STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER study is admirable: "free[ing) women's voices" (p. 210) is the urgent project here. But doing so requires that "depressing" ideas be faced and reckoned with: that Chaucer may not be "wemenis frend" (or may not be in ways that will solve our problems today, which this book seems to wish); that liberal humanism certainly is not; that true pluralism-a world of differences may be ideal, but that real structural change, not just a dream of in clusiveness, is the only way there. CAROLYN DINSHAW University of California, Berkeley RUTH MORSE. Truth and Convention in the Middle Ages: Rhetoric, Repre sentation, and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Pp. xiv, 295. $49.50. Academicbook reviewing is a paradoxical activity. The reviewer is endowed with an overwhelming advantage, but the ethics ofthis superiority require that it not be exercised. Having all the power but little of the freedom presupposed by intellectual exchange, the reviewer must practice an oblig atory noblesse oblige-one of those contradictions in terms that our strange profession generates in such profusion. Ruth Morse's Truth and Convention in the Middle Agesinvokes this double bind more sharply than usual. But while noblesse permits me to say that this book is widely informed, carefully written, and at times genuinely thoughtful, it does not oblige me to mislead myreaders. For ifone were led by the title to expect a cogent new account of medieval writing informed by several decades of debate about "representation," one will be disappointed. Morse's topic is indeed the conventionality or rhetoricity of medieval writing, particularly medieval historiography, and how it complicates questions oftruth. But in all but the last chapter this inquiry is vitiated by a too narrowly concep tualized analysis of the practice she surveys. The book begins with "a reassessment of rhetorical habits of mind" by discussing rhetorical education. Her account emphasizes Cicero, Quin tilian, and-oddly-Isocrates, whose twelve progymnasmata are taken as typifying medieval "exercises of invention," a "dozen graded exercises." This is an instance ofMorse's baffling strategy ofrelying on texts and terms that have little medieval currency. Iftheprogymnasmata are to be taken as 184 .REVIEWS typifying medieval "rhetorical habits of mind" (itselfa large assumption), then why was not the text of choice Priscian's widely used Praeexer citamina-a translation of Hermogenes' progymnasmata - rather than a Greek text unknown to the Middle Ages? So too both here and throughout the book medieval and Renaissance practices are discussed as if they were identical, a lack of discrimination that will mislead the student audience that Morse posits as her primary target. Chapter 2 begins from the presupposition that medieval historians wrote "for exemplary purposes rather than strict representation," but the long discussion fails to advance beyond this elementary claim. Hence, for example, an extended account of the representation of Henry V at Agin court in a number oftexts reduces itselfto the conclusion that propaganda took precedence over accuracy. But Morse could have asked more probing questions of her texts: Does not the theatricality of Henry's behavior itself imply a critique? Does other evidence suggest that Henry did actually behave this way, that he typically represented himself heroically? And what of the larger context of the description in each of the texts? It must also be said that the usefulness ofMorse's discussion is not improved by the misleading identification of one of the texts. Chapter 3 turns to biography to demonstrate "that people were seen as instances ofunchanging types" and that, with the primary exception ofthe letters of Abelard and Heloise, "there are no reliable biographies (in any modern sense) before the seventeenth century." Apart from the predicta bility ofthis conclusion, one is again struck by the curious disproportion of the chapter, especially given its primary audience of students. Discussing hagiography, for instance, Morse provides a detailed analysis of Sulpicius Severus's VitaMartini but neithera history ofthe genre nor anaccountofits function within medieval culture. The fourth chapter discusses translation theory (word-for-word versus sense-for-sense) but slides imperceptibly into an account of medieval habits of commentary and interpretation, es pecially of the Bible-a discussion filled with interestingly speculative suggestions...
Read full abstract