Impossible Recovery: Julian of Norwich and the Phenomenology of Well-Being

In her first monograph, Lucas offers a powerful and deeply nuanced reading of one of the most complex of Middle English texts: Julian of Norwich’s Revelations of Divine Love. Over the course of six core chapters, Lucas offers a stunning set of engagements with this medieval text and the work of the German phenomenologist Martin Heidegger. The central premise focuses on conceptions (both historical and contemporary) of recovery and illness—though the wider implications of the book are far broader and more interdisciplinary than that and move confidently into the emerging field of environmental/ecological humanities. The book will be of interest to all graduate students in the field of medieval studies and to experts within the related fields of medieval religious texts and medical humanities.It begins with an expansive introduction that situates Lucas’s key texts, terms, frameworks, and methodologies with aplomb. The most innovative connections drawn are between the concepts of illness and revelation (2) and that of “recovery” itself. This allows Lucas to map health onto historiography in a fresh and exciting manner, one that provides further grounding for her use of the term “paramodern” (19–24). All these conceptual issues are firmly anchored in Julian’s text, which Lucas reads with care and precision. This allows her to make connections between Heidegger and Julian in a manner that echoes medieval hermeneutics itself. Her example of “dwelling” is key to this, though the Middle English word from which dwell comeshas a far wider range than Lucas permits and possesses an antonymic sense and/or function: Dwellen is beguiling, complex, and can denote the sense of return and of vagrancy, but also deception and menace. This is a quibble, as such meanings are not her primary concern, but it does speak to the allusive and gestural qualities of Julian’s prose.The ambit of the book expands in chapter 1. Here, Lucas adds depth to the book by exploring the concepts of seeking, abiding, and the “homely.” Through deft close analysis, she connects health with recovery and with time. Particular emphasis is given to the use of grammar and the present tense in Julian’s deployment of present participle forms. The idea of “home”—or more accurately the idea of going home—thus becomes for Lucas synonymous with health itself. This then leads to a prolonged engagement with Heidegger, language, and metaphor. It is an impressive display of theory and shows very careful thinking. It would have been enhanced by more extended and frequent citation of the original German passages. There are some contemporary theoretical omissions, most likely due to the punishing word limits imposed on first monographs by presses these days, but the issue of Heidegger and metaphor (39) begs for at least a mention of Hans Vailinger’s philosophy of “als ob” (as if) as a way of productively extending the reach of these concepts. Similarly, more attention on affectivity and homeostasis, especially in regard to rhythm and poetic language, would have further enriched this excellent chapter (49).The connection between Julian’s illness and revelatory experience takes center stage in the next chapter, as Lucas makes the fascinating connection between ars moriendi and ars medicina (67). In Lucas’s reading, death and medicine become a sort of craftwork, one characterized by subtle and shifting complexity. The main focus rests on the connection between dying and demise: It acts as a means of approaching the dual first- and third-person narrative nature of Julian’s prose. The result, for Lucas, is the connection between the personal and experiential: In essence, the text offers a series of coexperiential hermeneutic possibilities designed to both inform and form the reader (85–86). The close readings here are interesting and make much of the temporal ambiguities and play between time and event. Such careful work allows those aspects, or temporal-experiential junctures, to be more clearly foregrounded. No small feat, given the complexity of Julian’s prose.The third chapter looks to revelation and suffering, and thus is concerned with the role of fear and its connection to health. While I would quibble with the terms used—apprehension would surely be the best term to explore the composite of knowing and fearing—the work offered here on dread is robust and of the highest quality. Once again, dread and dwell have a more complex connection than perhaps Lucas permits (111), and would perhaps merit a deeper look at Julian’s concept of hospitality (137), but this is not the chief contribution of the chapter. The work on prudence (118) and especially “besy” as an affective term (125) is wonderfully provocative. Here, business becomes a sort of epistemological and interpretive problem that combines anxiety with spiritual distraction and despondency.The monograph reaches new levels of complexity in the fourth chapter. Lucas looks here at a range of issues in Julian and other texts. The main focus is on “kynde” as a form of authenticity, via mention of Piers Plowman. While the work on experience and wonder is good, it is the painstaking work on Julian’s “soule” as food and soul that is most impressive. Throughout this chapter, Lucas deploys wonderfully sensitive close readings (161) of Julian’s stylistic devices. This is furthered by superb work on the use of prefix intensifiers (173–74). It is an impressive chapter; indeed the last section has enough material to be its own separate chapter—as it is, it is a marvel of compression.The fifth chapter on the contemplative way is the best: lucid, detailed, and compellingly written. The focus is on Julian and the concept of home, and Lucas deploys wonderfully detailed close readings from a selection of different passages. Breadth is provided by looking at three main instances of the term, and Lucas takes care to explore grammatical and syntactical issues in addition to—that rare thing—morphology. The readings are careful and nuanced, and are as compelling as they are convincing. The morphological work is most impressive, especially on verbal suffixes/prefixes (226) and “beseeking”—though I would have liked some finer distinctions regarding the telicity of some of the core verbs examined. It is the best chapter of the book, for me at least, full of deft analysis and delicious close readings.The final chapter takes us into new areas via one of the most frequently analyzed passages in Julian’s text. What starts as an engagement with Julian’s lord-and-servant passage soon changes into an utterly fresh engagement with the current ecological humanities. Through careful attention to form and content, Lucas shows how Julian’s presentation of home has profound ecological dimensions. Close etymological work sustains all this admirably and perhaps points to future work in the field.A short conclusion rounds off the book as an impressive contribution to medieval studies. My only real criticism is the amount of scaffolding: Each chapter spends considerable time telling you what it will do, and then nearly as much time telling you what it has done. While this does help with clarity, especially for inattentive readers, it takes up more space than it merits. This is a very minor point, and perfectly understandable given the daunting complexity of the topic. Lucas has written a stellar first monograph, one that should be read by anyone with an interest in Julian of Norwich and medieval ideas of health and healing.