One colleague
admitted to me this morning that my suggestion that we introduce Chaucer to the
hapless pupils in the equivalent of our second form has left her with
nightmares.
As far as I could
make out from the welter of Spanish descending into Catalan that was the
meeting that I went to at the end of school last night, the area of concern for
the project that the kids are going to have to complete covers a period of some
400 years from the 11th Century to the 14th or 15th!
Chaucer was the
obvious writer of distinction – who is also interesting to read. Having given the assembled company my
rendition of the opening lines of The Prologue to The Canterbury Tales in my
own version of Middle English they stared at me with expressions ranging from
incredulity to outright horror!
The most outraged
was a fellow member of the English Department who had sudden visions of having
to pretend knowledge of a writer who she had not dipped into! I will have to provide a “Chaucer for
Dummies” handbook. Though I have to
admit that my knowledge does not extend to the story that I have not and will
not read “The Tale of Sir Topaz”, that long drawn-out ironic joke at Chaucer’s
expense. That is the sort of literature
for which life simply is not long enough.
And after all, even his character in the Tales was interrupted and told
to shut up.
I was thinking
more along the lines of the play version of The Pardoner’s Tale. This is a fairly simple moralistic story and
the background to the character of the Pardoner will afford the kids hours of
innocent fun. Or something.
Nothing has been
finalized, but as everyone knows that Suzanne is my “friend” and as she is the
“Big Cheese” in Project Based Learning there is a fair chance that Chaucer will
make it to the final cut!
Unfortunately this
means that I will have my own work cut out to produce something that can act as
an introduction to the work and the sort of language that he used. Though I do envisage the use of Middle
English being kept to an absolute minimum!
I think that other
members of staff were equally shocked by the range of ideas that seemed to be
flowing – all of which de-skilled colleagues and hinted at the range and extent
of work that would have to be done if the project was to succeed.
It is a real and
painful truth that that meeting, like ever other meeting in the world of education
that I have ever attended, did not make my life easier. Always by the end of the assembly there is
more work to do and no consequent lessening of the work that you already
have. Still after more than thirty years
why should I expect any difference just because the country is different!
Hope springs
eternal!