Abstract

Abstract: This paper theorizes fourteenth-century English metaphors of reading as a medical process, arguing that Canterbury Tales Block C showcases the interplay of the Physician's and Pardoner's two distinct medicalized hermeneutics. Turning to the queer disability politics of Eli Clare and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick to unpack the ethical import of such metaphors of reading and repair, I argue that these two tales proffer first the Physician's systematized interpretive strategy of diagnosis and cure before turning to the immoral, anti-cure processes of interpretation offered by the Pardoner. Chaucer's Physician is widely acknowledged as an inadequate reader who fails to account for nuanced spiritual meaning in both his literary and medical practice. I argue that the Physician and his tale reveal the failures of interpretation that reads for harm's "roote" and "boote" ( GP , 424–25), and, further, reveal the violence of authoritative cure applied without consent. In this paper's sick/queer lens, then, the Pardoner and his invitation to informed and consensual comfort become a response to such reading methods that seek to organize, cure, and adhere to coherent systems of meaning. Further, nuancing our current understanding of queer reparative practices in the context of chronic illness, the Pardoner's methods showcase the impossibility, at times undesirability, of interpretive repair that pursues wholeness. Refusing medical and spiritual intervention, the Pardoner comes to offer a participatory hermeneutic that prioritizes comfort over wholeness, and a model of care based not on authoritative cure but on iterative consent.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.