[ The MusicWeb Message Board ]

CELEBRATING 20,000 Classical CD reviews on-line; 21,000 visitors each day.
Return to MusicWeb International

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm Posted by Martin Walker on July 4, 2008, 12:00 pm 91.168.15.60 Just a small linguistic note that may be of interest: when you say of the Merchant's characterisation of January's address to his wife that "the words he employs, while they may be “old” are certainly not merely “lewd”. They are words of marvellous erotic beauty", then of course you are right on the latter point - but in Chaucer "lewd" means mainly non-clerical or unlearned, sometimes (but obviously not here) unmannered as the common folk is wont to be. The Merchant is being ironical, of course, knowing full well that learned men are listening, ready to condemn. We may think that the fact that he remembers these words so well betrays his actual feelings in the case; he may, indeed, have some experience in the matter...  Post a Response

Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm Posted by Glyn Pursglove on July 4, 2008, 5:36 pm, in reply to "http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm" 217.155.206.169 A modern reference work such as A Chaucer Glossary, edited by Norman Davis and others (Oxford, 1979) proposes three definitions for "lewed": (a) ignorant; lay, not clerical (b) stupid, worthless (which is how they gloss the miller's use of the word) and (c) lewd, lascivious. Given Chaucer's subtlety it would be foolhardy to limit this instance of the word to any one of these meanings (which is why I quoted the word a second time, rather than 'translating' it). Which meaning one thinks is uppermost would depend on one's reading of the whole character and narrative method of the Merchant - not a topic it would be sensible to pursue at length in this musical context! G.P.  Post a Response

Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm Posted by Martin Walker on July 7, 2008, 11:35 am, in reply to "Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm" 91.168.12.151 I had already suspected that, Glyn. I quite agree about Chaucer's multi-layered irony, by the way, but was chiefly concerned to question what I supposed (perhaps wrongly) to be an emphasis on (c) to the exclusion of (a) & (b) - which latter I personally would understand in a wider sense as behaviour (verbal in this case) appropriate to the lower echelons of society. Anyway, your fine review has already caused me to put the CD on my list!  Post a Response

Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm Posted by Glyn Pursglove on July 7, 2008, 6:48 pm, in reply to "Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm" 81.103.164.52 Good! I hope you enjoy it - I feel sure that you will!  Post a Response

Re: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm Posted by Glyn on July 6, 2008, 10:21 am, in reply to "http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/July08/canticum_acd22503.htm" 81.103.164.52 In my first response to Martin Walker's interesting observation (typed in rather too much of a hurry just before a journey) my mention of the Miller was, of course, a stupid slip of the mind. I intended to refer to the Merchant trhroughout! Apologies  Post a Response

     «Back to thread

Thank you for using the MusicWeb Message Board. Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb