The Chaucer Review: An Indexed Bibliography (Vols. 1-30)

Pinti, Daniel J. "Governing the Cook's Tale in Bodley MS 686." 30 (1996): 379-88.
As the fifteenth-century Bodley MS 686 suggests, fifteenth-century scribes and readers did not recognize the inviolability of an author's text. The scribe of the Bodley MS clearly differentiates his voice from that of Chaucer, but develops the fundamental conflict between apprentice and master in the tale and also suggests an end to the story. His changes offer a different view of the themes of the tale and indicate the fifteenth-century conception of Chaucerian authority. The alternating voices throughout the telling of the tale create a story in dialogue and tell readers that they may view the story from different points of view. The scribe also plays on Perkyn's position as an apprentice to create a position for himself as a poet apprenticed to Chaucer. The text of the tale itself also becomes Chaucer's apprentice, but like Perkyn, it is recalcitrant, thus allowing the apprentice poet to demonstrate his poetic ability and to become the poetic master Chaucer. The scribe's participation in the text not only subjects it to necessary governing, but also negotiates the troubled waters of authority in the fifteenth century.

Seymour, M. C. "Of this Cokes tale." 24 (1990): 259-62.
Chaucer probably completed the Cook's Tale, but the quire containing the rest of the tale was lost. The slight changes in handwriting between tales may suggest that several different scribes worked on the Canterbury Tales and so support the idea that Chaucer completed the tale. There is some manuscript evidence to suggest the misplacement of a full "quire of sight" containing the rest of the completed Cook's story.