Skip Navigation

The Review of English Studies 2001 52(205):1-21; doi:10.1093/res/52.205.1
© 2001 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Straker, S-M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Deference and the difference Lydgate, Chaucer, and the Siege of Thebes

S-M Straker

Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

In the prologue to the Siege of Thebes John Lydgate adopts the pilgrimage frame of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and inserts himself as a character into his precursor's fiction. Despite the richness of Lydgate's intertextual reference, critics have read the Siege as an incompetent imitation of Chaucer's Knight's Tale that is hamstrung by lugubrious verse and conventional morality. This article argues that critics have overlooked two calculated acts of self-authorization that illuminate Lydgate's attitude towards both Chaucer and his own art. First, Lydgate's self-portrait in the prologue is a careful inversion of Chaucer's Monk that redeems the authority of the monastic voice. Second, Lydgate imagines an alternative poet-patron relationship whereby his monastic identity authorizes him to resist the Host's demand for a specific type of tale. Like the privileged counsellors within the Siege's narrative, Lydgate's poetic persona speaks the unwelcome truth to a figure representing secular authority. Lydgate's deferential literary exercise is also a manifesto for the poet's relationship to the political order, a relationship whose potential for aggressive and principled resistance rejects the submission to authority that is implicit in certain of Chaucer's works. However, the prologue's self-confidence is undermined by the rest of the poem: the futility of rhetoric and prudent counsel within the narrative threatens Lydgate's entire historiographic project.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.