Have you developed a great idea after the initial proposal deadline for the 2026 NCS Congress? If so, here’s your second chance!

by Candace Barrington

The 2026 NCS Congress Program Committee warmly invites additional proposals for the Congress’s Research Expo. The Research Expo will host research with strong visual or digital elements presented in a display or poster format. Presenters will discuss their display and the underpinning research during a single launch session.

This session is open to a range of formats and topics that may offer updates on work-in-progress, preliminary conclusions, experimental modes of presenting research data, and shorter summaries of material. Topics particularly suited to posters might include, but are certainly not limited to: 

  • Research on manuscripts or other aspects of material culture
  • Image-heavy work that deploys visual analysis
  • Updates on large-scale funded projects or other grant funded work-in-progress
  • Data-driven work that is communicated in graphical forms
  • Experimental digital methods
  • Incorporate a hands-on or other interactive element

Posters will be displayed in a hall where receptions will be held and a time will be reserved for researchers to talk about their work. A prize will be offered to one poster. 

Note: The printing of posters can be done in Freiburg (and at no cost) before the conference (more information will be provided to those whose posters are accepted).

To submit a proposal: Proposals should be titled and no longer than 200 words. Please include your name, affiliation, and your email address along with your abstract. Please email your proposal directly to the Research Expo organisers Mary Flannery, R. D. Perry, and J. R. Mattison at ncs2026freiburg@gmail.com no later than 31 December 2025.

Death of a beloved translator, John Boje

by Candace Barrington

One of the great joys of the Global Chaucers project has been the opportunity to correspond (and sometimes meet) many translators and scholars from around the world. Each one has taught me much about translation, Chaucer, and the joys of literature. Perhaps none taught me more than John Boje of Pretoria, South Africa.

He and I began corresponding in November 2013. I had learned (from someone on some platform) about his ‘n Keur uit die Pelgrimsverhale van Geoffrey Chaucer [A Selection of the Pilgrims’ Tales of Geoffrey Chaucer]. I emailed him, asking if he’d be willing to answer some questions. I tapped “send,” and before I had a chance to make a cup of tea, I heard back from him with an enthusiastic “Yes!” And so began our collaboration and our friendship.

Earlier that year, he had completed his translation of all the tales (including, he was proud to report, The Parson’s Tale and The Tale of Melibee), so all the tribulations and victories of translation were fresh in his mind. I would send one-line questions, and he’d respond with pages filled with exuberant answers and multiple examples. He described complications and shared insights that I didn’t have the experience to imagine. He gleefully (and mischievously) explained how he exploited the common Dutch ancestry of both Middle English and Afrikaans words. He showed me how Afrikaans, a language associated with an oppressive regime, could be slyly used (in ways that Chaucerians can appreciate) to subvert the dominant discourse.

Because he eventually wrote “‘Save oure tonges difference’: Reflections on Translating Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales into Afrikaans,” his doctoral dissertation whose erudition is belied by the “reflections,” I have at hand a compendium of his thoughts about particular techniques or specific dilemmas.

I am fortunate that I learned of his decline in time to send him a note expressing my gratitude. I wanted him to know that our initial email conversations became the foundation of my scholarly practice. His clear and enthusiastic answers to my ambitious questions convinced me that I would be able to make a long-term project out of my germ of an idea.

I must add one more note: John’s generosity of spirit extended far beyond the gracious help he offered me. As his friends and family testify, he provides an unbeatable example of how to work towards a world where “justice can rise up / And hope and history rhyme” (Seamus Heaney, “The Cure of Troy”).

Chaucer in the Age of Medievalism: In sondry ages and sundry londes

by Candace Barrington

Colloquium organizers–Justine Breton and Jonathan Fruoco–have announced the full program for the upcoming Chaucer in the Age of Medievalism to be held at the University of Lorraine in Nancy, France, 13-14 November 2025.

Any attending the conference will not need to register or pay a fee. There will not be an online option.

Next month’s event is part of Jonathan Fruoco’s “In Sondry Ages and Sundry Londes” conference cycle sponsored by the New Chaucer Society. These events explore Chaucer’s presence and reception in non-Anglophone countries. Prior conferences took place in Grenoble, France (2018) and Hiroshima, Japan (2023). Jonathan is looking for someone to help organize the next conference outside of the Anglosphere in 2027. Contact him at jonathan dot fruoco at gmail dot com if you’re interested.

Korean Translations of The Canterbury Tales: A Comparative Introduction (with Samples!)

by Yea Jung Park (Saint Louis University)

Compiler’s note: The annotated list shared here is the result of serious sleuthing through archives, libraries, and used bookstores, but it is by no means fully comprehensive. My interest in Korean translations of the Tales has two originary moments: one is when I located a rarely-discussed abridged translation of the Tales in the collected works of Choe Nam-seon, among his early 20th-century serializations of “world literature” in translation, and another is when I chanced on a previously undocumented translation of the Tales (“Fake Kim B” below) while shopping for a recommended translation (“True Kim” below). Both ‘discoveries,’ while interesting in themselves, also show that there may be more such translations not discussed here, including partial translations or individual tales. Kang and Choi’s study mentions a lost translation, Kwak Jang-hyun’s 1962 publication, a copy of which they (and I too) failed to locate. A children’s version of the Nun’s Priest’s Tale has been previously identified in the Global Chaucers database. I also note that post-separation North Korea may hold translation archives to which I did not have access. This list may well be updated in the future, and I would be more than happy to receive queries or tips at yeajung.park at slu.edu.

The “CHOE N.” text (CHOE Nam-seon 최남선, 1915-17). Prose; partial and abridged [7 tales]; indirectly translated. Abridged versions of the following: General Prologue; The Knight’s Tale; The Clerk’s Tale; The Franklin’s Tale; The Pardoner’s Tale; The Wife of Bath’s Tale; The Nun’s Priest’s Tale (misnamed as the Nun’s Tale); The Prioress’s Tale. Published as one of the major Western classics under the heading of “세계문학개관” [Introduction to World Literature] in the magazine “청춘” [Youth], this translation was made by Choe Nam-seon, a cultural activist, literary translator and critic who is now also considered the first Korean “modern” poet. Choe’s source, an abridged Japanese translation, was identified only recently in 2018 (see Kim reference). Although Choe worked indirectly, many of his rhetorical flourishes are original, using onomatopoeia and action words that fill out the Japanese base text in ways that create effects surprisingly similar to Chaucer’s vernacular. The opening, an abbreviated version the General Prologue, is reworked into a musical rhythm and vocabulary that echoes the rhetoric of traditional Korean genres such as pansori (musical story-telling genre) or early vernacular soseol (novel). The links to traditional Korean genres, immediately recognizable to today’s Korean readers as hailing from Korea’s premodern vernacularity, create an interesting temporal effect, marking the text as something with a deep linguistic and literary past without the artificial interventions of a consciously “antiquating” translation. Kang and Choi point out that communicating the “feel” of Middle English to modern Korean readers poses a particularly difficult challenge for translators (p. 233); translated artifacts from Korea’s own literary past provide one good way of meeting this challenge. Presenting students with the Choe text as Chaucer’s “first encounter” with the Korean reading public will prompt simultaneous critical attention to the historical particularities of Chaucer’s language and to Chaucer’s afterlife and global transmission history.

