Literature and Testimony
After writing that last post, I searched for Chaucer on the LDS.org archives and found an article by Arthur Henry King entitled Literature and Testimony. He says, “I think that with all his so-called liberality Chaucer is nevertheless a great religious poet.” Lately I’ve been reading AHK’s Arm the Children and I respect him a lot — he’s becoming one of my role models, in fact.
Continuing on with the idea of that last post, I see two options before me. The first is to discard anything that has anything bad in it (and of course the definition of “bad” is an issue that has to be wrestled with, but thankfully the Spirit helps) and completely avoid it. The second is to recognize that the great artists and writers of the past often had blemishes and were imperfect, but their art is still great (for the most part) and I should overlook the moral faults. I don’t know yet which is the more correct path…
February 17th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
here’s an interesting question: is it a moral fault for Chaucer to include naughty jokes in his texts? And what of literature that explores the darker side of human character other than sexual license? I’m thinking particularly of Dostoevsky, but you could even include the exploration/representation of evil in Lord of the Rings.
February 17th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
I suppose one standard by which a work could be judged is whether the moral issue is glorified or condemned, but that’s a hard thing to tell sometimes. In Dostoevsky, it’s clear that Raskolnikov’s murder was wrong, and if my memory serves me correctly the rest of the book is about his path toward redemption. The James Bond books and movies, on the other hand, would seem to be more gratuitous.
Having said that, perhaps the difference is between a work containing a depiction of evil and it being evil. I certainly don’t think that depicting evil is wrong; without it, good would have no meaning. With Chaucer it seems like the naughty jokes are approved and “normal,” but it’s been a long time since I read him and my memory could be faulty.
I’m still not satisfied — how can the two be reconciled? (Or is there even any reconciliation necessary?)