Christine de Pisan in her Querrel de la Rose criticizes Roman de la Rose, which is a love poem. This poem "describes the ultimately successful quest of a lover for the mystical and fleshly Rose". Christine is totally against the poem and attacks of strongly.
It is marvelous how Christine de Pisan starts her writing in Quarrel de la Rose. She starts showing you modesty of her self, and appears very calm. She stings you then in a sweet style illuminating why is she against the work she is criticizing.
Her modesty can be seen, or better to call her understatement, in page 125. When you continue reading and you reach the middle of it, you will see how gradually transforms from calmness to showing strong protest, which is covered up with polite style. Still the ironic tone she uses exposes her disapproval. An example for her emotional ironical tone would be seen in page 128, which she dedicates to discuss the issue of women in the work she is criticizing.
I agree with Christine de Pisan on condemning the poem, but I disagree with her in the way she represents her disapproval and the way she protests against the work. She expresses her refusal to such a poem by the way she chooses words. It is seen in her using the language, which reflects her feelings towards the work mentioned, such as in page 127. When the page is read, it will be clear that her emotions control her style. She is not being objective, but she has a very good case against the work she's criticizing as I believe,
Further more, another matter I disagree with her in that she should have read the book she is criticizing with carefulness and patience. In page 126, she admits that she read it with rush. In my opinion, any one who criticizes, or even protests against any work, which is in this case a literary work, should read every part of it with carefulness and focus to justify the material.
At the end, I can only say that I have projected my point of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document