{"title":"“chevrefeuille”的寓意","authors":"Kathryn E. Levine","doi":"10.1215/00358118-10055141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The apparent ambiguity at the heart of Marie de France’s lai “Chèvrefeuille” has beguiled generations of readers. This short twelfth-century Old French verse text purports to tell a simple story of how the exiled Tristan manages to signal to Yseut as she passes through a forest with her entourage, and its only interpretive difficulty seems to be the way Tristan communicates his message by carving some words or letters onto a stick. This article argues that, by debating what exactly Tristan writes, the scholarship on “Chèvrefeuille” leaves aside the intertext of the Tristan tradition, and by extension, the literary and affective investments of the lai. This narrow critical question leads to a broader problem of how literature can or should be read. Reading “Chèvrefeuille” as imbricated in the twelfth-century Tristan tradition underscores the pleasure of recognition that both modern reader and medieval receiver might experience and invites a re-examination of the role of the imagination in the study of medieval literature.","PeriodicalId":39614,"journal":{"name":"Romanic Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Message of “Chèvrefeuille”\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn E. Levine\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00358118-10055141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The apparent ambiguity at the heart of Marie de France’s lai “Chèvrefeuille” has beguiled generations of readers. This short twelfth-century Old French verse text purports to tell a simple story of how the exiled Tristan manages to signal to Yseut as she passes through a forest with her entourage, and its only interpretive difficulty seems to be the way Tristan communicates his message by carving some words or letters onto a stick. This article argues that, by debating what exactly Tristan writes, the scholarship on “Chèvrefeuille” leaves aside the intertext of the Tristan tradition, and by extension, the literary and affective investments of the lai. This narrow critical question leads to a broader problem of how literature can or should be read. Reading “Chèvrefeuille” as imbricated in the twelfth-century Tristan tradition underscores the pleasure of recognition that both modern reader and medieval receiver might experience and invites a re-examination of the role of the imagination in the study of medieval literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanic Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00358118-10055141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, ROMANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanic Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00358118-10055141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, ROMANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
玛丽·德·弗朗斯(Marie de France)的小说《chchrevrefeuille》(chchrevrefeuille)的核心内容明显模棱两可,吸引了几代读者。这个简短的十二世纪古法语诗歌文本旨在讲述一个简单的故事,讲述被流放的特里斯坦如何在她和随从穿过森林时设法向尤瑟发出信号,其唯一的解释困难似乎是特里斯坦通过在一根棍子上刻一些单词或字母来传达他的信息。本文认为,通过讨论特里斯坦到底写了什么,关于《ch弗里弗伊维尔》的学术研究忽略了特里斯坦传统的互文,进而忽略了赖的文学和情感投入。这个狭隘的批判性问题引出了一个更广泛的问题,即文学应该如何阅读。将《ch弗里弗伊维尔》作为12世纪特里斯坦传统的砖块来阅读,强调了现代读者和中世纪读者都可能体验到的认识的乐趣,并邀请人们重新审视想象力在中世纪文学研究中的作用。
The apparent ambiguity at the heart of Marie de France’s lai “Chèvrefeuille” has beguiled generations of readers. This short twelfth-century Old French verse text purports to tell a simple story of how the exiled Tristan manages to signal to Yseut as she passes through a forest with her entourage, and its only interpretive difficulty seems to be the way Tristan communicates his message by carving some words or letters onto a stick. This article argues that, by debating what exactly Tristan writes, the scholarship on “Chèvrefeuille” leaves aside the intertext of the Tristan tradition, and by extension, the literary and affective investments of the lai. This narrow critical question leads to a broader problem of how literature can or should be read. Reading “Chèvrefeuille” as imbricated in the twelfth-century Tristan tradition underscores the pleasure of recognition that both modern reader and medieval receiver might experience and invites a re-examination of the role of the imagination in the study of medieval literature.
Romanic ReviewArts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍:
The Romanic Review is a journal devoted to the study of Romance literatures.Founded by Henry Alfred Todd in 1910, it is published by the Department of French and Romance Philology of Columbia University in cooperation with the Departments of Spanish and Italian. The journal is published four times a year (January, March, May, November) and balances special thematic issues and regular unsolicited issues. It covers all periods of French, Italian and Spanish-language literature, and welcomes a broad diversity of critical approaches.