Rereading the Medieval and Early Modern

For Vladimir Nabokov, the process of re-reading is always constructive: “A good reader, a major reader, an active and creative reader is a rereader.” For Patricia Meyer Spacks, re-reading — though satisfying for pure literary analysis — can reveal unwelcome truths about the past, and cause disenchantment with works we used to love. While a first reading depends (primarily) on the expectation of pleasure (of a vicarious or hermeneutic kind), re-reading draws on critical self-awareness. According to Michael Riffaterre, only a second and separate retroactive reading can produce “significance” by identifying and reconfiguring the various perspectives of the text. Thomas Leitch argues that re-readings allow for an “appreciation of the story through an analysis of the ways in which it achieves its initial effects.” If we all already know what will happen in medieval and early modern texts, what changes for us when we return to them? Do different words, phrases, symbols, and ideas become important when refocused by class, gender, and race? How do these texts have different meanings when read in different contexts? Are re-readings better readings? This panel aims to examine the process of re-reading the medieval and early modern, in revisitations and adaptations.