Queer Pandarus? Silence and Sexual Ambiguity in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde

Pugh, Tison. “Queer Pandarus? Silence and Sexual Ambiguity in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde.” Philological Quarterly. Winter 2001 p. 17-35

Pugh uses queer theory to take a look at the relationship between Pandarus and Troilus in Troilus and Criseyde, finding queer undertones to the text. He states that in medieval contexts, there were no clear definitions of sexuality drawn by being either heterosexual or homosexual, and so we shouldn’t try to understand the relationships in the text as such. However, he does say that the relationship between two men, and specifically where the line should be drawn as acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior, was a concern in Chaucer’s day, and that it makes sense for Chaucer to have addressed it. Pugh cites many ambiguous moments in the text, and the things that Pandarus doesn’t say, the things he alludes to or will never give a clear answer about, as clues to the idea that the text can be read queerly. He argues that the driving force behind the action of the story is what Pandarus actually wants, and everything that happens is because of Pandarus’ desire--that the relationship between Pandarus and Troilus is about the power Pandarus has over Troilus, and that part of this power fulfills a sort of erotic need in Pandarus. Pugh stresses throughout that Chaucer is deliberately leaving many questions open and ambiguous, inviting the reader to form their own opinion about the characters of the main players, and that it’s precisely this ambiguity that allows for a queer reading.

Available on LION