Final Paper: A Novel Conversation

Choose ONE of the following Options to write a 4-5 page paper (double spaced), using BOTH novels as support. You can use one more than the other, but each work needs to factor into your response, even if you use one as a “naysayer” to the other. Quote passages and close read them as part of your conversation—don’t merely summarize the plot and move on. An essay that doesn’t demonstrate close reading and an understanding of the text will not score very highly, so be careful!

DUE BY 5PM ON OUR FINAL EXAM DAY: MONDAY, DEC. 4th

Option #1: “And you must be aware, Fanny, that it is every young woman’s duty to accept such a very unexceptionable offer as this” (Austen 307).

Who should a woman marry in the 18th/early 19th century? What does it mean to make a “good marriage” or a “bad” one? How can a woman learn to see the difference, and what should guide her in accepting a proposal? Can ‘selfish’ interests interfere, or should it be solely in the interest of the family? Use Austen and Johnson to respond to this question, and imagine what they might be trying to teach young women of the time about choosing a spouse.

Option #2: “To indulge in the power of fiction, and send imagination out upon the wing, is often the sport of those who delight too much in silent speculation…The mind dances from scene to scene, unites all pleasures in all combinations, and riots in all delights which nature and fortune, with all their bounty, cannot bestow.” (Johnson 97)

What is the danger—or virtue—of an education spent reading novels? Why might fiction lead young people down false paths or philosophical dead ends? Is Fanny like the Astrologer, living her life too much in books to relate to the real world ideas and passions around her? Is Austen trying to warn young women away from Fanny’s example? Or would Austen disagree with Johnson’s advice, finding novels the very best antidote to the illusions and advertisements of society? Can “sensibility” be carried too far...or are novels the only way to truly obtain it?

Option #3: “Here was again a want of delicacy and regard for others which had formerly struck and disgusted her...How evidently was there a gross want of feeling and humanity where his own pleasure was concerned” (Austen 303).

What does it mean to be “good” or “virtuous” in life? How can a novel, through a sympathetic hero/heroine, teach young people to distinguish between virtue and vice? And how can antagonists (or others) teach us to see that—quoting Shakespeare—“all that glitters is not gold”? Do Austen and Johnson agree on the universal virtues that young people should strive towards? Or do Fanny and Rasselas ultimately embark on every different moral adventures?  (Remember that Johnson says that modern literature merely repeats the classics of old...does Austen agree and prove this in MP?). 

For Monday: Austen, Mansfield Park, Book 3: Chs.31-18 (or Chs. 1-7)

Keep reading for next Monday and find another passage to write about for class. Remember, too, some of the ideas we discussed in class on Friday, particularly the Romantic concepts of sensibility, and to a lesser extent, the sublime. Does Henry Crawford (and others) truly prize Fanny's sensibility and is that what gives her worth apart from other women on the marriage market? Is Henry, himself. a man of "sense" as he claims? Can Fanny teach Mary sensibility--or is she too "insensible" to learn? And why else might Fanny be Austen's most "Romantic" heroine?

See you on Monday...

For Friday: Play Catch up!

Keep reading Mansfield Park for Friday, but mostly I want everyone to catch up to at least the beginning of Book 3. No required page numbers beyond that. You don't have to write a response today (don't remember if I told you to do so), but if you do, I'll simply credit it to your account. :) 

We'll do some talk about Austen and her world to help supplement our reading of the novel. Then we'll make a mad dash to finish the book in the next week (even though we only have one class next week.

See you tomorrow...

For Wednesday: Austen, Mansfield Park, Chs. 25-31 (Finish Book Two)

As before, just bring a passage to class with a brief discussion of why you felt this passage was important, significant, or interesting in some way. And I promise, I'll give you a reading break soon...just keep at it a bit more! :) 

As an added bonus, here's some excerpts from Austen's lettters about Mansfield Park. In general, she writes very little about her own work--or, if she wrote more, they were lost in the letter that her sister Cassandra destroyed after her death. But here are a few comments about the book (the Henry mentioned below is her brother, not Henry Crawford(!) ):

"Henry has this moment said that he liked my M.P. better and better; he is in the third volume. I believe now he has changed his mind as to foreseeing the end; he said yesterday, at least, that he defied anybody to say whether [Henry Crawford] would be reformed, or would forget Fanny in a fortnight" (March 5, 1814)

"Henry has finished Mansfield Park, and his approbation has not lessened. He found the last half of the last volume extremely interesting." (March 9, 1814).

"In addition to their standing claims on me they admire Mansfield Park exceedingly. Mr.Cooke says "it is the most sensible novel he ever read," and the manner in which I treat the clergy delights them very much" (June 14, 1814). 

"Mrs. Augusta B owned that she thought Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice downright nonsense, but expected to like Mansfield Park better, and having finished the first volume, flattered herself that she had got through the worst...Mrs. Lefroy preferred [Emma] to Mansfield Park, but like Mansfield Park the least of all [her novels]" (1815). 

For Monday: Austen, Mansfield Park, Chs. 16 to (Book II) Ch.6

Remember that there are is no response due on Monday; instead, we'll do an in-class response based on a specific passage. Consider some of the ideas we've been discussing throughout the week, such as:

* the education of women, particularly daughters

* the relationship of mothers and daughters (and to a lesser extent, fathers and children)

* ideas of propriety and morals: what does good and 'right' conduct mean? 