The “TRUE KIM” text (KIM Jin-man 김진만, 1963). Prose, versified in later reprints by adding line-breaks; full and unabridged; directly translated with reference to other translations. Kim Jin-man, one of Korea’s pioneering scholars of medieval English literature, published a full translation of the Canterbury Tales in 1963, the first to include all of the Tales and also the first known translation to work directly from Middle English. As mentioned above, Kim’s translation is generally considered the “best” Korean rendition of the Tales, and has been reprinted several times. Kim names F. N. Robinson’s Works of Geoffrey Chaucer (1957, 2nd ed.) as his source text, showing that he chose an up-to-date and authoritative version at the time of translation. At the same time, Kim cites other translations, including modern English renditions by R. M. Lumiansky and Nevill Coghill, a French translation (Les contes de Canterbury by L. Cazamian and others), and Junzaburō Nishiwaki’s Japanese translation (『カンタベリー物語』). The plethora of sources that fed into this translation highlight the fact that even the most academically acclaimed translations rarely constitute an isolated exchange between the original text and the genius of the translator; it is a cultural amalgam that becomes rich through, not despite, multiple vectors of influence. Kim’s stated multivalent translation practice and its eminent success supports both the usefulness of considering multiple translations of the same text together, and the inclusion of indirect translations such as Choe’s in the scope of such considerations.

The “FAKE KIM A (GIANT BOOKS)” text (1982). Prose; partial [General Prologue and 9 tales]; possibly indirectly translated. Discovered by Kang and Choi to be a separate translation from Kim’s authentic 1963 text, this translation circulating under Kim’s name was published in 1982 by Moongongsa as part of the “Giant Books” series of world’s classics and Korean must-reads. Although Kang and Choi condemn this translation as one filled with errors and mistranslations (pp. 238-42), some readers have noted that the Korean prose of this text is much more readable than more literal academic translations. The focus on readable prose, perhaps the hallmark of heavy editorial processing, marks this text as the forebear of later prose translations such as Song’s, visibly geared toward a general reading public rather than academics or students of English literature.

The “FAKE KIM B (DONGSEO)” text (1987). Prose; full and unabridged; possibly indirectly translated. The publishing house Dongseomunhwasa (Dongsuh Publishers) published an authentic reprint of Kim’s translation in 1975, but the 1987 reprint (acquired by accident while searching for the “True Kim” text) is yet another separate translation. The book faithfully reproduces Kim’s 1963 introduction, but surreptitiously adds Michio Masui’s Japanese translation from the 1970s to the list of translations credited. This addition hints that the “ghost translator” behind this text either incorporated Masui’s translation or used it wholesale as the mediating source. The text also shows influence from modern English translations not initially mentioned by Kim, such as a telling reference to the “scent of fruit” in the first line of the General Prologue (that can only be a residue of the rhyming efforts of J. U. Nicolson’s 1934 translation, which runs: “When April with his showers sweet with fruit / The drought of March has pierced unto the root”; my emphasis). This “questionable” version was a surprising crowd favorite among my sample readers, who remarked on its resonance with the overall tone of 1980s Korean literature and chose it as one of the most pleasurable reads along with the “True Kim” text. However questionable the provenance or presentation, a new full translation of the Tales is a muscular feat, and it is worth noting that the Korean market produced yet another one at this time.

The “SONG” text (SONG Byeong-seon 송병선, 2000). Prose; full and unabridged; directly translated with reference to other translations. Translated by Song Byeongseon, a scholar of Spanish literature, this text does not immediately earn the approval of English literature scholars such as Kang and Choi, but the fact that this translation managed to edge out both the iffy Kim reprints and the roughly contemporary Lee & Lee translation in the market is interesting. This translation is currently by far the easiest text to acquire, sold in multiple editions in bookstores, and thus sports the largest number of online reader reviews to date, though likely soon to be overtaken by the newer Choi Yejung translation discussed below. (For the numbers of reviews, I referred to the websites of two major Korean booksellers: Kyobobook and Aladin.) The translation was re-released in an abridged version geared toward young adults in 2007, with comic subheadings added to each tale (e.g., “If your story’s good, your meal is free” for the General Prologue). The translation claims to be based on both Middle English and Spanish; the translator names John H. Fisher’s Middle English edition, The Complete Poetry and Prose of Geoffrey Chaucer (1977), noting its basis on the Ellesmere manuscripts as the reason for his choice, along with a Spanish translation (Los cuentos de Canterbury, 1991). Song’s nod to the manuscript tradition of the Tales displays the kind of interest in faithfulness and rigor increasingly expected of Korean translations, but his use of a Spanish help-text marks this translation as a participant in the tradition of multiply-translated texts that still impacts the Korean literary market.

The “LEE & LEE” text (LEE Dongill & LEE Dongchoon 이동일 & 이동춘, 2007). Mix of prose and verse; full and unabridged; directly translated. This collaborative translation by English professors Lee Dongill and Lee Dongchoon was the first in the several decades following Kim’s original translation to claim special expertise in Middle English literature. Parts of the translation were published earlier in 2001 and 2004 from Hanwool Publishing. The translation takes as its source the 1987 edition of The Riverside Chaucer, edited by Larry D. Benson. The translation is deemed “highly accurate” by Kang and Choi (p. 255), but the focus on accuracy of sense rather than ease of reading or communication of ambience contrasts with the efforts made by Kim to recreate the tone of particular speakers. The translation generally follows the original’s choice of verse or prose, as witnessed in the earlier partial publications of this translation, but the consolidated full edition cited here sometimes renders verse tales into prose (perhaps due to length issues or editorial choice). The general consensus among readers is that this translation is not a standalone reading text, but a near-literal translation that Korean students of Chaucer can lean on when struggling with the original Middle English.

The “CHOI Y.” text (CHOI Yejung 최예정, 2022). Mix of prose and verse; full and unabridged in two volumes; directly translated. Translated by Choi Yejung, a Korean scholar of Middle English literature who has previously conducted comparative critiques of existing Chaucer translations herself, this very recent publication takes The Riverside Chaucer (3rd ed.) as its source. In choosing verse or prose form, the translation faithfully follows the original. It also has the interesting distinction of being the first translation to deploy the polite register (hasipsio-che) of Korean throughout the main narration, resulting in a more conversational yet elevated tone overall than the ‘plain’ formal style (haera-che) of earlier translations. (There is some variation in register and speech level to reflect particular speakers’ character and mood, an element that can be witnessed in other translations as well; comparison of register choices among translations will be an interesting comparative project specific to the Korean-language scene.) Erudite but also very readable, even a smidgen too casual at times, this translation seems likely to become the new standard edition for Korean readers, especially as part of the acclaimed world’s classics series from the publishing house Eulyoo.

