For Wednesday:
The Knight’s Tale, Parts Three and
Four (48-79)
Answer TWO of the
following…
1. What does the Knight
describe the temples of Venus, Mars, and Diana in such detail in Book Three?
For someone who likes to avoid detail and just get on with the story, why does
he slow down and linger here? What
might the Knight (or Chaucer) want us to see here?
2. Discuss the Knight’s
narrative style focusing on a specific passage. Does his manner betray any doubts, subtext, or satire? Related to this, do you ever feel Chaucer is
satirizing/poking fun at him? Or are
his sympathies largely with the Knight?
3. Discuss Arcita’s death
speech on page 70-71: how do you think the Knight/Chaucer wants us to “read”
this? Is this what we expect from a
dying knight—is it noble and chivalric?
Or does it seem somewhat artificial and shallow? Again, consider the fact that the Knight may
be addressing the brunt of this story to his son, the Squire.
Elyse Marquardt
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2: The Knight expresses a LOT of satire when it comes to love. He seems to know that mushy, feel-good stuff is essential when telling a love story, so he dutifully sticks with it. However, I am struck by the amount of subtle sarcasm in his tone on several occasions. I feel as if Chaucer uses the Knight to make fun of people's unwavering belief in the gods. Arcita and Palamon are both told that they will win Emily, which is true. But only Palamon gets his actual heart's desire, which is spending the rest of his life with her. The gods are portrayed as fickle and argumentative.
Question 3: The Knight seems to be pretty strongly directing this speech at his son. He makes it all sound very romantic, yet the gist of it is that despite all of Arcita's best efforts, Emily has still slipped through his fingers. Death will sever us from even the ones who we hold most dear, so don't make too much of material things - or people - because there will be an end to it all. (This is a rather hopeless viewpoint and I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it. But it does seem to be the point that the Knight is trying to make.)
Great responses; no, we don't agree with it (I'm not sure Chaucer agrees with ANY of the pilgrims completely), but it's consistent with his character. He has a very fatalistic, Anglo Saxon view of the world, perhaps colored by his years as a Crusader. Beowulf would love to hang out with him in the mead hall!
DeleteAnna Talkington
ReplyDelete1. I feel that the knight pauses to show the relationship between the gods and the characters. Emily logically goes to pray to Diana, the patron of virgins. Arcita goes to pray to Mars, god of war and Palamon to Venus, goddess of love. It seems to suggest that the Chaucer wants us to know that Palamon’s heart is in the right place and that Arcita is going about winning the battle in the wrong way. As we later find out, Arcita dies and Palamon ultimately takes Emily as his wife. I think the description of the temples parallels each character that prayers there.
2.
I think this is to be read in a serious manner. It came across to me as noble and chivalric. In accord with chivalry, he focuses his attention greatly on his lady during his dying breaths and also somehow hopefully restores the brotherhood between him and Palamon by suggesting Emily consider marrying him, which is a noble thing to do. But, the ultimate message that the Knight may be sending to his son is that this is where chivalry gets you-dead.
Great responses: in a way, it IS serious and is consistent both with Arcita's character and the Knight's point of view. But Arcita does sound a bit hollow and false, as the poetry is lacking; the point being that this is the Knight's idea of a knight fighting and dying for the wrong reasons, perhaps a fate he wishes his son to avoid?
DeleteAnna Talkington
ReplyDelete1. I feel that the knight pauses to show the relationship between the gods and the characters. Emily logically goes to pray to Diana, the patron of virgins. Arcita goes to pray to Mars, god of war and Palamon to Venus, goddess of love. It seems to suggest that the Chaucer wants us to know that Palamon’s heart is in the right place and that Arcita is going about winning the battle in the wrong way. As we later find out, Arcita dies and Palamon ultimately takes Emily as his wife. I think the description of the temples parallels each character that prayers there.
2.
I think this is to be read in a serious manner. It came across to me as noble and chivalric. In accord with chivalry, he focuses his attention greatly on his lady during his dying breaths and also somehow hopefully restores the brotherhood between him and Palamon by suggesting Emily consider marrying him, which is a noble thing to do. But, the ultimate message that the Knight may be sending to his son is that this is where chivalry gets you-dead.
