Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Feminists reaction to Chaucer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Feminists reaction to Chaucer

    Recently new scholarship has completely cleared the man regarded as the Father of English Literature as well as Poetry, Geoffrey Chaucer, author of the Canterbury Tales, of being a rapist. Back in the late 19th century a legal document from 1380 was uncovered in which a Cecily Champaigne declared:

    Noverint universi me, Ceciliam Chaumpaigne, filiam quondam Willelmi Chaumpaigne et Agnetis uxoris eius, remisisse, relaxasse, et omnino pro me et heredibus meis imperpetuum quietum clamasse Galfrido Chaucer, armigero, omnimodas acciones tam de raptu meo, tam de aliqua alia re vel causa, cuiuscumque


    Translated

    Let all know that I, Cecily Chaumpaigne, daughter of the late William Chaumpaigne and his wife Agnes, have remitted, released, and for myself and my heirs in perpetuity wholly quitclaimed to Geoffrey Chaucer, esq., all manner of actions related to my rape.


    In the original Latin, what is translated as being "my rape" is the more ambiguous "de raptu meo," which can mean rape or else, more vaguely, abduction.

    Now, a team at the United Kingdom’s National Archives, established that Chaumpaigne’s quitclaim revealed that this was over a labor dispute and nothing whatsoever to do with a sexual assault. Chaucer and Chaumpaigne were in fact, co-defendants in a dispute concerning Chaucer’s apparent hiring of Chaumpaigne away from her previous employer, one Thomas Staundon. Apparently there had been some sort of early non-competing clause that might have been violated -- not Ms. Chaumpaigne herself.

    So all's well that ends well, right? Not quite.

    Some feminists are not amused. Including some at the New York Times. For them it didn't much matter whether or not Chaucer was guilty. For them it seemed the only issue was what affect will this have on feminist scholarship -- which has made a big deal over the years about Chaucer's alleged crime.

    The front page of Saturday’s New York Times carried a surprisingly arcane story regarding the settling of an old “rape” controversy concerning Geoffrey Chaucer, the renowned 14th century writer of The Canterbury Tales: “Chaucer the Rapist? Newly Discovered Documents Suggest Not.”

    But culture reporter Jennifer Schuessler still wedged the story into a #MeToo "systemic rape culture" framework as she reluctantly explained the apparent vindication of this Dead White Male.

    For nearly 150 years, a cloud has hung over the reputation of Geoffrey Chaucer, the author of “The Canterbury Tales,” long seen as the founder of the English literary canon.

    A court document discovered in 1873 suggested that around 1380, Chaucer had been charged with raping Cecily Chaumpaigne, the daughter of a London baker. In the document, Chaumpaigne released Chaucer from “all manner of actions related to my raptus”-- a word commonly translated as rape or abduction.

    In recent decades, the suggestion that Chaucer had been accused of rape helped inspire a rich vein of feminist criticism looking at sex, power and consent in stories like “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Tale"....


    The tendency to indulge feminists explains Schuessler’s strange hesitation to let Chaucer off the centuries-old hook.

    The researchers dug up “the original writ in the case, from 1379,” which showed it was a labor dispute, not a rape case, that brought Chaucer and Chaumpaigne to court.

    It’s an explosive claim in the world of Chaucer studies. And in a telephone interview, Sebastian Sobecki, a professor of English at the University of Toronto, who did the research with Euan Roger of the British National Archives, summed it up carefully, while emphasizing that the discovery should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship.

    ….

    Their findings arrive at a moment when medieval studies has been particularly fractious, with heated disputes about race, gender and diversity spilling out of scholarly journals and onto Twitter. And alongside the excitement about the new discovery, a number of scholars expressed unease that the findings would be weaponized against feminist scholars, who have sometimes been accused of trying to “cancel Chaucer.”

    Literary scholar Holly Crocker, despite the evidence, said she “remain[ed] insistent that the questions feminists have raised about the intersection of rape culture and women’s labor should shape our collective approach to these documents.”


    The researchers had to cover themselves by injecting the viewpoint of outside feminist scholars that had not participated in the research.

    At the same time, Sobecki said he had been concerned that the discovery would be seen as simply “exonerating” a wrongly accused famous man, while also undermining valuable feminist scholarship.

    To head off that possibility, he said, he and the journal’s editors sought commentary from three prominent feminist scholars…


    This sad attempt to mollify left-wing feminists met the evident approval of Schuessler:

    And even if Chaucer didn’t rape Chaumpaigne, Sobecki and Roger write in their article, it’s important to continue to discuss how he “participated in hegemonic discourses that shaped the lives of all women.”


    Actual facts no longer matter, only the preservation of the narrative of “misogyny” in Chaucer scholarship.

    [Professor Samantha Katz Seal] said she found the new research persuasive and “brilliant.”But while it dispelled the rape charge, she said, it did not change the way the charge --and what she said was the often cavalier, misogynist discussion of it by male scholars --had shaped Chaucer scholarship….And the new evidence, Seal said, did not change the fact that Chaucer’s poetry was “embedded in a systematic rape culture.”


