Over the course of Books IV and V, Genius has had to “modefie” his approach to include the discourses of gentilesse, labor, and religion. However, even Genius' “schame,” the exposure of Venus and Cupid as incestuous, licentious, unreasonable, and opposed to the order of divine justice, does not produce a radical or immediate break in the poem for either Genius or Amans. For instance, in the “Tale of Babio and Croceus,” Genius still speaks positively of “Cupides art” (V.4803), and explains how “Cupide and Venus eke/ A medicine for the seke/ Ordeigne” (V.4827), so that the young and lovely Viola can enjoy generous Croceus rather than miserly Babio. But this does not mean there has been no change at all. Neither Venus nor Cupid is mentioned by Genius between the discourse on religion and the “Tale of Babio and Croceus” some 3000 lines later. However, the Latin verses continue to mention them, drawing on the Latin term for Covoitise, Cupiditas, itself the topic of Latin verses of V.iii. The cupidinous lover desires to have Venus all to himself (V.iii.4) through perjury; the “amans” seeks women as the “cupidus” seeks fields (V.iv.3); and “cupido non dat sua dona Cupido” (Cupid does not give gifts to the cupidinous; V.vi.3). Therefore, between the mentions in the vernacular, the pejorative analogy between avarice and the gods of love has persisted, but only for the Latinate reader, prompting guidance on the Genius' analogizing.