Answer TWO of the
following...
Q1: How does the
narrator characterize himself and the presumption of writing a poem about
pilgrims on a journey to Canterbury
Q2: Where in the
Prologue do we see social criticism and/or outright satire of individual
pilgrims? How might this connect to the belief of the ‘common’ English
man/woman, particularly regarding topics such as the nobility, the Church,
fashion, and manners?
Q3: Which
pilgrim’s description did you find most appealing or interesting? How does
Chaucer’s language create this character and help us ‘see’ him or her? What do
you feel he wanted us to connect with or admire/dislike about the character?
Q4: Compare the
style of narration of “The General Prologue” to that of Beowulf. Though these works are written hundreds of years apart, and reflect two very different Englands, there are some surprising similarities. What seems like the most radical departure in Chaucer's work, and what tells you that Chaucer might have known and studied works like Beowulf in his career?
2. Throughout the whole prologue it is quite evident that this author is going to use offhand humor to execute a literary work that both engages the reader and keeps them thoroughly entertained. A very good example of this would be when Chaucer is describing the Friar on page 6, saying “He was an easy man in giving shrift, /When sure of getting a substantial gift:/For, as he used to say, generous giving/to a poor Order is a sign you’re shriven.” Chaucer is hitting on the common reoccurrence of the church getting money through the powerful force of confession. This is a shot at the political aspects deeply rooted within the Catholic Church at the time this piece was written. He also addresses the Friar’s ability of being “So versed in small talk and flattery,” also at page 6 indicating that the Friar was quite good at his ability of manipulation, as the author seems to portray him.
ReplyDelete3. Within the quest of those going on the Pilgrimage, the wife from near Bath is a character that is to be watched as this piece unravels. Chaucer opens up with her description in addressing that is “a bit deaf” on page 14. He then goes into her ability of “almsgiving” and talks about the rage she felt if someone out gave her. To continue further, she is spoken of as being “bold” and “handsome” in face (beauty being of something quite important to those within this timeframe). The author then talks about her love life and that being quite expansive, with being “five times married, that’s to say in church.” I think the author wants readers to be engaged with her story, by being curious as to how she got to where she was of being married at least 5 times.
Great responses; yes, he's clearly quite taken with the Wife of Bath, and gossips about her out of excitement and wonder. SHe's even more interesting when he lets her talk later on (we'll read it next week). Note how he pokes fun at her without skewering her, something he doesn't hold back on with the Friar, the Pardoner, and a few others.
Delete3- I found the description of The Miller the most interesting, mainly because of the narrator's somewhat amusing physical description. The Miller reminds me of Gimli from Lord of the Rings quiet a bit due to his described mannerisms and appearance. Chaucer seemed to spend a little more time describing this character's looks instead of his history or personality. I know that Chaucer has described this man as wearing a white coat and blue hood, but I cannot help imagining The Miller as a stout, kilt clad, hairy Scottish man with a pint of ale in one hand and some bagpipes in the other
ReplyDelete4- First of all, Chaucer is much more focused on description compared to the Beowulf Poet. The Beowulf Poet appears to be more focused on the telling of a story, and subsequently, Beowulf reads at a much faster clip than The Canterbury Tales. The environment of Beowulf has a very barbaric feel as well. In that world, I imagine everyone to be wearing chain mail, or armor with a giant great sword strapped to their back. The people of The Canterbury Tales are dressed in a much more regal fashion. Even The Miller, who is described as something of a brute, is dressed in a white coat and blue hood. The atmosphere of Chaucer's writing has a much more refined feel to it.
Great responses--and yes, the Miller IS Gimli, in a sense (or perhaps Bombur from The Hobbit). He's a man who loves the earthly pleasures, and no doubt horrifies some of the religious figures on the journey. What till you see The Miller's tale...it's as off-color as you would expect from a man of his epic proportions!
Delete2. One instance of satire of an individual pilgrim that perhaps stuck out to me the most was during the description of the Friar. The Church is beginning to become something of a money-making machine, especially with the implement of pardons (as we also see in the description of the Pardoner), and the narrator describes this character in such a way that it shows how twisted the Church probably was at the time. The Friar, on the surface, is a man of God who is willing to take confessions, but only from the wealthy. Contrary to Christ, this Friar kept his distance from “lepers and street-beggars”. Chaucer defines him as a “beggar in his friary”. He almost resembles a pharisee in the regard of being what Jesus called a “white-washed tomb”. This Friar is a shining leader to his wealthy clients, but is filled with cheat and hate.