The revised “LEE & LEE” text (LEE Dongill & LEE Dongchoon 이동일 & 이동춘, 2007). Mix of prose and verse; full and unabridged; directly translated. A revised version of the 2007 text, created for Minumsa’s long-running world literature series. In the translators’ preface for this edition, Lee and Lee state that revisions were made in the interest of clarity for each line and for the general context, and that they paid extra attention to the meaning of the original Middle English. They expressed regret that Chaucer’s verse rhythm is difficult to reproduce in Korean. Based on comparisons of select passages, revisions appear to be mainly cosmetic (word choice, punctuation). A fuller comparison will give an interesting vision into how the same set of translators can make different textual choices over time.

CHOOSE YOUR FAVORITE: I share some sample passages from each Korean translation drawn from the same sections of the General Prologue, with my English back-translations for non-Korean readers’ reference. (These back-translations will of course reflect my own understanding of the flavor of each translation; if you are a Korean-language reader and have a different back-translation to offer, please reach out!)

Comparing each translator’s treatment of Chaucer’s famous opening lines, particularly their seasonal language and vivid imagery, is a great way to begin appreciating the different stylistic choices and atmosphere-setting work of each translation. For detailed suggestions on using such passage comparisons in the classroom, see my article “Multiply-Translated Chaucer in the Korean Classroom,” which focuses on descriptions of the Wife of Bath in particular.

[Middle English]

What that Aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour.
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes… (General Prologue 1-7)

Bifil that in that seson on a day,
In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay,
Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage
To Caunterbury with ful devout corage,
At nyght was come into that hostelrye
Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye
Of sondry folk, by aventure yfalle
In felaweshipe, and pilgrimes were they alle,
That toward Caunterbury wolden ryde. (General Prologue 19-27)

[Choe N.] 때는 춘삼월春三月 망간望間 땅은 런던倫敦의 남부南部 싸우드웍(Southwork) [sic] 숫막 쇄금정鎖金亭이라. 캔터베리 치성致誠을 가랴고 적적寂寂한 복로 방房에 전전반측輾轉反側 홀로 누어 잠이 드냐말냐 하는 차에 꾸역꾸역 들어오는 이십구명二十九名의 행인行人이 다가튼 치성致誠길이나 제각금 다른 직분職分…

The time is spring, near the middle of the third month; the place is the tavern Swaegeumjeong [lit. ‘Padlock Inn,’ perhaps short for ‘Gold-decorated (Tabard) Inn’] in Southwark, a southern part of London. Meaning to go for devout prayers to Canterbury, as I lay alone and fidgeting in a quiet side room, on the brink of waking and sleep, come a-swarming in twenty-nine wayfarers, all on the same prayer-way but each from a different estate…

[True Kim] 사월달 달콤한 소나기가 삼월 가물을 속속들이 꿰뚫고 꽃을 피게 하는 습기로 온 세상 나뭇가지의 힘줄을 적시어 주면, 서녘바람 또한 잔나무 밭 애송이 가지의 끝과 끝 속에 감미로운 입김을 불어 넣어 준다.

When the month of April’s sweet showers pierce deep through the March drought, and when with the moisture that causes the flowers to bloom they drench the sinews of all the tree-branches of the world, the westerly breeze also offers to blow its mellow breath into the fine end-points of the baby branches in gardens of small trees.

이 계절 어느날, 나는 경건한 마음으로 캔터베리로의 순례를 작정하고, 싸작크의 타바드 여인숙에 투숙했다. 밤이 되자 그 여인숙에는 스물 하고 아홉 사람의 한 떼가 들었다. 우연히 동행이 된 형형색색의 이 사람들은 모두 순례자들이었고, 찾아가는 곳은 캔터베리였다.

One day in this season, I with a devout heart decided upon a pilgrimage to Canterbury, and found lodgings at Southwark’s Tabard Inn. When it became night, into that inn there entered a crowd of twenty people and nine. Having become companions by chance, these people of all shapes and colors were all pilgrims, and the place they were looking to head was Canterbury.

[Fake Kim A]

달콤한 4월의 비가 한차례 내리자 메말랐던 4월의 대지가 촉촉히 물기를 머금어 나무들은 생기를 되찾고 꽃봉오리도 벌어지기 시작했다. 숲 속의 나뭇가지와 무성하게 자란 관목은 서풍의 향긋한 입김으로 부드러운 작은 가지를 뻗는다.

After a round of sweet April showers, the parched earth of April [sic] held water moistly, so that trees regained their liveliness and flower buds also began to open. The branches in the woods and the lushly grown bushes stretch out soft small sprigs due to the fragrant breath of the west wind.

그와 같은 시절의 어느 날, 신앙심이 샘솟듯 솟아올라, 나는 캔터베리 사원을 향해 혼자서 길을 떠났다. 도중에 런던 변두리 사자크의 ‹타바드 여관›에 묵게 되었다. 우연히도 그 여관에 29 명의 일행이 묵고 있었다. 듣건대 그들은 신분도 직업도 달랐으나, 여행 중에 서로 만나 함께 다니게 되었다는 것이었다. 그들은 말을 타고서 캔터베리에 참례한다고 했다. 물론 나도 그들 가운데 끼어들었다.

One day in that same period, piety welling up like a fountain, I embarked alone on the road toward the Canterbury shrine. On the way, I happened to stay at the ‹Tabard Inn› in Southwark, in the peripheries of London. By chance, there was a group of 29 people staying there at that inn. As I heard tell, they were all different in status and profession, but met during their travels and joined to journey together. They were riding on horses to pay their respects at Canterbury. I of course edged my way in among them.

[Fake Kim B]

과일 향기 달콤한 4월의 봄비
3월의 마른 나무뿌리에 스며들어
수액이 흐르는 온세상 줄기들을 촉촉이
적셔 꽃봉오리 터뜨릴 즈음,
서녘바람 감미로운 입김을
숲과 나무 여린 새싹에 불어넣는다.

Sweet with the scent of fruit, the April spring rain
Seeps into the dry tree-roots of March.
And drenches moistly all the sap-filled branches of the world
And makes the flower-buds burst open—just about then,
The westerly breeze blows its mellow breath
Into the tender buds of woods and trees.

이 계절의 어느 날,
나는 경건한 마음으로 캔터베리를 순례하고자
서더크에 있는 타바드 여관에 묵고 있었다.
어둠이 깔릴 무렵 스물아홉 명의 여러 계층이 우연히 만나 여관으로 몰려 들어왔다.
그들 모두 참배를 하기 위해 캔터베리로 가고 있었다.

One day in this season,
In order to make pilgrimage to Canterbury with a devout heart, I
Was lodging at the Tabard Inn, which was in Southwark.
Just as dusk settled, twenty-nine people of various estates met by chance and crowded into the inn.
They were all heading to Canterbury to pay their respects.

[Song] 은은하게 내리는 4월의 비가 3월의 가물었던 땅 속으로 깊이 파들어갔다. 그 비는 꽃을 피우기에 모자람이 없을 정도로 대지의 모든 나뭇가지를 촉촉이 적셨고, 서풍은 감미로운 입김으로 숲과 들판의 연약한 싹에 생기를 불어넣었다.

