Clearly expressed in the Prioress's tale is the anti-Semitism framed in Christian lore. Chaucer, strengthens this connection with the Prioress inserting herself into the tale in a number of ways. She begins the tale by invoking God directly and goes on to say, "Right so fare I, and therfore I yow preye, / Gydeth my song that I shal of yow seye." (L. 486ff). In this way, while it is her tale she tells it with the guidance and power of God. Furthermore, rather than simply recounting the tale, the Prioress inserts herself into the tale, such as in when she says, "As I have seyd, thurghout the Juerie" (L. 551), which serves to emphasize her connection to the tale. This then casts further asides as originiating with her, as when she states, "Fro thennes forth the Jues han conspired / This innocent out of this world chace." (L. 565).
That her story varies with the stories presented in Rubin's text speaks to Chaucer's authorial hand, if not in adapting the tale, in selecting it from a wide array of it. Rubin offers strong historical context for the story, however I believe he presents an overly academic explanation for a rather simple problem. His assertion of the Jewish connection to the eucharist and "fears of the danger which Jews posed to the physical and spiritual well-being of Christians" (pg. 4) may overlook the culturally universal concept of ethnocentrism. The Jews lived apart from the Christian society, as mentioned in the Prioress's tale with her mentioning, "...thurghout the Juerie / This litel child, as he cam to and fro" (l. 551). Harsh treatment likely arose out of the Jews being the other and the fears of their effect of spirtitual well-being were likely how dislike/fear of 'the other' were vocalized, rather than from whence they originated. Moreover, that the Jews had this connection to the Eucharist I believe speaks to the power of this hatred/fear rather than a cause of it. Rubin also seems to gloss over the deicide aspect of the harsh treatment of Jews, which seems a more likely cause of harsh treatment than indirect connection with the Eucharist.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I just wrote essentially the same thing as you. It seemed to be also that Rubin stated his conclusion in the beginning, gave anecdotes and facts, and believed that those anecdotes and facts, while tangentially relevant, would lead one to his conclusion.
ReplyDelete