Introduction 1
NOTES Introduction 1. Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger, quoted in Jeff Persels and Russell Ganim, eds, Fecal Matters in Early Modern Literature and Art (Aldershot, Hampshire and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2004), pp. xii–xv. Also William Ian Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 43–4. This said, Douglas does not consider the fart in any systematic way, only incidentally; for example, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London and New York: Routledge 1966, repr. 1996), p. 120. Waste studies is a scholarly domain in its own right. Most relevantly to medieval waste, see Susan Signe Morrison, Excrement in the Late Middle Ages: Sacred Filth and Chaucer’s Fecopoetics (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), especially pp. 139–58. 2. John Trevisa, On the Properties of Things: John Trevisa’s Translation of Bartholomaeus Anglicus De Re Proprietatibus, ed. M.C. Seymour, Elizabeth Brockhurst, Gabriel M. Liegey, M.H. Blechner, Ralph Hanna III, Joseph E. Grennen et al., 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975–1988), 7.49, 1:401. 3. Walter Benjamin, Illuminations, ed. Hannah Arendt, trans. Harry Zohn (New York: Schocken, 1968), p. 197. 4. At a distance, the Angel and Royal gargoyle looks like a face, but viewed from underneath, is clearly a butt. Autun’s gargoyle, however, leaves no room for doubt at any angle. See Janetta Rebold Benton, Holy Terrors: Gargoyles on Medieval Buildings (New York: Abbeville, 1997), pp. 60–3. “Gargoyle” comes from OF la gargole [throat]. 5. For Middle Ages as origin of the contemporary, see Umberto Eco, Travels in Hyperreality, trans.
[Show full text]