The delicately falling rain of April delved deep into the parched earth of March. This rain moistly drenched all of the earth’s branches, enough to make flowers bloom, and the west wind with its mellow breath blew a lively spirit into the frail buds of the woods and meadows.

이런 시기의 어느 날이었다. 나는 경건한 마음으로 캔터베리로 순례하기로 마음먹고 런던교 남쪽의 서더크 구역에 있는 타바드 여관에 묵고 있었다. 그런데 어둠이 깔릴 무렵 스물아홉 명의 무리가 이곳에 도착했다. 그들은 각양 각색의 계층에 속해 있었는데, 우연히 만나서 무리를 이루어 캔터베리로 향하고 있었다.

It was one day in this period. I had decided to make a pilgrimage to Canterbury with a devout heart and was lodging in the Tabard Inn in the Southwark area, south of London Bridge. Then just as dusk settled, a crowd of twenty-nine arrived at this place. They belonged to a diverse array of estates, and were heading to Canterbury, having met by chance and formed a group.

[Lee & Lee; differences in the 2023 revision in brackets]

사월의 달콤한 소나기가 삼월의 가뭄을
뿌리까지 깊이 꿰뚫을 때,
그리고 꽃을 피게 하는 촉진적인 힘을 지닌
그 촉촉함[축축함]에 모든 줄기가 적셔질 때
그리고 서풍 역시 달콤한 입김으로
모든 숲과 들판에서 부드러운 새순에
생명력을 불어넣고 있을 때…

When the sweet shower of April pierces
The drought of March deeply unto the root,
And when all branches are drenched in that moistness [wetness].
That bears the promoting power that makes flowers bloom.
And when the west wind also with sweet breath
Into the soft new buds in all woods and fields
Blows living energy…

이 계절 어느 날,
캔터베리로 성지순례를 떠나기 위해
마음속 믿음 가득한 채 내가 머물고 있던
서더크에 있는 타바드 여관에,
저녁 무렵 다양한 계층의 스물아홉 사람이
우연히 일행이 되어.
단체로 [한 무리로] 그 여관을 찾았다.
그들 모두는 순례자로서
캔터베리를 향하여 가려는 의도를 지니고 있었다.

One day in this season,
Into the Tabard Inn in Southwark
Where I was lodging while faith was full in my heart
In order to depart on pilgrimage to Canterbury,
Around evening twenty-nine people of various estates
Having become companions by chance.
Visited the inn as a group [as one crowd].
They all were pilgrims
And bore the intent of going towards Canterbury.

[Choi Y.]

4월의 달콤한 소나기가
3월의 메마른 뿌리까지 뚫고 들어가
줄기마다 물기로 촉촉하게 적셔
그 힘으로 꽃이 피어나던 때였습니다.
서풍이 향긋한 숨결로
온 숲과 들판에 생명을 불어넣어
보드라운 새싹이 돋아나던 때였지요.

When the sweet showers of April
Pierced through to the dry roots of March
And drenched with moisture each stem
So that flowers would bloom through that power—this was the time.
It was the time when the west wind with sweet breath
Blew life into all the woods and meadows
So that soft new buds began to grow.

이런 계절의 어느 날,
저는 매우 경건한 마음으로
캔터베리로 순례길을 떠날 채비를 하고
서더크 지방의 타바드라는 숙소에 묵게 되었습니다.
밤이 되자 그곳으로
스물아홉 명은 족히 되는
각양각색의 사람들이 들어왔습니다.
그들은 모두 순례자로서
캔터베리로 가는 길에
우연히 만나 동행하게 된 사람들이었습니다.

One such day in this season,
I, with a very devout heart,
Prepared to go on pilgrimage to Canterbury
And happened to lodge at an inn called Tabard in the Southwark area.
When night fell, into the place came
Folks fully twenty-nine in number
Of a diverse array of types.
They all were pilgrims, And on the way to Canterbury
Had met by chance, and begun to travel together.

Texts and translations cited (in chronological order)

Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. In The Riverside Chaucer, 3rd ed., edited by Larry D. Benson. Oxford University Press, 2008. 23–328.

최남선 (CHOE Nam-Seon), trans. “캔터베리記” [Tales of Canterbury]. In 『육당 최남선 전집』 [Complete Works of Yukdang Choe Nam-seon], vol. 13. 역락 Youkrack, 2003. Originally serialized in the magazine 『청춘』[Youth] during years 1915–1917.

김진만 (KIM Jin-man) [True Kim], trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales]. 정음사 Jeongeumsa, 1963.

김진만 (KIM Jin-man) [Fake Kim A], trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales]. 문공사 Moongongsa, 1982.

김진만 (KIM Jin-man) [Fake Kim B], trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales]. 동서문화사 Dongsuh Publishers, 1987.

송병선 (SONG Byeongseon), trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales]. 책이있는마을 Book Village, 2000.

이동일 & 이동춘 (LEE Dongill & LEE Dongchoon), trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales]. 한국외국어대학교출판부 Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Press, 2007.

최예정 (CHOI Yejung), trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales], 2 vols. 을유문화사 Eulyoo Publishing, 2022.

이동일 & 이동춘 (LEE Dongill & LEE Dongchoon), trans. 『캔터베리 이야기』 [Canterbury Tales], 2 vols. 민음사 Minumsa Publishing, 2023.

References and related works

강지수 & 최예정 (KANG Ji-Soo & CHOI Yejung). “‘각양각색의 사람들이 각양각색으로 이야기했노라’—『캔터베리 이야기』 번역 검토” [“Diverse folk diversely they seyde”: Korean Translations of The Canterbury Tales]. 중세르네상스영문학 [Medieval and Early Modern English Studies] 12.1 (June 2004): 225-56. Korean text, English abstract available.

김준현 (KIM Jun-hyun). “『청춘』의 ‘세계문학개관’ 저본에 대한 검토 (1)—최남선과 마쓰우라 마사야스(松浦政泰)” [Review on the Original Text of “World Literature Overview” in Cheongchoon (Youth)—Choi Nam-seon and Matsura Masayasu]. 사이間SAI 24 (2018): 9–41. The Tales are discussed on pp. 30-34. Korean text, English abstract available.

영미문학연구회 번역평가사업단 (Assessment of Translations of Major British and American Writers Project). “캔터베리 이야기” [The Canterbury Tales]. 『영미명작, 좋은 번역을 찾아서』 [British and American Literature: In Search of Good Translations]. Changbi, 2005. 245-265. Korean.

이동일 (LEE Dongill). “『캔터베리이야기』 한국어 번역의 문제점 고찰” [A Consideration of Problems in Korean Translations of The Canterbury Tales]. 영미연구 [Journal of British & American Studies] 36 (2016): 27–52. Korean text, English abstract available.

PARK, Yea Jung. “Multiply-Translated Chaucer in the Korean Classroom.” Literature Compass 21.1-3 (2024). http://doi.org/10.1111/lic3.12735. English.

