Summary Of The Swerve Greenblatt

Laura Saetviet Miles, a Medieval literature teacher at the University of Bergen, points out the historical inaccuracy of Greenblatt’s The Swerve. Miles argues that Greenblatt represents the past as what he wanted it to be, not what evidence proves it to be. Though Miles admits that she fell in love with the writing style and easy-to-follow prose when she first sat down in a Norway library, after thinking about the book from her professional perspective she realized that the book was dangerous. Greenblatt was creating an image that was not only inaccurate but shows a model of history that persists to move toward modernity which diminishes the crimes and injustices it carries with it. However, it is not all Greenblatt’s fault as his misrepresentation of the history of brilliant literature and culture was awarded by multiple people who overlooked his errors.

Miles points out that Greenblatt allows his inner Poggio to take over him as the “anti-religious, egotistical humanist” describes his hatred toward the Middle Ages and monks whom he calls “educated slaves.” His extreme harshness comes from his personal anecdote comparing his mother’s death to medieval people where both carried no joy; the collision of the personal and historical narratives resulted in the fictional book. Miles criticizes The Swerve because as a professor, she knows it is dangerous for readers who know no better than to believe that they read and therefore they learn false information about history. She says that if she assigned The Swerve to her students, they would immediately see the errors and differences in his argument than the medieval works she usually assigns them. Since not all people are literary students, Miles fears that less knowledgeable scholars will base their wisdom off of Greenblatt’s personal desire for what the past should be