ReplyDelete3. The first character that caught my attention was the Knight’s son, the Squire. Being the son of a knight, he is likely all too familiar with courtly love. Being a knight-apprentice, courtly love is likely his destiny. It is probably for this reason he is such a romantic. “Wonderfully athletic, and of great strength. He’d taken part in cavalry forays…His clothes were all embroidered like a field full of the freshest flowers…He sang, or played the flute, the livelong day…” Metrosexual by today’s standards, but perhaps the general, respectable young man you would find back then. Chaucer perhaps wanted the reader to connect with the Squire’s passion – because who can’t love a teenage romantic? Or maybe Chaucer wished for the reader to be repulsed by this character, as all this romanticism is somewhat smothering as well as sickening. Here we have this young man who is apprenticed to bravery, but his destiny is shadowed by a veil of love – and likely a love he can never obtain.
Excellent responses; as you suggest, he is very cutting towards the hypocritical religious figures in the company, and doesn't mind assassinating them one by one. Yet he is quick to praise the ones who devote themselves to their fellow man or the weak in general, as we see in his portraits of the Priest and the Prioress. It's also interesting to note that he pokes gentle fun at the Squire without skewering him; I think he understands the young man's values, even though they can be seen as a bit silly.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQ2. I see a bit of satire and criticism in Chaucer’s description of the Prioress. The Prioress is wearing a necklace of coral and green beads with a pendant that says “Love Conquers All”. For the Prioress this necklace would seem strange because it isn’t rosary beads with a crucifix, instead it is more of a for show accessory than an object of faith and prayer. Another interesting thing is the fact that the beads are coral, because normally coral beads were thought to bring the wearer success and love. So does she maybe have a secret lover or a lover of courtly love? Which would make sense because of how well versed she is in French, she could be a reader and fan of stories of courtly love. She feeds expensive foods like meats, milk, and “fine white bread” these to the dogs and animals, when she probably should have been giving it to help the hungry people in need around her. Not to mention how she is elegantly dressed and polished for a person who should be living a humble life helping the poor. Which Chaucer points out when she says that she is “…so full of charity and pity”, but then follows it up with a description of her charity towards animals with expensive foods (6). But even then Chaucer seems to be showing sympathy to her because maybe she acts the way she does because she never truly wanted to be a nun.
ReplyDeleteQ3 (Sort of Q4 as well). The descriptions that I found to be the most interesting are the Knight and his son the Squire. The Knight seems to be described in the days that are similar to that of Beowulf and he represents the old beliefs of being a decorated war hero. Whereas his son represents the newer tales of Knights in this time period, because he is more obsessed with courtly love and is described as not getting enough sleep at night because he possibly was busy courting a lady with his music. The Knight is described as just coming from a battle all dirt, roughed up, and tired, while his son is lively and bright and seems to be described a bit more cleanly. The Knight fights in wars for honor and chivalry, while his son fights for the more recent kind of chivalry, which is jousting and fighting for the woman you are courting. They serve as a much bigger overall image of the changes in generations between the old Anglo-Saxon days and the days the Chaucer is currently living in that is after the invasion of the Normans. To sort of go on to question 4, not like I haven’t seemed to blend the two together already, is that while he may be trying to show that differences in social class don’t necessarily make one person better than the other, but also that while the days of Beowulf are different from the days of Chaucer, they share a common link. Beowulf’s time had poets who wanted to show the extraordinary side of the ordinary, and in a way that is what is seems like Chaucer is trying to do. Chaucer is showing that while the current society values the pristine and aesthetic beauty, there is a beauty in being human and having flaws with other humans who may not live like you. He tells this story with the same French-inspired aesthetic, but has the Beowulf roughness and character qualities that set a person up to potentially fail because they are seen as human beings in the story.
Excellent responses--such a wealth of detail! I like what you say about the Knight and his son: this forms the basis of The Knight's Tale, as you'll see this week. Chaucer is definitely contrasting the old school knight with the new chivalric one, though without judging either. The Squire is a bit of a dandy, and it definitely out for the ladies, but he's also brave and hard-working, and has seen battle (though not nearly as much as his father). His father, meanwhile, is an old soldier who fights for men, not women. And yet he tells a colorful tale of honor and chivalry when his turn comes up. Keep these ideas in mind as you read his Tale.
DeleteQ2 Social Criticism can be seen when he is describing the woman from Bath. He describes her in a way that says she is not approachable. "In all the parish not a dame dared stir Towards the altar steps in front of her, And if indeed they did, so wrath was she As to be quite put out of charity." He also kind of looks down on her for having five husbands and other lovers. He refers negatively to her having traveled the world.
