The Making of Textual Culture: “Grammatica” and Literary Theory, 350–1100 by Martin Irvine
Nicolette Zeeman
STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER value and suggestiveness. In its scope, method, much of bril­ liantly acute textual analysis, this is a powerful contribution to our under­ standing the politics intellectual labor narrative form in fourteenth-century England. ANDREW GALLOWAY Cornell University MARTIN IRVINE. The Making Textual Culture: "Grammatica" Liter­ ary Theory, 350-1100. Cambridge Studies Medieval Literature, vol. 19. Cambridge: Press, 1994. Pp. xix, 604. $59.95. Martin Irvine argues that grammatica, institution ofmedieval grammar, governs all textuality Latin Middle Ages. It produces techniques ideologies shape academic reading, commentary, compilation, composition. constructs terms which knowledge understood. stresses intertextual assumptions grammatica arrogates it enormous power productivity: As discipline sustained by dominant social political institutions medieval Europe, functioned perpetuate reproduce most fundamental conditions for culture, providing discursive rules interpretative strategies constructed certain texts as repositories ofauthority value. (p. 2) litteratus, learned, cleric, "was consistently gen­ dered masculine socially empowered" 2). These are, I think, plausible arguments. This volume looks at late classical early treatises well poetic commentaries expound use ofgrammatica. A second projected cover later Here, moves through theories Clement Alexandria, Augustine, Origen what he claims essentially "grammatical" culture Carolingian Anglo-Saxon periods. He thus includes materials do not always appear histories theory. part his avowed project argue wide-ranging generative powers grammatical concludes book considering 222 REVIEWS some poems. hugely comprehensive, drawing on wide bibliography available only manuscript. very useful reference work. Nevertheless, rigorous detail or larger seems imply, instance, Aristotelian notion "ordinary" "dominant" (kyrios) language equivalent cruder "proper" (proprius) language, was dominate Ages long after (pp. 104-7). On other hand, remarks Phaedrus Plato's "attempt rewrite subvert memory philosophical recollection success­ ful": remark echoes bland tone rather than content claim "replete with irony, humor, self-parody" 29, 26). repeatedly distinguishes from scholarship focus forms cultural located discipline. sees first bastion clerical hegemony. foregrounds art trivium, against modern (and medieval) scholars who have emphasized disciplines. site hermeneutic control semantic surveillance. comments length "technologies authority­ literacy, normative latinity, literary canon, scribal arts, production" 306). Sometimes sounds homogenous. Although notes interpretive innovations Isidore, De literis colendis, places stress their reproduction already inscribed into 169-71, 185, 210-13, 241-43, 305-13). But surely substantially right. However, Irvine's ideological analysis ends up reproducing traditional versions both. They are seen institutionally clerical, religiously orthodox, wedded disciplinary authority. reductive each case. accusation leveled Foucault-derived work rele­ vant here: allows few sites resistance difference. Can be true authoritative gram­ matica controls "the entire church monastery" 306; also p. 460)? Even book, all, there evidence alternative valuations grammatica...
Studies in the Age of Chaucer