    Recently, Schuessler has been much more forgiving to convicted cop killers.


    As an aside, my favorite tale from Chaucer's masterpiece is The Pardoner's Tale.

















    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  • #2
    The MRC thinks an article that reports Chaucer did not rape Chaumpaigne is an attempt to cancel Chaucer.

    And our dear darling rouge thinks we need to pay attention to their drivel.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
      The MRC thinks an article that reports Chaucer did not rape Chaumpaigne is an attempt to cancel Chaucer.

      And our dear darling rouge thinks we need to pay attention to their drivel.
      That's what you take from this story?
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
        The MRC thinks an article that reports Chaucer did not rape Chaumpaigne is an attempt to cancel Chaucer.

        And our dear darling rouge thinks we need to pay attention to their drivel.
        You are really starting to lose it, seeing what you want to see and not what is said.

        Go back and read the article. This time for comprehension.

        If you do you can clearly see is that the author of the piece pretty much sees the evidence that exonerates Chaucer in a "that's nice, but" manner.

        You can pretty much see the message she is pushing incapsulated in this sentence:

        And alongside the excitement about the new discovery, a number of scholars expressed unease that the findings would be weaponized against feminist scholars


        If that's too complex for you to grasp, this also expresses it:

        In recent decades, the suggestion that Chaucer had been accused of rape helped inspire a rich vein of feminist criticism looking at sex, power and consent in stories ... while emphasizing that the discovery should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship.


        That "rich vein of feminist criticism," that was based on the falsehood that Chaucer was a rapist, "should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship" even if it was founded on that misnomer.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          That's what you take from this story?
          I think whatever he grew in the brush down there over the summer is making him cross-eyed. He can't see straight.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            You are really starting to lose it, seeing what you want to see and not what is said.

            Go back and read the article. This time for comprehension.

            If you do you can clearly see is that the author of the piece pretty much sees the evidence that exonerates Chaucer in a "that's nice, but" manner.

            You can pretty much see the message she is pushing incapsulated in this sentence:

            And alongside the excitement about the new discovery, a number of scholars expressed unease that the findings would be weaponized against feminist scholars


            If that's too complex for you to grasp, this also expresses it:

            In recent decades, the suggestion that Chaucer had been accused of rape helped inspire a rich vein of feminist criticism looking at sex, power and consent in stories ... while emphasizing that the discovery should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship.


            That "rich vein of feminist criticism," that was based on the falsehood that Chaucer was a rapist, "should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship" even if it was founded on that misnomer.
            My read from her article is a little kinder. That while Chaucer was a foundational stone of the scholarship, that at this point, the removal of that stone does not cause the whole thing to fall apart. (Which can be true, a single withness in a court case being shown false does not falsify all the other evidence in the case, and may not render the case unwinnable (though it certainly doesn't help.))

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

              My read from her article is a little kinder. That while Chaucer was a foundational stone of the scholarship, that at this point, the removal of that stone does not cause the whole thing to fall apart. (Which can be true, a single withness in a court case being shown false does not falsify all the other evidence in the case, and may not render the case unwinnable (though it certainly doesn't help.))
              It is just that in this case Chaucer was like the keystone (and to mix my metaphors), the foundation on which much of the "decades of important feminist scholarship" were built upon.

              And I'm not arguing that it collapses or even should after what Chaucer was accused of has been shown to be completely false, but rather defending the "decades of important feminist scholarship" that came from that incorrect belief seems to be her goal -- which is why she treats the news of vindication as "that's nice, but."



              Did you ever read it? Got a favorite tale?

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                That "rich vein of feminist criticism," that was based on the falsehood that Chaucer was a rapist, "should not be seen as invalidating decades of important feminist scholarship" even if it was founded on that misnomer.
                No it wasn't.

                Read the article.
                .
                In recent decades, the suggestion that Chaucer had been accused of rape helped inspire a rich vein of feminist criticism looking at sex, power and consent in stories like “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Tale,” which contain depictions of sexual assault (or what to modern readers appears like it).

                Feminist criticism of the sexual assaults depicted in these two stories don't depend on an assumed rape by Chaucer himself, though the assumption "helped to inspire" the criticism.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  That's what you take from this story?
                  Feel free to critique my response.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                    Feel free to critique my response.
                    Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the whole idea of cancel culture, but it was my understanding that historical figures are being canceled because of blemishes on their record which would not be viewed with approval today. In the instant case, that would be Chaucer's alleged raping of a woman. Turns out that it's probably false, so despite decades of feminist scholarship excoriating him for being a rapist, he shouldn't be canceled.

                    That was my take.

                    I have no idea where you got "The MRC thinks an article that reports Chaucer did not rape Chaumpaigne is an attempt to cancel Chaucer." The MRC appears to think that the article which reports the discovery is slanted in such a way as to minimize its relevance to scholarship on Chaucer.