ReplyDeleteQ3 The character description I found most interesting was the Friar. Chaucer first tells us that he is well liked and gives the impression that he is a good person but then as he goes further into describing him he starts giving us details to dislike. For instance, the Friar does not deal with the lepers so that the higher class people will still associate with him. He would help people but he got something out of it. He was paid for it and was able to give the gifts he received to pretty girls. Chaucer also describes him as knowing more about the good places to drink than the lower classes that were normally associated with that.
Great responses...I'm not sure he looks down on the Wife of Bath, but he's gossiping about her, as if to say "wow, she had 5 husbands! Can you believe? But she's one of THOSE kinds of women...tee-hee." That said, he seems to admire her ability to travel on her own and take charge of her life. He doesn't assassinate her the way he does in the Friar's portrait. We'll think more about her when we come to her Prologue and Tale.
ReplyDeleteQ2) The thing that stuck out to me the most when talking about social criticism is when the writer starts talking about the nun whose referred to as Madam Eglantyne. He says "And well she sang a service, with a fine Intoning through her nose" the way I read this was as sarcasm. I actually found it to be quite funny how he was sarcastic through out writing of these characters. It does say this women has good manners. Then he goes on to talk about how she eats a lot "but she could carry a morsel up and keep the smallest drop from falling on her breast" Talking about her not singing well and eating a lot is a type of social criticism and I think it goes along with what we talked about in class how women in this age were treated and were seen in a different way than the men might have been.
ReplyDeleteQ3)The Character that I enjoyed reading about was the Doctor. I like how well the writer explains the doctor to us he is very detailed and goes on to explain that this doctor is amazing at what he does and he is very smart. I think by explaining all of this to us the author is trying to get us to like the character by telling us all of his good qualities right form the beginning. However I think a downfall to this doctor may be the fact that he loves gold. This is a sign to us that the doctor is greedy and maybe very full of himself and his work.
Uh-oh, you didn't leave your name! Make sure to tell me who you are, otherwise I can't grade this or give you credit! :)
DeleteAshley Tucker
DeleteSorry! I didn't notice it didn't post with my name attached!!
Thanks! You now have credit! Good responses, too. The Doctor is interesting, because he is one of the most learned of the bunch, with all that Greek knowledge at his fingertips. And yet, he is in the service of gold--quite unlike the Oxford Scholar, who selflessly gives his information out for free: "gladly would he learn, and gladly teach." The reality of Chaucer's world is that few have knowledge, and knowledge is power, and those who have power generally abuse it.
DeleteQuestion 2: I believe we see social criticism in the description of the Friar. The narrator said “It’s unsuitable, as far as he could see, /to have sick lepers for acutance’s. /There is no honest advantageousness/In dealing with such poor beggars; /It’s with the rich victual-buyers and sellers. /and generally, wherever profit might arise, /Courteous he was and serviceable in men’s eyes.” Generally, a friar is a poor humble man who seeks nothing in return when helping people of all social classes. That’s the case with this particular friar though. He thinks very highly of himself in a way that he is too good to be seen by, basically, peasants unless, of course, there was some form of profitable gain on his behalf. I believe the narrator strongly distaste the Friar and wants others to see that the noble men of the country are not always as noble as thy lead people to believe.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 3: I find the prioress (nun) to be most interesting. The narrator describes the Prioress perfectly as a modest and quite with nice dainty manners. I can just picture her fair and petite, young and beautiful. The narrator makes it sound like that while she is said to know French and have excellent table manners, she is not as educated or wealthy as she likes others to believe, and most importantly did not strictly behave as a nun should. She is said to wear a broach with Amor vincit omni, love conquers all, engraved on it. I find this interesting because as we talked about in class nuns are forbidden to love anything or anyone but the church. But this does not seem to be the case with the Prioress, and I like that. She, to me, is like any young woman or girl, wishfully dreaming of Prince Charming coming and whisking her away. The narrator wanted us to see she is a little good with a hint of bad, and rebel following the rules. And that is someone I believe a majority of us can relate too. Plus, who doesn’t like a little romance thrown into a story.
Great responses...Chaucer loves to peer beneath the social curtain and reveal the 'naked' person beneath. The Friar is a great example of this. He is respected for his position in society, and yet he uses this power for his own gain, utterly neglecting those who truly need his help. All the church figures (except the Priest) are a worldly and most of them corrupt, and the Prioress/nun is an interesting case in point: she affects French fashions and wants to be a high lady, and amuses herself with this fiction. However, she still has a good heart and looks out for the lowest of the low, the animals, which in the Medieval world are routinely tortured and brutalized. She truly believes in love, even if her love is often more romantic in nature ("love conquers all"). The other figures are mostly scum, using their power to advance their social standing and get better mistresses. Only the priest stands apart, saying "It's a shame to see...a shitten shepherd and a cleanly sheep." This could describe most of the church figures in this poem.
Delete