Politics, Prodigality, and the Reception of Chaucer's 'Purse'
- Author / Editor
- Prendergast, Thomas A.
Politics, Prodigality, and the Reception of Chaucer's 'Purse'
- Published
- William F. Gentrup, ed. Reinventing the Middle Ages and the Renaissance: Constructions of the Medieval and Early Modern Periods ([Turnhout: Brepols, 1998), pp. 63-76.
- Series
- Arizona Studies in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, no. 1.
- Description
- Surveys "legends" about Chaucer's prodigality, from Thomas Usk's "Testament of Love" to early editions of Purse and modern critical reception of the poem. Editions of Purse and critical responses seek to defend Chaucer "from charges of political opportunism," casting him variously as a prodigal, a "'pure' unsullied poet," and a "self-serving though loyal subject."
- Contributor
- Gentrup, William F.,ed.
- Alternative Title
- Reinventing the Middle Ages and the Renaissance: Constructions of the Medieval and Early Modern Periods.
- Chaucer Subjects
- Complaint of Chaucer to His Purse.
- Facsimiles, Editions, and Translations.