I am keeping up with my reading much more efficiently than I was at the time of the first reflective essay. One difference from last time is that now I trust the syllabus more than word of mouth. Regardless if I feel that we are discussing another text than the syllabus says, I go ahead and read the assignment anyway. Another thing I think that has helped me is the modern translation of Chaucer. I have more of a schedule now: every Friday evening I read the modern translation, and then on Saturday morning I slough through the original text. That way, whenever I feel I am getting lost in the text, I can point out situations and actions that seem similar to what I read the night before until the two texts appear parallel. One thing you are doing that is helping me read more carefully is asking us questions not directly about the text, but based on abstractions which you would need some knowledge of the text already in order to answer. It makes me feel like I have to keep up to date with my reading so I don’t look stupid in class. In order to become a better student, I want to participate in class discussions more, take more detailed notes, and drag my giant Riverside Chaucer to class more often.
The most interesting thing I have learned about medieval literature this semester is a continuation from my last reflective essay. I continue to be fascinated with the humor and personality of the author that was lost in translation (at least for me) until I took this class. Sure, Ovid’s style was satiric, but Chaucer seems to have been going for flat out funny. What other reason could there have been for him to contrast the stoic knight and his effete son in The Knight’s Tale or to have named Januarie’s placating friend Placebo in The Merchant’s Tale? And of course, I would have to be blind myself not to see how innately funny the character of Pandarus is in Troilus and Criseyde. What was surprising to me was the multiple levels of humor in Chaucer’s works: through both the situations he describes and the words (and spelling of those words) that he uses to describe. I at first assumed that Chaucer’s writing was flowery and dense, even in his own time, since it is so difficult for me to read. But as you point out Chaucer’s wordplay and double meanings, it is clear that Chaucer also formed his diction and syntax with the purpose of entertaining his audience.
I absolutely am working on my research portfolio. It is so much easier the second time around, now that I know what I’m doing. I have already started writing the essays, since I have them selected. I told you in my last reflective essay that I wanted to focus my second portfolio on upper class women, but I expanded that to a wider study of women within medieval class structure. The articles I am reading are: “Powerful Allies and Dangerous Adversaries: Noblewomen in Medieval Society” by Amy Livingstone, “So Strategize: The Demands in the Day of the Peasant Woman in Medieval Europe” by Madonna J. Hettinger, “Medieval Queenship” by Janet L. Nelson, and “Working Women in the Medieval City” by Benjamin R. McRee and Trisha K. Dent. I haven’t chosen a book to review yet, but I think it will be easier to do now that I have widened my research topic. I was concerned at first that this selection would give me purely feminist criticism, but there seems to be quite a bit of Marxist criticism too, especially in the “Working Women” article. I plan to develop a uniting thesis about this selection of articles.