2026 New Chaucer Society Congress at University of Freiburg: Call for paper proposals now available

by Candace Barrington

The program committee co-chairs for the 2026 NCS Congress, Mary Flannery and Ryan Perry, have released the call for paper proposals. You will find both the full cfp and the guidelines for submission at the New Chaucer Society website.

Please keep in mind the two-step submission process. Both steps are due 27 April 2025.

Global Chaucerians will find a wealth of sessions to consider. Many explicitly invite a global perspective, including (but certainly not limited to)

  • 5. Medieval Ecologies out of Place
  • 6. Queer Medieval Ecologies
  • 7. Perspectives on Premodern Ecologies
  • 8. Middle English Multilingualism Beyond French and Latin
  • 9. Multilingual Approaches to Pilgrimage and Crusade Narratives
  • 10. Languages Beyond Borders: Multilingual Contact Zones
  • 11. Multilingualism on the Road
  • 12. Perspectives on Global Medieval Travel Writing
  • 13. Multilingual Middle English
  • 14. Medievalists Moving Together: Social Movements and New Solidarities
  • 15. Involuntary Mobility: Displacement, Migration, Language, Refuge
  • 26. Global Medievalisms
  • 27. Medievalism and Contemporary Retellings
  • 30. Reconstructing the Middle Ages: Architectural Medievalism
  • 31. Understanding the Coloniser/Re-Imagining the Medieval
  • 34. Medieval Intersectionality
  • 43. Global Perspectives on the Study of Chaucer
  • 71. Translanguaging
  • 73. New Medieval Literatures Presents: Chaucer and the Unexpected…
  • 75. Comparative Work in Medieval English and German

Others seem ripe for a global perspective:

  • 17. The Social Lives of Medieval Devotional Texts
  • 22. Living Libraries, Living Laboratories: Medieval Books and Archives and/as Classrooms
  • 25. Analog Medievalisms
  • 28. Ageless Medievalisms
  • 29. Institutions
  • 32. Transcending Precarity Through Solidarity
  • 38. Generosity: Now
  • 44. Translation Urbis / Cities in Translation
  • 53. Lyric Threats
  • 78. Research Expo
  • 79. Open Paper Thread

And, of course, all the other sessions welcome your proposals!

So, please enjoy reading the vibrant call for proposals.

If you have specific questions about the submission process or general questions about the congress, please contact me. I’m happy to point you to someone with the answers.

We’re excited to learn how the sessions and their descriptions stimulate new ideas. Most of all, we’re thrilled that we’ll be able to see many of you in Freiburg.

Nazmi Ağıl’s Canterbury Hikâyelieri: 30 years and 9 editions later

by Candace Barrington

The first translator I interviewed for Global Chaucers was Nazmi Ağıl, Chaucer’s Turkish translator, in April 2013. Jonathan Hsy and I had launched our project only a few months earlier, and we were still trying to determine who was out there, what they were doing, and how we would approach them.

Early in developing Global Chaucers, I had downloaded the New Chaucer Society membership list and contacted anyone with an affiliation outside the Anglophone academic sphere. I asked for information about translations, adaptations, as well as courses that included Chaucer in their reading lists. Among the many who responded, we heard from a colleague in Turkey who pointed us to Nazmi and his translation, Canterbury Hikâkyelieri.

As it happened, I was scheduled to be in Istanbul for the opening of a close friend’s art exhibit. To make the most of the opportunity, I contacted Nazmi. We met for coffee at Taksim Meydanı, the large public square where, a month later, the Gezi protests were met with violence. But that day, the square was bustling and normal. And inside the coffee shop, Nazmi taught me how to ask translators questions. Later that week, we traveled up the Bosphorus, almost to the Black Sea, in order to visit Nazmi’s classes at Koç University and to meet his students and colleagues. In many ways, meeting Nazmi marks a shift in my understanding of the Global Chaucers project.

In subsequent years, we’ve met again in Istanbul and in Reykjavík (for NCS 2014 and the first iteration of the Polyglot Miller’s Tale!). We’ve even published together in a 2018 special issue of Literature Compass: Chaucer’s Global Compaignye.

Our most recent joint appearance has been in Medievalism and Reception, an essay collection edited by Ellie Crookes and Ika Willis. Published earlier this fall by D.S.Brewer in their Medievalism series, the volume closes with Nazmi’s absolutely gorgeous “Hosting Chaucer’s Pilgrims in Turkish.” If you want to read about translating Chaucer from one of his best translators, get your hands on Nazmi’s essay.

And if you’re curious about role of translators in ensuring Chaucer’s readership, note this: Canterbury Hikâyelieri is in its 9th edition!

2026 New Chaucer Society Congress: Call for Sessions

Germany’s Black Forest is Calling

by Candace Barrington

The Program Committee for the 24th Biennial Congress of the New Chaucer Society–to be held in Freiburg, Germany, 27-30 July 2026–has released its Call for Sessions.

The Call includes guidelines for submitting panel proposals to eight thread options:

  • Comparative Environmentalisms
  • Multilingualism and Mobility
  • The Social Lives of Medieval Books
  • Ubiquitous Medievalism
  • Precarity
  • Tales in Translation
  • Thinking with/through Ethics/Aesthetics
  • Open Topics

You will find complete descriptions of the threads as well as the submission process here.

The deadline for submitting a session proposal is 17 January 2025.

The ensuing Call for Papers will appear soon thereafter.

Kuddos to the program committee members Alastair Bennett, Gina M. Hurley, Koichi Kano, Julia R. Mattison, and Eva von Contzen (ex officio), led by committee co-chairs Mary Flannery and Ryan D. Perry.

Chaucer in Iran

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

CFP: Chaucer in the Age of Medievalism: In sondry ages and sundry londes

13-14 November 2025. University of Lorraine, Nancy

Following the Chaucer: Here and Now exhibition (2023-2024) at the Bodleian Library, this conference–sponsored by the Modernités Médiévales association and the New Chaucer Society–aims to continue the reflection on the medievalist dimension of Geoffrey Chaucer’s work and its persistent influence in contemporary culture.

Far from being confined to his era, Geoffrey Chaucer’s work continues to resonate through the ages, inspiring a multitude of post-medieval representations. The poet himself remains a regularly invoked figure, sometimes even without direct connection to his texts, suggesting an autonomous legacy of Chaucer both as a man and an artist. Whether through the prism of cinema, music, theater, television, poetry, or other artistic forms, the poet remains an endless source of inspiration and reinterpretation. This conference invites us to question how adaptations and reinterpretations of Chaucer and/or his work by artists from diverse cultural backgrounds enrich our understanding of his legacy. His various incarnations over the centuries raise fascinating issues regarding intercultural dialogue, the politics of memory, and the evolution of popular culture.

Proposals may particularly focus on one of the following axes, without necessarily being limited to them.

