2000South Central ReviewRequires access

French Sixteenth-Century Literary Studies in the United States Today

Ullrich Langer

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Until recently American graduate programs in French divided the literary tradition into manageable morsels: Middle Ages, Sixteenth Century, Seventeenth Century, Eighteenth Century, Nineteenth Century, Twentieth Century, and Francophone Literature. The introduction of a Literary Theory component and of Cultural Studies changed that picture only to the extent that, since French Studies are not an expanding, but a contracting or at best stable area in the humanities, certain periods of the Continental tradition might be collapsed (say, Middle Ages to Renaissance, or Seventeenth to Eighteenth centuries) or eliminated entirely when hiring decisions are made. Among the traditional periods, the sixteenth century is the least attractive, seen from the point of view of the undergraduate curriculum. Why is that? It is not a matter of the absence of wonderful literature; arguably the greatest comic genius in prose, the greatest writer of love poems, and the greatest moral and personal essayist of the French language all wrote during this century. Rather, a practical difficulty faces American students venturing into the literature of the Renaissance. The works that these writers composed are neither in Old French (and thus available in a modem French translation in cheap editions, such as Livre de poche's collection Lettres gothiques), nor are they in the quite accessible French of the seventeenth century. For an American undergraduate, the prose of Montaigne is considerably more difficult than the writing of Proust, let alone Duras or Camus. But also more difficult than medieval romance: the American undergraduate will almost never be asked to read Chretien de Troyes in anything but modem French. In addition, the Middle Ages are, for lack of a better word, cute: knights, damsels, adulterous love, castles, etc. Medieval narratives can resemble the basic structure of Hollywood movies, from Westerns to Star Wars. But moving from Yvain to the genealogy of Pantagruel or to Montaigne's De la vanite means moving from a recognizable imaginary world to a kind of writing dependent on a much greater variety of sources, of genres, of discourses. The

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Until recently American graduate programs in French divided the literary tradition into manageable morsels: Middle Ages, Sixteenth Century, Seventeenth Century, Eighteenth Century, Nineteenth Century, Twentieth Century, and Francophone Literature. The introduction of a Literary Theory component and of Cultural Studies changed that picture only to the extent that, since French Studies are not an expanding, but a contracting or at best stable area in the humanities, certain periods of the Continental tradition might be collapsed (say, Middle Ages to Renaissance, or Seventeenth to Eighteenth centuries) or eliminated entirely when hiring decisions are made. Among the traditional periods, the sixteenth century is the least attractive, seen from the point of view of the undergraduate curriculum. Why is that? It is not a matter of the absence of wonderful literature; arguably the greatest comic genius in prose, the greatest writer of love poems, and the greatest moral and personal essayist of the French language all wrote during this century. Rather, a practical difficulty faces American students venturing into the literature of the Renaissance. The works that these writers composed are neither in Old French (and thus available in a modem French translation in cheap editions, such as Livre de poche's collection Lettres gothiques), nor are they in the quite accessible French of the seventeenth century. For an American undergraduate, the prose of Montaigne is considerably more difficult than the writing of Proust, let alone Duras or Camus. But also more difficult than medieval romance: the American undergraduate will almost never be asked to read Chretien de Troyes in anything but modem French. In addition, the Middle Ages are, for lack of a better word, cute: knights, damsels, adulterous love, castles, etc. Medieval narratives can resemble the basic structure of Hollywood movies, from Westerns to Star Wars. But moving from Yvain to the genealogy of Pantagruel or to Montaigne's De la vanite means moving from a recognizable imaginary world to a kind of writing dependent on a much greater variety of sources, of genres, of discourses. The

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Until recently American graduate programs in French divided the literary tradition into manageable morsels: Middle Ages, Sixteenth Century, Seventeenth Century, Eighteenth Century, Nineteenth Century, Twentieth Century, and Francophone Literature. The introduction of a Literary Theory component and of Cultural Studies changed that picture only to the extent that, since French Studies are not an expanding, but a contracting or at best stable area in the humanities, certain periods of the Continental tradition might be collapsed (say, Middle Ages to Renaissance, or Seventeenth to Eighteenth centuries) or eliminated entirely when hiring decisions are made. Among the traditional periods, the sixteenth century is the least attractive, seen from the point of view of the undergraduate curriculum. Why is that? It is not a matter of the absence of wonderful literature; arguably the greatest comic genius in prose, the greatest writer of love poems, and the greatest moral and personal essayist of the French language all wrote during this century. Rather, a practical difficulty faces American students venturing into the literature of the Renaissance. The works that these writers composed are neither in Old French (and thus available in a modem French translation in cheap editions, such as Livre de poche's collection Lettres gothiques), nor are they in the quite accessible French of the seventeenth century. For an American undergraduate, the prose of Montaigne is considerably more difficult than the writing of Proust, let alone Duras or Camus. But also more difficult than medieval romance: the American undergraduate will almost never be asked to read Chretien de Troyes in anything but modem French. In addition, the Middle Ages are, for lack of a better word, cute: knights, damsels, adulterous love, castles, etc. Medieval narratives can resemble the basic structure of Hollywood movies, from Westerns to Star Wars. But moving from Yvain to the genealogy of Pantagruel or to Montaigne's De la vanite means moving from a recognizable imaginary world to a kind of writing dependent on a much greater variety of sources, of genres, of discourses. The

Key concepts: History, Literature, Literary criticism, History of literature, Art

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
French Sixteenth-Century Literary Studies in the United States Today — Research Paper | ScholarLens