-Rocky Moore
ReplyDelete2. I think Chaucer is taking shots at this Knight throughout his whole storytelling process. It is even like he is mocking that entire class of Knights that were around during Chaucer's time. Basically showing how cocky they can be instead of the virtuous and chivalrous behaviors they were supposed to display. Even the story within the story about the two knights Arcita and Palamon portrays satire as this 'noble' Knight is telling a story about two fools who fall in love with the same woman and how they show absolutely no honorable duties and this guy doesn't even know he is making fun of himself at the same time. Literally on page 76-77, which I wont write the whole quote because he says over and over he wont tell you more of the tale yet he tells you some information already(don't you hate when people do that?) " I'll not tell how some threw in shield and spear", then says nor shall seven more times! After all of that he finally says, (thank goodness), "but make an end of my long story, and come to the point as quickly as I can". Like dude if you haven't already talked enough, he is showing off about how much he knows and I really don't care, except the point in which Chaucer is hilarious and makes this Knight look really dumb. In that case Chaucer wins me over, this is too funny.
4. I don't think Thesus is talking about this in a real honorable fashion as more so he took his fathers advice about how all things must come to an end, unlike the idea from Beowulf that your fame and glory outlasts what you do here on Earth. Aegeus, Thesus's father, gave him a very wise statement on page 74 that lead to his speech at the end."Just as no man has ever died, who has not lived in this world in some way, just so there never lived a man, anywhere on earth, but at some time was dead. This world is but a thoroughfare of woe, and we are pilgrims, traveling to and fro. All earthly troubles have an end in death. And he said much more to the same effect, exhorting people to be comforted". Ultimately I believe Thesus is just trying to get the people over this Tragedy the best he can and actually giving glory to God (which is confusing because the author has him talk about the Christian God and the Greek Gods as well- in direct relation to Beowulf and the complications of Pagans and Christianity too.) The whole idea of Chaucer telling stories within a story is unbelievable to note.
Great, detailed responses as always. Perhaps he isn't making the Knight seem dumb so much as over-earnest and maybe a tad self-important. He is REALLY into this story, and when he comes to a good part, he can't restrain himself. He also wants us to get the morals, which is why those parts are a bit longer, too. But again, it's consistent with Chaucer's aim to show people as they are, not as he would edit them to be.
Delete1. The three temples were decorated in a way that suggested the wills of the gods were opposed to what each character desired. The Knight went into great, lengthy detail when explaining this. I feel like he wanted us to see the importance of this opposition. Venus and Mars, representative of love and war, were shown to cause upheaval and agony, rather than grandeur and bliss. Diana was represented as a goddess that encouraged change, rather than guarding virginity. I feel like this was a way for Chaucer to show satire, and possibly to put a Christian spin on the story, since the pagan gods had failed the 3 characters.
ReplyDelete3. I think Chaucer wants us to see the pathetic tone within Arcita’s death speech, which is on page 72-73 for us. He mentions the qualities of “faith, wisdom, honour, chivalry”(pg 73); however, his speech doesn’t suggest that he actually had these qualities. From a dying knight one would expect an epic death speech that was humble yet certain of its own attributes. I feel like the Knight is directing this speech particularly towards his son. He wants him to see that courtly love is a mockery, and in death you lose your ability to love someone anyways.
Great responses--good allegorical reading of the temples, especially. The length and detail of these passages suggests the Knight really wants us to read this carefully (as does Chaucer).
DeleteKelsey Tiger
ReplyDelete3. I think in a way Arcita’s death speech is noble, but not necessarily chivalric. Palamon and he fell in love with the same lady and therefore they began to have a fallout with each other. At the end of his death speech, he says “in the whole world there isn’t anyone so worthy to be loved as Palamon.” So even in the midst of dying and no longer being able to spend forever with Emily as he rightly won the right to, he is speaking how Palamon is deserving of her love. The knight may be trying to convey to his son that even the greatest love will come to an end so don’t lose focus on your chivalric duties and brotherhood.