Axis 1: Medievalist Echoes of Chaucer’s Work
A first axis of study will examine how Chaucer’s work is reinterpreted and adapted in contemporary culture through various artistic forms. What specific Chaucerian motifs and themes resonate in the modern context, and what are the reasons for this resonance? This exploration will study how artists adapt his work while preserving medieval elements and question the stakes of selecting and modernizing these elements. The influence of William Morris on the reception and representation of Chaucer will receive special attention. By publishing The Canterbury Tales in his Kelmscott Chaucer and bringing to life a romantic vision of the Middle Ages through works such as The Earthly Paradise, Morris profoundly
shaped the perception of Chaucer from the 19th century onwards. It will be relevant to examine how Morris, like others, reshaped Chaucer’s image to serve his own aesthetic and ideological ideals, in order to deepen the repercussions of this reinterpretation on the contemporary reception of Chaucer’s work.
We also invite study of the theatrical and poetic performances of Chaucer’s work and their contribution to renewing our understanding of the original text. The performance by poet Jean ‘Binta’ Breeze of “The Wife of Bath at Brixton Market” (2009) offers an interesting example of interaction between Chaucer and an engaged audience. How do adaptations of Chaucer in public or alternative spaces broaden the accessibility and scope of his work? Similarly, it would be pertinent to reflect on how contemporary projects such as Patience Agbabi’s Refugee Tales (2016) use Chaucer’s heritage to address issues of memory, identity, and inclusion. These initiatives contribute to reevaluating and revitalizing the importance of Chaucer’s work in the contemporary cultural landscape.

Axis 2: Chaucer Himself, Incarnations, and Appropriation
Beyond the poems that have endured, the figure of Geoffrey Chaucer is sometimes summoned in various works and rewritings, bringing the medieval poet back to life. In Brian Helgeland’s film A Knight’s Tale (2001), which takes its title from one of Chaucer’s works, the poet is one of the main characters. Affected by a gambling problem, debts, and a tendency to put his pen at the service of the highest bidder, this protagonist seems far from the traditional representation of authors. However, his poetic talent and, above all, his oratorical skill increasingly find a place in the plot, contributing to making the character an adjunct to the hero, but also and above all a figure of a rebellious demagogue. What implications does this medievalist and trivial interpretation of Chaucer have on the poet’s posterity and his reception by the general public? While knowledge of the specifics of Chaucer’s life is not necessary to understand or appreciate Helgeland’s work, this biographical input nonetheless enriches readings of the film. What are the stakes, then, of articulating popular reception and scholarly knowledge in the representation of Chaucer’s figure? This same association of the popular and the scholarly is precisely what guides the integration of the poet into Thierry la Fronde in 1965 (season 3, episode 10), recalling the series’ pedagogical and entertaining ambition, mixing fictional characters with easily identifiable historical figures. Each time, Chaucer is clearly named, and often subtle references to his work or biography, apparently aimed at a knowledgeable audience, pepper his staging. It is from this perspective that he also appears as a ghost in 2009 in The Simpsons series (season 20, episode 18), in reference to his burial in the Poets’ Corner of Westminster Abbey. What do these uses of the poet’s image in popular culture say about his contemporary reception? Who are these nods aimed at, and what do they bring to the works concerned?

Communication proposals, approximately 2000 characters in length, should be sent by February 3rd, 2025, jointly to Justine Breton (justine.breton@univ-lorraine.fr) and Jonathan Fruoco (jonathan.fruoco@gmail.com).

Scientific Committee
Candace Barrington (Central Connecticut State University)
Justine Breton (SAMA, Université de Lorraine)
Vincent Ferré (CERC, Université Sorbonne-Nouvelle)
Jonathan Fruoco (CREA, Université Paris-Nanterre)
Patrick Moran (University of British Columbia, Canada)
Karin Ueltschi-Courchinoux (CRIMEL, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne)

Fanfiction in Academia: The Wife of Bath

by Sydney Lauer and Georgine Revilloza

Fig. 1. Fan illustration depicting “The Wife of Bath.” Digital illustration by Caitlyn Chellew, 2022, 
https://www.tumblr.com/isumicurtis/
702833355612372992/a-couple-of-
select-illustrations-depicting-the .

When two of my CCSU graduate students expressed enthusiasm for fanfiction, I asked if they would provide us an inventory and brief analysis of fanfiction based on Chaucer’s character, The Wife of Bath. They graciously complied and collaborated on this useful introduction. They also received permission to reproduce the fanart by Caitlyn Chellew, a former student of Susan Yager (Professor Emerita, Iowa State University).

Please see this introduction as a useful adjunct to Anna Wilson’s groundbreaking work on fanfiction and premodern literatures. There’s so much yet to be explored. –Candace Barrington

Using the Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale to unveil the appeal of fanfiction in academic and social conversation.

Part of an intertextual network, fanfiction is a work of fiction written by fans for other fans. These works pull from a source text or celebrity as a point of departure and are most commonly—but not always—distributed within spaces populated with members who share similar interests in fandoms, celebrities, or other fannish interests. These fans then metamorphose the source material to what most appeals to them, either deviating from or staying true to the source through such aspects as form and time period. Fanfiction and its variety add to academia, enhancing how we interpret source material and contributing to how readers, writers, and text intersect.

Chaucer, a canonical author, often engaged with widely circulated narratives, pulling what interested him and transforming them into The Canterbury Tales. Considered normal and admirable, this practice was employed by other notable writers such as Shakespeare, Milton, and more recently NYT bestselling authors Stephanie Meyer and Ali Hazelwood. Today, this would be considered fanfiction.      

In this pair of essays, Georgine explores The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale (WBPT) fanfiction currently in circulation, reporting on the ways WBPT can help us understand word count, length, and the variants of English used in fan-made works. Then, Sydney explores why fanfiction appeals to writers and readers alike. 

The Wife of Bath’s fanfiction: a fourteen-year retrospective of Archive of Our Own and FanFiction.Net

I must first establish my research’s cut-off date: December 12, 2022. I selected this date because it is when habireboo posted “Four weddings and a funeral,” the last WBPT fanfiction when I began writing this article. Coincidentally, Girlfrommarz published “Tonight with Chaucer the Wife of Bath,” the first WBPT fanfiction, on December 12, 2008, marking exactly fourteen years between the two works’ publication dates.

My research draws on works published on Archive of Our Own (AO3) and FanFiction.Net (FFN), leaving out other fanfiction-hosting sites. Readers can access works on AO3 and FFN without an account and locate WBPT fanfiction by using The Canterbury Tales sections on both sites. In contrast to these platforms, Wattpad, another popular fanfiction-hosting site, limits search results and thus access to stories from non-users. Despite my searching the tags “thewifeofbath” and “the wife of bath,” works irrelevant to WBPT flood Wattpad’s search results. These search issues spurred me to exclude Wattpad from my research data and instead hone in on more accessible archives.

In the Tales sections found in AO3 and FFN, I identified seventeen works of WBPT fanfiction by sixteen authors. Only one user, a_t_rain, authored two stories. I account for crossovers, crossposted works, tagged works, and untagged works.[1] AO3 hosts twelve stories and FFN houses three. Because two stories are available on both sites, the total number of distinct stories is fifteen. For the purpose of demonstrating the fanfiction that currently lives online, I do not include deleted works even with access to tools such as the Wayback Machine.[2]

Certain fanfiction categories dominate others. The thirteen non-crossovers, for example, eclipse the mere four crossovers in number, the crossovers including but not limited to the epic Beowulf and the British sci-fi show Torchwood. This example indicates a trend of WBPT fanfiction authors refraining from intersecting fandoms.

