Reclaiming our year 2 module ‘Chaucer and his Contemporaries’ back from news outlets

Amelia Cropley

In early October, the Daily Mail took to their Sunday edition Mail on Sunday, to write about one of our university’s second year English modules, ‘Chaucer and his Contemporaries’. The Mail on Sunday surprisingly requested information using Freedom of Information laws and found it necessary to speak up on this module. However, as a student on the module, I find it rather unreflective and deceptive. 

The aforementioned content notice has been severely mistaken as ‘slap[ping] a trigger warning’ on Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales and similar works, when it is nothing of the kind.

The article in question comments on the module’s “woke” content notices which identify students to religious practices, claiming it is demeaning to students. But whilst this acclaimed newspaper believed they were writing the truth, I’m going to cross their t’s and right their wrongs, as someone inside the lecture and seminar rooms.

Following the publication of this article, there has been a rather one-sided vantage point of our module, and in doing so, presenting it to be something it is not. The aforementioned content notice has been severely mistaken as ‘slap[ping] a trigger warning’ on Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales and similar works, when it is nothing of the kind. Instead, this is not as revelatory as it’s presented, but instead an overall content notice which will be summarised and explained week-by-week regarding what it entails. This, in my view, is the opposite of censorship

This, in my view, is the opposite of censorship

The Daily Mail’s article goes further to insinuate that the module censors many aspects of the text’s religious elements. However, as a weekly attender of the module, I believe this is far from the truth. In order to represent students from all backgrounds, our lecturers redesigned the module, making it more diverse and inclusive by adding less-known Scottish texts; texts covering the historical conflict between Islam and Christianity; and writings highlighting the experiences of mediaeval women, such as Medea and Margery Kempe. This, in my view, is the opposite of censorship, but rather providing a holistic education with a multiplicity of topics that arose in the Middle Ages and its literature. In fact, the notion of having a content note of what is to be studied is evidence enough that it does expose students to difficult topics and in doing so, presents a reflective view of the period in question.

At the request of the Daily Mail, the lecturers affiliated with ‘Chaucer and his Contemporaries’ (who will remain anonymous at the request of the Head of School), provided a short statement on the matter prior to publication, including that they are aware their students represent all faiths and none at all, but that even those familiar with Christian faith will find aspects of late-medieval Christianity different to practices today. The provided statement reads, ‘even those students who are practising Christians will find aspects of the late-mediaeval worldview they will encounter in Chaucer and others alienating and strange; and all students might find the anti-Islamic sentiments of some mediaeval writers, for example, something they would appreciate knowing about in advance.’ But the Daily Mail decided to hide this from public view.

Instead, the Daily Mail redacted their own request and published ‘even those who are practising Christians will find aspects of the late-mediaeval worldview… alienating and strange.’, which is very deceptive of its original meaning. But despite the ellipses making it evident crucial elements of the statement was removed, other media outlets, such as The Catholic Herald, have taken what Daily Mail has written and presented the issue, not for what it is, but what it was portrayed to be by the acclaimed tabloid newspaper. 

The module convenor stated they are not censoring, but promoting the Christian faith as it was in Medieval England.

Differences in religious practices refers to texts such as Hoccleve’s ‘My Compleinte’ who sees his depression as something given to him by God. Without the knowledge on mental health we have today, of course one might try to find conclusions in a Divine Power. These practices also refer to the experiences of Julian of Norwich, who in her devotion to Christianity gives up the materialist world by becoming an anchoress, who devotes the rest of their life to prayer, often in a doorless cell built into the walls of a church until death.

The Catholic Herald quotes Andrea Williams, chief executive of Christian concern, who claims on the issue that ‘to censor expressions of the Christian faith is to erase our literary heritage.’ But in defence, the module convenor stated they are not censoring, but promoting the Christian faith as it was in Medieval England. And as the dominant faith of the time, it simply cannot be ignored.

With this in mind, how can someone classify our module as ‘demeaning education’? Frank Furedi, a former sociology professor from the University of Kent, supported the Daily Mail, who in all due respect, has not specialised his career or dedicated research to Middle English like this module’s convenor and leaders. Our lecturers described to me how their teaching encourages students ‘to consider world-views different to their own, and to become compassionate interpreters of the past.’ This is not narrow-mindedness or ‘ignorant academics’ that Furedi senselessly suggests of fellow academics.

An English degree and Middle Ages literature can be aware of the impact of difficult topics, whilst maintaining an academic standard. 

The academics who teach ‘Chaucer and his Contemporaries’ also state that ‘teaching mediaeval literature can combine academic rigour with an increased sensitivity towards certain subjects that may impact a diverse cohort differently as individuals’. This therefore does not diminish or decrease the academic level of the course, but rather teaches that an English degree and Middle Ages literature can be aware of the impact of difficult topics, whilst maintaining an academic standard. 

As a student on the module, I am saddened that this misinformation is circulating in the media, especially as the module and its literature has endless depth which we are encouraged to critique in each lecture and seminar at a personal, unique level. An overall content notice may not make sense to the public eye, however those whom it was written for will understand its true meaning, and know the course is approached with intellect and equal consideration.

Amelia Cropley