{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023731048121292023, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013183915622940012, 'mean_word_length': 5.1437246963562755, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clément Marot: The Mirror of the Prince (review)

Thanks to the work of scholars like M. A. Screech and Gérard Defaux, the image of Marot as a court poet notable only for his ‘élégant badinage’ has been entirely eclipsed in recent years by the more compelling image of a committed and courageous ‘évangélique’ variously inspired by the mystical Paulinism of a Marguerite de Navarre and the Christian humanism of a Budé and an Erasmus. By focusing narrowly on Marot’s representations of François I and analysing the ‘political theology’ and ‘theopolitical meaning’ of familiar poems like Le Temple de Cupido, ‘Au Roy, pour avoir esté desrobé’, ‘Au Roy, du temps de son exil à Ferrare’, and the 1541 dedication of the Psaumes de David, Ehsan Ahmed adds a new dimension to this image and proposes some plausible corrections and refinements to our understanding of Marot’s particular brand of evangelism. It is useful to be reminded that Marot addressed twice as many poems to François as to François’s pious sister Marguerite, and that in these poems Marot invariably contrived to fuse royalty and divinity in the person of his king. Marot represents François not simply as a patron and protector but as a surprisingly orthodox roi thaumaturge and figure of Christ the redeemer. While some of Ahmed’s readings are more convincing than others, his demonstration as a whole is compelling. Ahmed is skilful at explaining the relevance of traditions like the sacre, at narrating crucial events like those surrounding the ‘Affaire des Placards’, and at analysing Marot’s reworking of poetic models. He is also good at drawing fine distinctions among orthodox, evangelical, and reformed theologians — concerning not only the sacred nature of kings but the meaning of ‘literal meaning’ in biblical exegesis — while at the same time respecting the deliberate vagueness of many of Marot’s positions. From all of this emerges a fine sense of the characteristic blurring of sacred and profane in the various syncretistic and typological roles Marot ascribes to François. What emerge rather less clearly are the strategies that motivate these various representations. Some of the poems discussed here are not nearly as innocent as they appear in Ahmed’s account. Rather than using his own real-life difficulties as convenient pretexts for expressing sincere ideological commitments, as Ahmed sometimes seems to suppose, Marot frequently manipulates situations and ideologies in a highly calculated way to manœuvre the king, by sheer rhetorical and symbolic force, into a position (religious, political, or simply personal) he might otherwise be strongly disinclined to occupy. Closer attention to the rhetorical, strategic and frankly manipulative aspects of these poems would undoubtedly lead to a clearer understanding not only of Marot the ‘évangélique’ but also of Marot the poet, the satirist, and the propagandist. All readers will nevertheless benefit from Ahmed’s insights into the ideologies of Christian kingship at work in Marot’s poetry.