The pattern partially stems from students. Per either fanfiction summaries or authors’ notes, six authors have explicitly stated their works to originate as school or university assignments, suggesting a degree of inflexibility in deviating from instructor guidelines and including other fandoms. I will refer to these as “academic fanfiction.” The other ten authors do not disclose their work as homework, and I will refer to them as “non-academic fanfiction.” Two of these writers have even written WBPT stories for Yuletide, an annual fanfiction exchange dedicated to niche fandoms.[3] Together, the silence regarding whether the fanfiction is homework and the participation in a fandom exchange suggest these ten authors have written out of their own volition. Therefore, most writers intend their work as fanfiction rather than doubling as assignments.

While none of these seventeen works surpass the Tales‘s length, WBPT fanfiction’s average word count, excluding outliers across this and other calculations, stands at 3,399 words — the length of a typical short story. Fanfiction fitted for assignments lower the average. Again likely restricted by homework instructions, six academic fanfictions average to 823 words, similar to flash fiction’s word count. The average of the eleven non-academic works significantly outnumbers academic’s average, coming to 4,863 words per fanfiction.

All WBPT fanfiction uses English, which is perhaps due to the Tales‘s original language, yet one work deviates from the norm by interspersing words from Romanized Sanskrit. In “Mrs. Badrinath on the Kailash Yatra,” Cherepashka sprinkles in Sanskrit terminology such as “yatra” (meaning “journey” or “pilgrimage”) and “shilabalika” (referring to big-breasted, female sculptures reoccurring in some Indian temple architecture).[4] Cherepashka’s use of Sanskrit enhances the fanfiction’s Himalayan setting as the Wife embarks on what the author tags as a “Hindu Pilgrimage.”[5] Despite Chaucer being predominantly read in English, WBPT fanfiction shows how his intelligence can thrive in other languages.

Every author writes in Present Day English (PDE), but Middle English (ME) appears on occasion. Parodying the American TV crime drama Murder, She Wrote, sistermagpie’s “Mordre, She Wroot” plays with ME primarily in the title. ME lacks a dominant presence in sistermagpie’s story, yet dialogue such as “God clepeth folk to him in sondry ways” signals ME’s usage.[6] “The Seconde Tale of the Wyf of Bathe” author Beth H (bethbethbeth) also lightly smatters in ME, penning the word “certes” in between paragraphs bursting with PDE.[7] ME’s presence, however small, links WBPT and its fanfiction together.

Form also varies. Nine authors, such as CalumcGee and sistermagpie, use prose, cementing this style as most common in WBPT fanfiction. In comparison, only three authors, such as Girlfrommarz, favor playscript, ranking this form the least popular.

Four writers gravitate towards poetry, though the type of poetry differs. In “One Horny Poet,” TheClergy writes in limericks, a form known for its bawdy humor, as shown in the following example:

Chaucer is one horny poet

Full of seed and eager to grow it

The Wife of Bath’s hips

The Parson’s sweet lips

Both excellent places to sow it[8]

In contrast to TheClergy, “The Wife of Bath’s Second Tale” author mizelisa attempts to emulate Chaucer when writing in non-metered rhyming couplets, though her lines steer away from iambic pentameter: “And so through the pilgrims who did laugh / Came the voice of the good Wife of Bath.”[9] Both works make a nod to Chaucer’s style by presenting in poetic form. Nonetheless, his use of verse does not restrict authors from exploring prose and play scripts when writing fanfiction.

Variety blooms from WBPT fanfiction archived in AO3 and FFN. Across fourteen years and seventeen works, the data demonstrates writers’ preferences: non-crossover, prose works written in PDE, averaging around 3,000 words. Still, the same data illuminates how authors differ in crossovers, word count, language, English variants, form, and, for example, whether the text is intended as homework or not. Fanfiction thus paves many paths for authors to explore in their creative pilgrimage. The data exposes the vacuum of fanfiction oriented to replicate Chaucer’s style, challenging anyone to fill in that gap or fight against the grain by transforming WBPT into a work almost completely their own.

So why fanfiction? The academic, social, and literary appeal of fanfiction in the realm of academia and beyond

While we’ve discovered what’s out there in terms of WBPT fanfiction, we have yet to explore why reading or writing fanfiction has become an increasingly popular way to engage with texts. Surrounded by negative stigma and deemed “not real literature,” fanfiction has not only grown in popularity but the bad reputation surrounding it has been slowly dissolving over the last several years. Even New York Times bestselling authors, such as Stephanie Meyer (Twilight), Cassandra Clare (Mortal Instruments), and Ali Hazelwood (The Love Hypothesis) have stated their most popular novels or franchises began as fanfiction. So why do people decide to read or write fanfiction? What does fanfiction bring to the table, and what is its role in academic study?

The process of consuming fanfiction, either by reading or writing, offers these possible satisfactions: It provides closure to fans wanting more after they reach the conclusion of a text or the frustrating cliffhanger of an unfinished series. Writers can complete cliffhangers based on their interpretations of the original text, using their knowledge of the canon world—what fans generally agree on what happens in the source text—to build on the plot and characters already set in place by the original creator.[10] Fanfiction can also comfort readers looking for an alternate ending to a favorite TV show, movie, or novel. For example, what if the Wife of Bath never left on the pilgrimage to Canterbury? What would happen if she remained married to her first, second, third, or even fourth husband rather than being married a fifth (and potentially sixth) time? Fanfiction also provides writers and readers with a means to explore the endless possibilities set in place in the text’s canon world and make it their own. While fanfiction has not always been popular in academic spaces due to its status as “low-culture,” it has allowed both readers and writers to further explore the complexities and nuances of their favorite characters or worlds. Alisoun’s story does not need to remain in the confines of WBPT but can be explored beyond her pilgrimage to Canterbury, as explored in fics such as “The Wife of Bath’s Second Tale ” written by mizelisa on Archive of Our Own. 

The addition of AUs, or Alternate Universes, perpetuates the complexity of what is considered canon. AUs is a descriptor used to characterize fanworks that change or alter one or more elements of the original work’s canon.[11] Popular AUs often take popular characters and thrust them into different situations, spanning from mundane coffeeshop AUs or complex alternate-ending AUs that throw the canon out the window. Members of fandoms often use AUs to explore characters in different contexts, or perhaps even merge them with different fandoms (called a crossover). One previously mentioned, such as “Mordre, She Wroot,” places Alisoun in a world reminiscent of the TV series Murder, She Wrote, where she solves the murder of one of the pilgrims. AUs can take characters out of the contexts of their worlds, plots, or even their own sense of self and transplant them into entirely new situations. Alisoun’s character can therefore be further explored in additional contexts outside of her brief story in The Canterbury Tales. These AUs add another layer of understanding to the source material, as they take elements of canon out of context and provide both fanfiction readers and writers the opportunity to investigate the nuances of the original text not previously explored.

