Mediaevistik 31 . 2018 309

Pleasure in the Middle Ages, ed. Naa- materials, “attempt to define and analyze ma Cohen-Hanegbi and Piroska Nagy. pleasures, joys, enjoyments, and delights International Medieval Research, 24. through the language and mindset of the Turnhout: Brepols, 2018, xxiii, 383 pp., source material” (xxii). 10 b/w ill. The book is divided into three sections, The term ‘pleasure’ has many different the first dealing with “Pleasured Bodies,” meanings, and can be understood both the second with “Didactic Pleasures,” the in physical, emotional terms and in reli- third with “Pleasures in God.” In the first gious, or philosophical contexts. Pleasure section, for instance, Esther Cohen reflects pertains both to the body and to the spir- on how pleasure was regarded in high it, so it turns out to be a very malleable medieval monasteries, while Philippa C. concept which cannot be easily exam- Madden (†) discusses merriment in late ined in a cultural-historical framework. medieval England as a medium to achieve The contributors to the present volume, physical and spiritual health. For Fernan- however, who originally presented their do Salmón, pleasure matters in terms of studies orally at the 2013 International the humoral body as discussed in medie- Medieval Congress at Leeds, pursue, as val medicine, which is very similar to the the two editors formulate it themselves, topic pursued by Naama Cohen-Hanegbi very diverse approaches, depending on (medical counsel). The pleasure created their individual research discipline. How- by the illuminated prayer book is the fo- ever, pleasure is regularly associated with cus of Maeve Doyle’s study, while Karen emotions, whether from a historical, theo- Moukheiber considers the role of Abbasid logical, philosophical, art-historical (only concubines and slave courtesans in Adab one study), or literary (practically left out) discourse, mirroring their essential pres- perspective. Of course, this opens anoth- ence in aristocratic and urban society. er Pandora’s box since ‘emotions’ repre- Indeed, there is a red line connecting sent a vast range of aspects in human life all these articles, but it is rather thin and that are commonly not easy to identify more tenuous than desired for such a vol- or to determine in a critical fashion. Co- ume. Intriguingly, William M. Reddy con- hen-Hanegbi (Tel Aviv University) and cludes this first section by trying to apply Nagy (Université du Quebec à Montréal) recent insights by neuroscience regarding offer the approximate definition of pleas- the workings of the drive for pleasure in ure as being “an affect sustained by the our brain to the poems by the first trouba- interaction between physical and sensory dour, William IX. Undoubtedly, the brain knowledge, between cultural and social controls experiences of pleasure, but why mores, and between religious thought and would that be relevant for a critical anal- ethics” (xix). It might be difficult to grasp ysis of these early troubadour poems with what they really mean by this, especial- their strongly sexual content? The brain ly because they consider such features did not suddenly operate differently in the as “pleasured bodies, didactic pleasures, twelfth century, but the cultural respons- and pleasure in God” (ibid.), which again es to the sexual desires changed for many leaves us groping for straws. However, different reasons. For Reddy, the Gregori- we are assured at the end of the intro- an reform, insisting on monogamy, threat- duction that all contributors, despite vast ened to undermine William’s political and differences in their methodologies and military power; hence his demand to have 310 Mediaevistik 31 . 2018 free access to noble ladies as his partners. individual and God. Zachary Giuliano What would neuroscience have to say studies how identified the reading about that? of religious texts as a form of pleasure, In the second section we come across a or “holy gluttony” (304). Ken A. Grant wide range of studies that deal with pleas- brings the teachings of Gregory the Great ure within the context of didacticism, such into play, who was, of course, endeavor- as ’s On the Virtues and Vices (Bar- ing with all his might to undermine world- bara Rosenwein, mostly a reprint from ly pleasures. Constant J. Mews examines 2014), William Peraldus’s Summa de viti- the important interpretation of the Song is (Richard Newhauser), Giles of Rome’s of Songs through as De regimine principum (Noëlle-Laetitia a medium for the to reach the mys- Perret), ’s Emendatio vitae terium of the Godhead (the “journey to and Simone Fidati’s Ordine della vita spiritual illumination,” 345). Finally, Rob christiana (Xavier Biron-Ouellet), and Faesen discusses the concept of divine the pleasure experienced (or conveyed to) pleasure (“ghebruken”) within the mysti- by the spectators of religious plays con- cal discourse by John of Ruusbroec and cerning the punishment of the condemned , both of whom resorted to the in hell (Élyse Dupras). It would be dif- idea of love but now applied to the mysti- ficult to find here a shared concept of cal experience (cf. my study, “Die flämis- pleasure; some studies highlight Schaden- che Mystikerin Hadewijch als erotische freude, others emphasize ethical and mor- Liebesdichterin,” Studies in Spirituality al teaching, and others again the struggle 12 [2002]: 23–42; here not consulted) against vices by means of . I The volume concludes with an index, am afraid that the term ‘pleasure’ increas- but there is no clear sense of what has ingly evolves into a place holder for many been accomplished. Pleasure appears as a different aspects, an awkward substitute term on virtually every page of this book, for the term ‘emotions,’ and neither one but we are rather at a loss what this might allows us to identify concretely what really entail. Returning to the introduc- would centrally be at stake. Rosenwein, tion, we find a bold statement of univer- for instance, suggests that emotions were sal claim, “The link between pleasure and “the same as virtues and vices” (173); Ne- pain, on the one hand, and the issues of whauser highlights how much Peraldus soteriology and eschatoloy, on the oth- encouraged his readers to pursue virtues er, is the landscape behind all medieval and to observe self-constraints to avoid discourse on pleasure” (xiii). Does this excessive consumption or transgressing entail antithetical reflections, or is pleas- moral limits; and Perret underscores the ure the global notion in all didactic and correlation between pleasure and ethics theological ruminations? The individual in Aristotelian terms. Thus, pleasure be- contributions offer valuable scholarly comes a broadly conceived notion for perspectives, but as a whole the volume many different aspects in the world of di- forces too many diverse issues together dacticism and moral teaching. and leaves us rather wondering about In the third section, we are confronted what the intended purpose really might with yet another perception of pleasure, have been. focusing on the relationship between the Albrecht Classen