Reading Chaucer Today: What's Love Got to Do with It?
Sponsoring Organization(s)
Special Session
Organizer Name
Thomas J. Farrell
Organizer Affiliation
Stetson Univ.
Presider Name
Thomas J. Farrell
Paper Title 1
No Love Lost: Chaucer’s Queer/Misogynist Narrator in Legend of Good Women
Presenter 1 Name
Elan Justice Pavlinich
Presenter 1 Affiliation
Univ. of South Florida
Paper Title 2
Inexpressible Agony and Ecstasy: Karol Wojtyla's Love and Responsibility in Books III and V of Chaucer's Troilus and Criseyde
Presenter 2 Name
Arnaud H. Zimmern
Presenter 2 Affiliation
Univ. of Notre Dame
Paper Title 3
Falling in Love with a Poem: Troilus and Criseyde and Reading as Discernment
Presenter 3 Name
Megan Murton
Presenter 3 Affiliation
Catholic Univ. of America
Start Date
12-5-2016 1:30 PM
Session Location
Schneider 1355
Description
This session proposes readings of Chaucerian texts that address what has been characterized as the desire for an appreciation—an openness to love—that continues beyond (without occluding) the scholarly skepticism that we bring towards (especially) the antifeminism, the homoophobia, the social or intellectual structures encoded in medieval texts. Is that rapprochement, that tertia via possible? Can Chaucer, situated in "then" but speaking to "now," be read whole in a single moment? Or, while we consider "skeptical, detached critique" and "enthusiastic identification and engagement" both essential to humanistic study (borrowing the words of Harvard College), do we find the conflicts between those long and well developed modes of Humanistic thought inevitable, and if so, how do we respond?
Thomas J. Farrell
Reading Chaucer Today: What's Love Got to Do with It?
Schneider 1355
This session proposes readings of Chaucerian texts that address what has been characterized as the desire for an appreciation—an openness to love—that continues beyond (without occluding) the scholarly skepticism that we bring towards (especially) the antifeminism, the homoophobia, the social or intellectual structures encoded in medieval texts. Is that rapprochement, that tertia via possible? Can Chaucer, situated in "then" but speaking to "now," be read whole in a single moment? Or, while we consider "skeptical, detached critique" and "enthusiastic identification and engagement" both essential to humanistic study (borrowing the words of Harvard College), do we find the conflicts between those long and well developed modes of Humanistic thought inevitable, and if so, how do we respond?
Thomas J. Farrell