Fanfiction is also not just a “for-fun” hobby that fans take up in their free time but hosts a variety of academic-based benefits for both reading and writing. Jacqueline Risch in “Not Just Lustful Literature: Self-Liberation through Fanfiction” argues that writing fanfiction still facilitates the necessary planning, techniques, and skills within the writing process that can be used in academic writing. While fanfiction is mostly creative writing, writers can play with style, organization, and audiences. As Georgine Revilloza details in her section, fanfiction can be academic assignments in addition to non-school-related projects.

Reading fanfiction, while it is not taken as seriously as traditionally published original works, is still reading. The greatest way for students to develop their reading skills is to read regularly. Students can discover what works in well-written fanfiction, such as plots, tropes, and other literary techniques also found in traditionally published original works read in literature classes. By reading fanfiction, students can draw connections, make predictions, and even explore themes, symbols, and motifs. They can later apply these skills to academic reading. Because fanfiction can function as “training wheels” for readers and writers, it is a fluid network of creative work that offers immediate gratification through the sharing of writing with others.[12]

While the source texts or real-life intrigue can vary, most people flock to fanfiction for similar reasons, such as providing closure to cliffhangers or deep-diving into the complexities of characters not otherwise explored in the source material. Reading a novel, a whole book series, or even a movie or TV show franchise only shows us a fraction of the world the writers of these texts have created. Fanfiction writers aim to expand upon the ideas, characters, or world-building within the canon universe. Using the source text as a “base,” or “jumping-off point,” writers of fanfiction have the opportunity to question essentializing narratives and embrace the distortion of the canon universe–the original plot and worldbuilding set in place by the source text’s author–or even take them out of context. Some just want to see their favorite characters live a happy ending; others are perfectly content writing a 200,000-word slow burn in which every favorite character in a certain fandom never finds happiness ever again.[13]

Whether it is taken seriously or not, fanfiction has a lot to add to the table of academia and literature as a whole. Acting as a way for people to continuously engage with texts they love, the conversation never has to end.

[1] Also known as xover and cross-universe, a crossover is fanfiction that combines elements of two or more texts and fuses them into a singular work. “Crossover,” Fanlore, Organization of Transformative Works, last modified August 16, 2024, https://fanlore.org/wiki/Crossover.

[2]  “Canterbury Tales – Geoffrey Chaucer,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, January 22, 2014, https://web.archive.org/web/20161129041949/http://archiveofourown.org/tags/Canterbury%20Tales%20-%20Geoffrey%20Chaucer/works. When researching deleted works, I discovered DaemonMeg’s “Scavenging for Dreams.” This fanfiction is shown in an AO3 Tales section snapshot from the Wayback Machine. This work has since been removed from AO3 at the time of writing this article. DaemonMeg did not tag “Scavenging for Dreams” with WBPT, but other untagged works have contained related content. Because “Scavenging for Dreams” itself is not archived, I cannot reject the possibility that this work would fall under WBPT fanfiction.

[3] Morbane et. al., “Yuletide,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, December 17, 2009, https://archiveofourown.org/collections/yuletide.

[4] Cherepashka, “Mrs. Badrinath on the Kailash Yatra,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, September 25, 2018. https://archiveofourown.org/works/16059587

[5] See note 4 above.

[6] sistermagpie, “Mordre, She Wroot,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, December 18, 2017, https://archiveofourown.org/works/13058556.

[7] Beth H (bethbethbeth), “The Seconde Tale of the Wyf of Bathe,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, December 25, 2008, https://archiveofourown.org/works/90161.

[8] TheClergy, “One Horny Poet,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, November 20, 2019, https://archiveofourown.org/works/21501718.

[9] mizelisa, “The Wife of Bath’s Second Tale,” Archive of Our Own, Organization of Transformative Works, October 10, 2019, https://archiveofourown.org/works/21162041.

[10] Canon is a source, or sources, considered authoritative by the fannish community. In other words, canon is what fans agree “actually” happened in a film, television show, novel, comic book, or concert tour. Specific sources considered canon may vary even within a specific fandom. “Canon,” Fanlore, Organization of Transformative Works, March 7, 2024, https://fanlore.org/wiki/Canon.

[11] Samutina, Natalia, “Fan Fiction as World-Building: Transformative Reception in Crossover Writing,” Continuum 30, no, 4 (2016): 433.

[12] Risch, Jacqueline, “Not Just Lustful Literature: Self-Liberation through Fanfiction,” Rhetorikos (blog), Accessed March 29, 2024, https://rhetorikos.blog.fordham.edu/?p=1712.

[13]A fandom is a group of fans, participating in fan activities and interacting in some way, whether through discussions or creative works…Fans of a fandom may or may not group together into fan communities, and this largely depends on how the fan understands the term itself. “Fandom,” Fanlore, Organization of Transformative Works, June 24, 2024, https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fandom.

Bibliography

Beth H (bethbethbeth). “The Seconde Tale of the Wyf of Bathe.” Archive of Our Own.
Organization of Transformative Works. December 25, 2008.
https://archiveofourown.org/works/90161.

“Canon,” Fanlore. Organization of Transformative Works. March 7, 2024.
https://fanlore.org/wiki/Canon.

“Canterbury Tales – Geoffrey Chaucer.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative Works. January 22, 2014. https://web.archive.org/web/20161129041949/http://archiveofourown.org/tags/Canterbury%20Tales%20-%20Geoffrey%20Chaucer/works

Cherepashka. “Mrs. Badrinath on the Kailash Yatra.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative Works. September 25, 2018. https://archiveofourown.org/works/16059587.

“Crossover.” Fanlore. Organization of Transformative Works. Last modified August 16, 2024. https://fanlore.org/wiki/Crossover.

“Fandom,” Fanlore. Organization of Transformative Works. June 24, 2024. https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fandom.

mizelisa. “The Wife of Bath’s Second Tale.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative Works. October 10, 2019. https://archiveofourown.org/works/21162041.

Morbane et. al. “Yuletide.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative Works. December 17, 2009. https://archiveofourown.org/collections/yuletide.

Ray, Megan. “Why We Should Be Fans of Fan Fiction.” The New York Times. June 26. 2023. sec. The Learning Network. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/26/learning/why-we-should-be-fans-of-fan-fiction.html.

Risch, Jacqueline. “Not Just Lustful Literature: Self-Liberation through Fanfiction.” Rhetorikos (blog). Accessed March 29, 2024. https://rhetorikos.blog.fordham.edu/?p=1712.

Samutina, Natalia. “Emotional Landscapes of Reading: Fan Fiction in the Context of Contemporary Reading Practices.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 20, no. 3 (May 1, 2017): 253–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877916628238.

———. “Fan Fiction as World-Building: Transformative Reception in Crossover Writing.” Continuum 30. no. 4 (2016): 433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877916628238.

sistermagpie. “Mordre, She Wroot.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative
Works. December 18, 2017. https://archiveofourown.org/works/13058556.

TheClergy. “One Horny Poet.” Archive of Our Own. Organization of Transformative Works. November 20, 2019. https://archiveofourown.org/works/21501718