PhDs in any field of medieval and Renaissance studies. The journal maintains a tradition of gathering work from across disciplines, with a special interest in articles that have an interdisciplinary or cross-cultural scope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信