Retrospective Prophecy and Medieval English Authorship.

Author/Editor
Fonzo, Kimberly.

Title
Retrospective Prophecy and Medieval English Authorship.

Published
Fonzo, Kimberly. Retrospective Prophecy and Medieval English Authorship. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2022.

Review
Fonzo's is a book with a mission. She contends that for reasons specific to each, the works of Langland, Gower, and Chaucer have been mis-read, largely through what she terms "retrospective prophecy": that is, a tendency to mistake "hindsight for insight," leading to claims "that a text anticipated a future historical event or movement, especially insofar as they may perpetuate myths of an always-improving historical timeline" (8). In order to correct this, her "book undertakes the excavation of the critical traditions of reading Langland, Gower, and Chaucer as prophetic in order to recover the complex and creative prophetic personae that they themselves sought to cultivate, often in defiance of rather than compliance with the discourse of political prophecy" (11)." She addresses Gower in chapter three, "Henry IV and the Ex Post Facto Construction of a Prophetic John Gower," pp. 70-103. Her reading of Gower is that he "actively adopted" political prophecies, whereas Langland "teasingly invoked and ridiculed them . . . and Chaucer avoided them entirely" (6). Fonzo's final paragraph conveniently sums up both chapter and book: "Despite the fact that no conclusive manuscript evidence supports the idea that Gower predicted Richard II's fall from power, the poet has remained a prophet in contemporary criticism for a cluster of interrelated reasons. First, both Gower and the Lancastrians were promoting this perception of the poet. Second, Gower's prophetic reputation has a cumulative effect. For instance [Malcolm] Parkes has based his perceptions of when Gower altered the 'Vox' upon [G. C.] Macaulay's interpretations of when Gower revised the 'Confessio.' Third, there remain very few editions of Gower's works, and the most prominent of those that do exist have been edited by people championing the perspective of a prophetic Gower. Fourth, the nature of Richard II's rule is still debated among historians, largely because we cannot tell which parts of history have been obscured by Lancastrian propaganda. Gower is often conscribed into this debate as either a witness to Richard's tyranny or an opportunistic traitor and foil for the supposedly loyal Ricardian poet, Chaucer. Fifth, the 'red herring' recension of the 'Confessio' that Gower happened to have originally dedicated to both Richard and Henry has served as a source of confusion for later scholars attempting to understand the circumstances surrounding its composition. Sixth, because Gower's works are either not in English or prohibitively long, they are rarely granted a prominent place on the syllabi of most English courses. Those who study and teach Gower's works cannot make the case for his importance solely from canonical relevance. Gower is important, much criticism tells us, because he had an uncanny talent for diagnosing problems in his country's general populace and leadership. Finally, audiences of any period rarely expect authors to be as crafty as Gower appears to have been in his prophetic self-fashioning. Gower's efforts to depict himself as a sage authority have cemented his reputation as a keen political observer but overshadowed his other literary accomplishments" (103). It is suggested that alongside Fonzo's book three essays by Peter Nicholson could be profitably read: "Gower's Revisions in the Confessio Amantis" ("Chaucer Review"19 [1984]; "The Dedications of Gower's Confessio Amantis" ("Mediaevalia" 10 [1984]; and "Poet and Scribe in the Manuscripts of Gower's Confessio Amantis" in Derek Pearsall, ed., "Manuscripts and Texts: Editorial Problems in Later Middle English Literature" (1987). [RFY. Copyright. John Gower Society eJGN 41.2.]

Date
2022

Gower Subjects
Backgrounds and General Criticism
Confessio Amantis
Manuscripts and Textual Studies
Vox Clamantis