Christine de Pisan; Europe’s first professional female writer, lauded in some quarters as a sort of proto-feminist, but I think she did about as much for 15th century women as Margaret Thatcher did for equal rights in 1980’s Britain. Christine was a successful woman in a man’s world; no mean feat in itself, but she was not concerned in the least with changing the status of women in her society.

I read the Norton Critical Edition of Christine de Pizan’s selected writings (more on this later), which features seven critical essays written mostly in the 1980’s. All of the essays concern themselves with Christine’s stance as a feminist writer or with her success at establishing herself as an authority, there is nothing about the quality of literature that she produced and for me that’s the rub. As I read the selections I asked myself “was her writing any good” was it of a standard of excellence that warranted it being elevated to the canon, or was it the fact that there was a dearth of female writers of the period and she has been singled out as an important woman’s voice.

Christine was born in Venice in 1364, her father Thomas was a reputed physician and astrologer and secured a position at the court of King Charles V at Paris. Christine married Etienne de Castel a notary and secretary at court. The family’s fortunes suffered on the death of Charles V as they did not receive the same level of patronage under Charles VI. Catherine lost both her father and her husband and at 25 she was a widow and found herself with three children and a mother to support. She decided not to re-marry and took the courageous decision to support herself by her writing while pursuing her rights to her husband’s estate through the courts.

There is no doubt that she was admired as a writer and had no shortage of patrons and after having established herself at court she was commissioned by the Duke of Burgundy to write “The Book of the Deeds and Good Conduct of the Wise King Charles V”. Christine had made her name in the debate that raged in Paris in 1401-2 about the Romance of the Rose. Christine weighed in heavily; criticising the misogynistic view of women expressed in the text, she accused the authors of maligning and mistreating women for no good reason. She also criticised the moral tone of The Romance and its too explicit sexuality. She continued with her pro-woman stance in much of her writing, notably in Christine’s Vision and The Book of the city of Ladies. Her method was to use well known source material, much of it lifted from Boccaccio and to enhance the role of women in thy stories, taking out any overt criticism and playing down the misogyny that was an all too frequent opinion expressed by male authors. This was not meant to be propaganda for an overhaul of women’s role in public life or in the home, she would have been horrified by such an assumption; look at what she says in the concluding paragraphs to “The Book of the City of Ladies”:

“And you married ladies do not resent being subject to your husbands: for sometimes it is not best for human beings to be free……. And those that have husbands that are evil, cruel and savage should make an effort to endure them so that they can try and oppose their evil ways and lead them back if they can to a reasonable and good life. And if their husbands are so obstinate that the wives cannot succeed, at least they will acquire great merit for their souls through the virtue of patience. And everyone will bless them and be on their side”

This does not sound like a proto-feminist and even from a 15th century perspective it seems reactionary. Christine was an aristocratic lady; she had no intention to rock the boat, quite the reverse in fact.

So what of the work that she produced; there is certainly a lot of it and an astonishing amount of variety. She was equally at home writing poetry or prose and there are two collections of ballads that stretch to a hundred pieces in each. The poetry is competent and probably sounds better in the original old French, but this is difficult to judge from the Norton edition as the selections are translated without attempting to follow Christine’s rhyming schemes. Her 100 ballads of a lover and a Lady take the part of both protagonists and in their way are a celebration of courtly love, probably more in tune with the 13th century than the 15th century, however it should be noted that this was a commission and Christine was a professional writer and she makes it clear that her heart wasn't in it as she says:

“I pray to God that I won’t get tired, for I’d
rather occupy myself with other business, with
more learning, but a sweet and noble person
requires me to write this to make up for what
I said about noble ladies and what amorous
Thoughts do to them. Thus I must compose one
Hundred ballads of amorous feelings”

Christine lived in turbulent times. At the start of the 15th century France was almost in a state of civil war and the English would soon enter Paris. I think Christine’s prose is at its best when she is chiding the nobles about their war like habits. In “The Lamentations On the Evils That Have Befallen France” and “The Book of Peace” she calls the king’s brothers to task and passionately pleads with them to seek peace: pointing out the evils of war. Christine an aristocrat to the core, once again proves that she has no love for the common man or woman: who are “no better than beasts” and should not be used in warfare, because they cannot be trusted and will only be interested in looting. Her vision is for a return to a feudal society with a wise and benevolent monarch firmly in control. Her finest writing, in my opinion is contained in “The Book of The Path of Long Study. This is a dream vision and Christine manages to produce prose that floats along with her vision of her journey through the spheres, it is both atmospheric and inventive.

Towards the end of her life Christine finally had a woman hero to celebrate and she wrote “The Tale of Joan of Arc” A poem of 61 short stanzas translated into prose for the Norton edition. Her poem is more of a peon to divine intervention than an exaltation of Joan the woman warrior, king maker and saviour of her country. According to Christine, France had God on it’s side and so Joan came to lead the French King to glory. For a supposed celebrator of the importance of women in history Christine seems to have missed a trick here, also her heavy handed religiosity is not to my taste and the prose translation makes it all seem rather flat.

Now a word about The Norton Critical edition , which is a real stinker. Part of the clue is in the title; The Selected Writings of Christine de Pizan, but this does not tell the story as what we have is selections from the writings of Christine, Apart from a couple of letters there are no complete texts and so it makes it difficult to take a view on her work. Are the selected extracts just the best bits or are they those that will go some way to make a case for her being an important woman’s voice; we will never know from these selections. Christine made her name through letters and her “The Debate on The Romance of the Rose and so I settled down eagerly to read her text and found this:

“Hush, now” Caddy said. I hushed and ate. Quentin wasn’t eating, but Jason was.
“That was Mother” Quentin said. He got up.
“You set right down” Disley said. “They got company in there, and you in them muddy clothes. You set down too, Caddy, and get done eating………….”

After an initial puzzlement I realised I was reading an extract from William Faulkner’s “The Sound and the Fury”. Now I like Faulkner’s book but wondered what an earth it was doing here. The extract went on for 31 pages and so I never got to read Christine de Pizan’s Debate. Obviously the proof reader or the printer had fallen asleep, but it is a mistake that does nothing for the reputation of Norton books.

From the selections I have read it would seem to me that Christine de Pizan is largely a writer for historical interest only. She was a well respected professional writer at the court of one of the greatest monarchs in Western Europe. Important for her squibs about the context of “The Romance of the Rose” and for her attempts at re-evaluating the role of women in the source material available to writers at the end of the Middle Ages. The appalling Norton Critical Edition does her no favours and so I would rate this book at 2 stars. . . ( )