4. Theseus expresses a universal verdict that basically at some time or another, an end comes to all. He says, “It can’t be helped, for all go the same way. And so I can affirm all things must die.” I think in Theseus’s speech he first condemns them for their folly but eventually honors their heroism. He starts off basically questioning why good “Arcita departed with honor and repute”, then why “his cousin and wife lament his happiness, who loved them well”. In the end he says they should “let gladness follow up sadness”. He honors their heroism by calling Palamon a true knight who served with his whole soul, heart, and might. Basically through adversity he persevered and continuously loved Emily no matter what the costs were.
Great responses--it might be a chivalric speech in some ways, but since the Knight doesn't entirely agree with chivalric love (at least as defined by the knights), it rings false. It sounds hollow because the Knight wants us to read it that way, and Chaucer is concerned with how the Knight wants to tell his story.
DeleteShelby Pletcher
ReplyDelete3) Despite the fact that the Knight is telling this story to his son, I do think there was something noble to be said about Arcita's speech. I love how he ends the speech by saying if Emily were to ever think of becoming a wife, to think of Palamon, his beloved old friend yet his current enemy. This thought sums up Arcita's speech. As shallow and pitiful as Arcita and his death speech may be, at the end of the day, the culturally romanticized courtly love did not win, nor his spiritual or physical armor of glory. Brotherhood did. And I think he vaguely recognizes this himself, even in his death.
4) "It's common sense, or so it seems to me, to make a virtue of necessity, take waht we can't avoid with a good grace, especially what's due to all of us. Whoever mutters at this is a fool, and rebellious to Him who governs all. The man who dies in his life's prime and flower while sure of his good name, wins most honour, for in that case he brings no shame to either Himself or friends. ...And so it's best, as regards his good name, to die when he is at the height of fame." This passage summed up what the narrator was trying to get at here. This felt as if I was jumping back to Beowulf. He spends much of his time during this speech talking about honor and praising Palamon for his relentless pursuit of chivalry and integrity, even when it cost him his love and his happiness. Unlike Beowulf's world though, Theseus speaks on the finality of death and our acceptance of it.
Good points--the Brotherhood does win in the end, but it takes death to do it. If Arcita had won, would he have given her up? No way. Hence the Knight's point that you don't get points for doing the right thing when you're dying--you have to do it when it matters. And for the Knight, love can never replace the true calling of a comrade in arms. He is old school, Anglo Saxon, and you could almost imagine Beowulf writing or saying large chunks of this tale, as you suggest.
Delete2. All through out sections three and four we are interrupted by the Knight himself! He disrupts the narrative with, "Although I could provide a thousand more"... "Which I will not trouble memory to recall"... "I shall not tell of his devotions now"... and so on. Towards the end of the tale upon the wake of Arcita's death, the Knight exposes one of his limitations by stating, "I'll shut up; I'm no theologian." This brought a smile to my face as I instinctually responded with "oh really now!" After all his detail on Venus, Mars, and Jupiter he suddenly surrenders his higher knowledge because after all He is a knight not a theologian. Chaucer was able to create doubts in my mind concerning the knight. He started to resemble the type that bait people in by being who knows it all, but doesn't have all the time to dispense this knowledge. On the other hand, maybe the knight is getting tired and wants to wrap up the story at this point!
ReplyDelete4. Although it seems out of sync with the culture and context of this story, Theseus honors Palamon and Arcita as noble. The heroism of Arcita and nobility is rooted not so much in his love, but the fact that he died young and famous! The story almost ends with Arcita being the better knight, he is the winner. Love is good, but dying like a knight is better.
Ha, great points; he is poking a little fun at the Knight, since the Knight is quite earnest about his tale, and doesn't notice these little lapses of his. Yet that's what makes this such a vivid tale--we read Chaucer reading the Knight who is reading the knights of the tale (and his son, perhaps). So many levels!
DeleteAshley Bean
ReplyDelete1. The three gods are so different, just as the characters are. These temples give us more insight to the characters by which god they pray to. Emily to Diana, Arcita to Mars, and Palamon to Venus. I wasn't surprised when Arcita ended up dying after he prayed to Mars. When Palamon prayed to Venus, I knew he would end up with Emily because when Diana told her that she would end up with one of these men, Emily prayed that it would be the one her loves her the most. Since Palamon's prayer was to the goddes of love, it just made sense.
