Digital Chaucer pedagogy and editing: probing generative AI’s reproduction of hegemony

This paper contributes insight to discussions around the use of generative AI in digital pedagogical editing, and the challenges these technologies present when empowering students to uncover, and recognise the erasure of, marginalised voices in medieval ‘canonical’ texts. The site of investigation is the fourteenth century text, The Pardoner’s Prologue and Tale from The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer. I situate critical, scholarly, and digital editing of Chaucer’s works, including queer and intersectional approaches to his literature and its modern adaptations, within pedagogical environments where there is a reported growth in the use of generative AI. I show how Large Language Models (LLMs), chatbots such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot, limit student access to hidden stories of oppression, unlike current teaching where students are empowered to connect with Chaucer’s works based on their lived experience. This topic is also particularly relevant at a time when wider discourse surrounds the possibility of Chaucer’s raptus of Cecily Chaumpaigne, and thus, Chaucer’s role within university courses where there are efforts to decolonise the curriculum. I first centre the ideas of students, educators, editors and practitioners to highlight the key skills development within Chaucer studies, showing how students are encouraged to generate their own interpretation and lenses for the analysis of medieval text, before probing generative AI responses to Chaucer’s tale and its multiple narratives. Drawing on queer and intersectional frameworks of pedagogy, and current concerns and critical ideas for the adoption of AI in higher education, I end by providing possible solutions to communicate the value of the arts and humanities in the current landscape, all while increasing dialogue between members of the community with varying types of expertise. The overarching aim of the paper is to engage discussion on the impact of such technologies on digital editing practices and beyond, as these developments move further away from conversation with the public on matters requiring critical thinking and reflexivity. The findings are not only relevant to editors and educators within Chaucer studies, but for disciplines across the board where LLMs may be reproducing dominant discourses and reinforcing cultural hegemony.