LEADER 03541oam 22005294a 450 001 9910315232403321 005 20230621140735.0 010 $a1-947447-57-2 024 7 $a10.21983/P3.0202.1.00 035 $a(CKB)4100000007823977 035 $a(OAPEN)1004668 035 $a(OCoLC)1076791151 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse77040 035 $a(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/36160 035 $a(oapen)doab36160 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000007823977 100 $a20180413d2018 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurmu#---auuuu 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aMythodologies: Methods in Medieval Studies, Chaucer, and Book History$fJoseph A. Dane 205 $a1st edition. 210 $aBrooklyn, NY$cpunctum books$d2018 210 1$aSanta Barbara, CA :$cPunctum Books,$d2018. 210 4$dİ2018. 215 $a1 online resource (286 pages) $cillustrations; PDF, digital file(s) 311 08$aPrint version: 9781947447561 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 330 $aMythodologies challenges the implied methodology in contemporary studies in the humanities. We claim, at times, that we gather facts or what we will call evidence, and from that form hypotheses and conclusions. Of course, we recognize that the sum total of evidence for any argument is beyond comprehension; therefore, we construct, and we claim, preliminary hypotheses, perhaps to organize the chaos of evidence, or perhaps simply to find it; we might then see (we claim) whether that evidence challenges our tentative hypotheses. Ideally, we could work this way. Yet the history of scholarship and our own practices suggest we do nothing of the kind. Rather, we work the way we teach our composition students to write: choose or construct a thesis, then invent the evidence to support it. This book has three parts, examining such methods and pseudo-methods of invention in medieval studies, bibliography, and editing. Part One, ?Noster Chaucer,? looks at examples in Chaucer studies, such as the notion that Chaucer wrote iambic pentameter, and the definition of a canon in Chaucer. ?Our? Chaucer has, it seems, little to do with Chaucer himself, and in constructing this entity, Chaucerians are engaged largely in self-validation of their own tradition. Part Two, ?Bibliography and Book History,? consists of three studies in the field of bibliography: the recent rise in studies of annotations; the implications of presumably neutral terminology in editing, a case-study in cataloguing. Part Three, ?Cacophonies: A Bibliographical Rondo,? is a series of brief studies extending these critiques to other areas in the humanities. It seems not to matter what we talk about: meter, book history, the sex life of bonobos. In all of these discussions, we see the persistence of error, the intractability of uncritical assumptions, and the dominance of authority over evidence. 606 $aLiterary studies: classical, early & medieval$2bicssc 608 $aElectronic books. 610 $amedieval studies 610 $aChaucer 610 $abook history 610 $aintellectual history 610 $abibliography 615 7$aLiterary studies: classical, early & medieval 676 $a001.30721 700 $aDane$b Joseph A$0923102 801 0$bMdBmJHUP 801 1$bMdBmJHUP 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910315232403321 996 $aMythodologies$92159344 997 $aUNINA