Grady, Frank. "The Boethian Reader of Troilus and Criseyde."

Chaucer Review 33, no. 3 (1999): 230-251.

Grady analyzes the Boethian philosophical undercurrent in Troilus and Criseyde as it relates to narrative structure, readership and Christian/Pagan paradox. The "double sorwe" of Troilus is made clear from the beginning through blatant foreshadowing and hints that a culturally literate medieval audience would understand. There is little doubt that a story set in Troy during the Trojan War will resolve itself unpleasantly. Grady argues that the audience approached the story with premonition-like foreknowledge through historical hindsight and cultural background. Even the characters themselves are prone to divination, notably through Calkas or Cassandra. Grady claims that this emphasis on Troilus' predestined fate is very like the predicament of the hero of the Consolation of Philosophy, although Troilus is not given the aid of Lady Philosophy. According to Grady, the loose timelines of Book V and the repetition of predestined doom throughout weave "a Boethian spell" that culminates strangely in Troilus' posthumous redemption. Grady elucidates the "special treatment" Troilus seems to receive (as a pagan, after all) as he flies into the eighth heavenly sphere. He questions what a medieval Boethian audience would think about his "exceptional salvation." How, also, are the readers to behave considering Troilus' suffering? Is the implied audience that of courtly lovers or, more broadly, Christians? This article brings up more questions than it attempts to answer. As the title suggests, it is (unfortunately) less concerned with Boethius than readers of Boethius. Grady does not conclusively (or clearly) illustrate the connection between the Troilus and the Consolation of Philosophy. When he compares the two works, it is to suggests that portions the Troilus lacks of the Consolation ask "readers to play the part of Lady Philosophy...[and] to play God" by filling in the blanks themselves. Although he makes clear that foreknowledge is an important part of the reading experience and the poem itself, this conclusion isn't convincing.