No, but seriously, while I would probably have forced myself to read it all even if it had been boring as hell, just on general principle and to prove you wrong , it was a pleasure to read. Though it possibly makes me less likely to read it rather than more - by giving me the idea that I have a fairly good idea of what it's about now, and don't need to bother reading it anymore.

No wonder you think he had some personal sexual issues, then. I admit, that's not what I would've expected based on what I read about the Roman de la Rose so far (as mentioned, mostly in Huizinga - who perhaps also wrote in a time in which being too explicit was frowned upon). On a vaguely related note, our prime minister (we're in the middle of an electoral campaign) just described his political opponents during a parliamentary debate as, and I quote, "eunuchs in a harem - you know how it's done, you know where it's done, but you can't do it yourselves". Quote of the year, if you ask me, at least in Belgian politics, but I do have a hard time imagining any such thing being uttered in the US Senate...