                    For some reason TWeb is not showing updates on this thread for me when I click on "New Topics".
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                      The MRC appears to think that the article which reports the discovery is slanted in such a way as to minimize its relevance to scholarship on Chaucer.
                      I think you are right about that. What's missing from the MRC article is a good argument for believing that the NYT article is slanted, rather than that the discovery really doesn't have much relevance to scholarship on Chaucer.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the whole idea of cancel culture, but it was my understanding that historical figures are being canceled because of blemishes on their record which would not be viewed with approval today. In the instant case, that would be Chaucer's alleged raping of a woman. Turns out that it's probably false, so despite decades of feminist scholarship excoriating him for being a rapist, he shouldn't be canceled.

                        That was my take.
                        Feminist criticism of Chaucer began decades prior to the introduction of "cancel culture" to the partisan lexicon, and frankly, had nothing to do with "canceling" him. To the contrary, the only candidates for "canceling" Chaucer have instead spent decades writing about him.

                        Criticism, in academia, means argument using "critical thinking."

                        At MRC, it means a hit piece against a woman reporter because the scholars she cites are insufficiently misogynistic.

                        I have no idea where you got "The MRC thinks an article that reports Chaucer did not rape Chaumpaigne is an attempt to cancel Chaucer." The MRC appears to think that the article which reports the discovery is slanted in such a way as to minimize its relevance to scholarship on Chaucer.
                        The headline of the MRC piece begins New York Times Cancels…Chaucer?

                        Hope that helps.

                        The Times article, in stark contrast to the MRC response, avoids emotive language and sensationalism. As befits a news article, the only opinions provided are those of relevant scholars in the field. MRC makes no attempt to show the choice of scholars is somehow biased. Instead, relying solely on the confirmation biases and prejudices of its readers, simply assumes a bias without providing supportive evidence.

                        And then transfers the scholarly opinions to the Times reporter and makes that the headline of the piece.

                        Drivel.

                        For some reason TWeb is not showing updates on this thread for me when I click on "New Topics".
                        Last edited by Juvenal; 10-21-2022, 04:21 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                          No it wasn't.

                          Read the article.
                          .
                          In recent decades, the suggestion that Chaucer had been accused of rape helped inspire a rich vein of feminist criticism looking at sex, power and consent in stories like “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Tale,” which contain depictions of sexual assault (or what to modern readers appears like it).


                          Feminist criticism of the sexual assaults depicted in these two stories don't depend on an assumed rape by Chaucer himself, though the assumption "helped to inspire" the criticism.
                          Sorry, like the singular naughty swine, this wasn't updating and kept showing him as the last poster from two days ago.

                          The fact is those stories were later focused on because of the false rape accusation (I bolded the pertinent part so you can see it).

                          The importance of Chaucer being cleared can be seen by how Schuessler quickly dismisses that fact because her purpose wasn't to report that fact but rather to fret that

                          a number of scholars expressed unease that the findings would be weaponized against feminist scholars, who have sometimes been accused of trying to “cancel Chaucer.”


                          Moreover, I went back and re-read "The Miller's Tale" since I vaguely remembered it and found it amusing.

                          There is no rape in it. While Nicholas did at first try to force himself on Alisoun, she quickly agrees to having sex and they have an ongoing affair.

                          I haven't re-read the other one, but wonder if it to doesn't even have a rape in it.

                          Oh, and apparently Nicholas was Trump (read it to understand).



                          Last edited by rogue06; 10-22-2022, 06:29 AM.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            The importance of Chaucer being cleared can be seen by how Schuessler quickly dismisses that fact ...
                            Schuessler is the reporter. The reactions cited are those of the affected Chaucerian scholars. Why are you imputing their opinions onto the reporter?

                            "Moreover, I went back and re-read "The Miller's Tale" since I vaguely remembered it and found it amusing. There is no rape in it. While Nicholas did at first try to force himself on Alisoun, she quickly agrees to having sex and they have an ongoing affair. I haven't re-read the other one, but wonder if it to doesn't even have a rape in it."

                            v.

                            "... which contain depictions of sexual assault (or what to modern readers appears like it)."

                            I recommend more coffee before posting.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                              Schuessler is the reporter. The reactions cited are those of the affected Chaucerian scholars. Why are you imputing their opinions onto the reporter?

                              "Moreover, I went back and re-read "The Miller's Tale" since I vaguely remembered it and found it amusing. There is no rape in it. While Nicholas did at first try to force himself on Alisoun, she quickly agrees to having sex and they have an ongoing affair. I haven't re-read the other one, but wonder if it to doesn't even have a rape in it."

                              v.

                              "... which contain depictions of sexual assault (or what to modern readers appears like it)."

                              I recommend more coffee before posting.
                              Schuessler picked those reactions and made them the story.

                              Coffee rots the brain. Murad IV had the right idea.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seer, Today, 01:12 PM
                              4 responses
                              51 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:33 AM
                              45 responses
                              341 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Starlight  
                              Started by whag, 04-16-2024, 10:43 PM
                              60 responses
                              388 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
                              0 responses
                              27 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-16-2024, 06:47 AM
                              100 responses
                              440 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                              Working...
                              X