3. I think that Arctia himself seemed true for the most part, but he was a little bitter when he gave Emily to Palamon. The knight, however, definitely seems to be poking fun at him. After all, he won, but still didn't get what he fought for. He practically died for nothing, and I think the knight is using his death as a lesson to his son.
Yes, interesting point: the devotee of Mars ends up dying (you live by the sword, you die by the sword) whereas Love wins in the end (in a way). I wonder whether the Knight believes that Love is more powerful than War, or if this is Chaucer's gloss on the poem, which the Knight is unaware of?
Delete-Tarra Ward
ReplyDelete3. I want to believe that the knight Arcita is being noble and genuine but I believe Chaucer/the knight want us to read this in a way that is a bit corny. Also when Arcita says "Lady of my heart, causer of my death." Even though she may be the reason he died, he chose to fight for her. You wouldn't expect to hear this from someone who truly loves you. It's as if the knight is wanting his son to know that this woman may be his love but at the end of it all she actually caused his death, leading me to believe the knight is saying to his son, you can want love but women will probably be the cause of your death.
4. Theseus discusses fate many times in his closing speech, he also talks about glory. "Stone under our feet is worn away," "broadest river will run dry," "great cities will decline and fall," "I can affirm all things must die." It's as if Theseus is saying that Arcita got what was coming to him after all. He honors Arcita by saying, "the man who dies in his life's prime and flower, while sure of his good name wins most honour." I believe he is saying that Arcita has died with glory because he is still young. Theseus is somewhat poking fun at Palamon. In a way I feel he is saying, well you win my sister now but you haven't died young so that's not very honorable.
Great responses: the speech is noble in Arcita's mind, empty and somewhat false for the Knight, and an example of bad poetry for Chaucer. Each voice adds to the overall interpretation. I think Theseus is the true voice of the Knight, though whether or not Chaucer subscribes to this is open to interpretation.
Delete1. He went in to so much detail about the temples to emphasize how important they were to the culture, yet how unimportant to every day life. What I got from it was that he wanted to emphasize the folly of devoting your entire life to any one of the things that these deities stood for: war, love, or chastity. He described them in gruesome, almost horrifying detail, and then later gave examples of how they all failed. It just seemed to me that it was so vivid to explain how much importance we put on it as a society, when our time and effort could be better spent elsewhere.
ReplyDelete2. The knight's style in this part was even more amusing to me than in the last part. He is so emphatic about the way he tells the story. He clearly is fascinated by the pagan attributes of the story, but knows that he shouldn't be so he tries to skip over them, but can't quite completely do it. It also seems to me that he is strongly disapproving of the temples to the gods. There is a lot of detail, but none of it is exactly pleasant. And then everything about the love and Arcita's death seems satirical to me. He clearly doesn't approve, and it seems that he doesn't really care.
Great responses: yes, we devote our lives to one or two "gods," when most of them fail us and demand our lives in return. That's the case for Love or War, and even Chastity (which, to Chaucer's mind, leaves you without heirs or intimacy). Time and effort could be much better spent elsewhere!
DeleteDevin Martinez
ReplyDelete1.) The knight describes in great detail the temples of the different gods as all depicting great suffering and shame. He emphasizes these things in order to further prove his point that worship of these false gods leads to sorrow and loss. The images portrayed are very dark and graphic as opposed to the smiles and rainbows associated with love or the heroism and honor associated with war.
3.) Arcita's death speech is best read as a sorrowful cowardice speech from a dying knight who would normally be expected to show more valor and honor at his moment of death. To me it seems very artificial and shallow considering he is claiming to be dying of passionate circumstances when in reality the woman he "dies" for does not even want to be with him.
Great responses--the false 'gods' lead us to death and destruction, and aren't really the things we love. For the Knight, it's the ideal of heroism and brotherhood, whereas for Chaucer it's simply a more balanced, non-dogmatic way of life. If you live for Mars you become type of person, unable to appreciate other paths. Chaucer wants to walk ALL possible paths, hence the Canterbury Tales and its parade of voices.
Delete