* Being natural vs. artificial--acting vs. being (particularly when theater is involved!)

* feminism vs. domesticity: what role does Austen champion for the modern woman? 

* Fanny's character: Rasselas or Imlac? (or neither?)

* Mary and Henry Crawford: dashing anti-heroes or simply bad guys?

* The novel of manners: do characters grow and develop in Austen's novels or serve as allegories (as in Johnson)? Can Henry Crawford change? Become more complex? Can Edmund? Can Fanny? 

For Friday: Austen, Mansfield Park, Chapters 8-16

As before, no questions, but choose a short passage which you can discuss briefly in a response (and bring it to class). I want to make sure yuo catch the 'little moments' and not get too lost in the thickets of the plot and the characters. It's a big novel and easy to get lost it! 

See you on Friday...

For Wednesday: Austen, Mansfield Park. Chapters 1-7

Okay, we're done with the 4 questions, since I want you to focus on just reading as much of the book as possible. It's a longer book, so do your best to get as close to the required reading as possible. 

However, instead of questions, I want you to do a short response each day (unless we have an in-class writing) where you identify a short passage you found interesting and explain why. You don't have to quote the entire passage, but you might say,

"In Chapter 5, there's an interesting passage where Henry Crawford tells his sister and Mrs. Grant that "An engaged woman is always more agreeable than a disengaged" (43). This is an important moment because...

You don't have to write much, just a short paragraph; I'll use these to start discussion and to build some of the main themes in class. If you're not sure what to look for, consider some of the following themes as you read:

* The education of women
* The marriage market
* Relations between husbands and wives
* Relations between different family members, esp. brothers & sisters
* Gossip 
* Satirical narration

Good luck and we'll talk more on Wednesday! 

For Friday: Johnson, The History of Rasselas (finish the book!)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In the penultimate chapter, the princess observes that “the choice of life is become less important; I hope hereafter to think only on the choice of eternity” (111). Do you think the book ultimately offers a spiritual message at the end? Is the only right choice the one that ignores earthly pleasures and pursuits altogether? Or is this merely a case of wishful thinking?

Q2: Imlac informs the astronomer (and the reader) that, “keep this thought always prevalent, that you are only one atom of the mass of humanity, and have neither such virtue nor vice as that you should be singled out for supernatural favours or afflictions” (105). Does this mean that everyone is too significant to matter in the grand scheme of things? That no one can do anything sufficiently just or degrading to merit punishment or pain? Or is he merely talking to the astronomer in particular?

Q3: Chapter XLIV, titled, “The dangerous prevalence of imagination” seems to be directly geared to novel readers. According to Imlac/Johnson, what is the chief danger of the imagination? How might too much novel reading affect the minds of his readers and lead them, like the astrologer, to “dreams of rapture or anguish”?

Q4: The novel is set in the East and sometimes seems influenced by Eastern philosophies—Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. This is distinctly possible, as many works such as the Bhagavad Gita were translated and made available in English in the 17th and 18th centuries. One of the chief tenets of Hinduism is the danger of attachment: if you bind yourself to the pleasures of the senses, and become too attached to human relationships, you will never escape the wheel of rebirth. Do you think Johnson subscribes to these ideas in his book? Is he trying to “translate” the East to the West in Rasselas? An example of this?

For Wednesday: Johnson, THe History of Rasselas, Chs. 17-35 (pp.44-77)

No questions this time (shew!), but we will have an in-class writing response when you get to class. Here are some ideas we might explore tomorrow, reaching back into Monday's chapters, as well as the chapters listed above:

* What does Johnson believe is the true business of a poet? What should he/she try to capture or depict for his/her readers? (how might this relate to what Johnson is trying to do for his readers?)

* Why are both Rasselas and Imlac skeptical of teachers and philosophers? How do they "fail" their profession or calling?

* In exploring the various ranks of society, what do Rasselas and his sister, Nekayah, find is universal no matter what your station in life? Do riches make the rich happier? Does family and intimacy make the poor more content? 

* What does it mean to live "according to nature"? Does this echo the poet, Alexander Pope's belief that, "whatever is, is right"? 

* Why might Johnson discuss the subject of marriage at such length in Chapters 28 and 29? Consider his audience...

* Johnson writes that "the early writers are in possession of nature, and their followers of art" (28). How does this relate to an appreciation and study of the past? Is the past essentially better than the present?  

For Monday: Johnson, The History of Rasselas, Chs.1-16 (pp.7-44)

[Sorry for the late post--I got sick and forgot to post on time! :( ] 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: What does Rasselas mean when he continually invokes the phrase, “my choice of life”? Why is he unable to make such a choice in the Happy Valley, and why does he believe that those outside the valley can are able to choose freely? Does Imlac encourage this belief?

Q2: In Chapter 10, “A Dissertation on Poetry,” Imlac philosophizes on the role of a writer/poet in society. This is important, since Johnson is writing a novel, a form of literature still suspect and largely geared toward middle-class women and servants (as we discussed in class). According to Johnson, what makes a “good” writer and what should he try to communicate to the reader? Why might the novel be the ideal vehicle to realize Imlac’s intentions?

Q3: Why does Imlac tell the prince that “Human life is every where a state which is much to be endured, and little to be enjoyed” (32)? What evidence does he offer for this, and are we supposed to believe him? If this novel is meant to be instructional, is Imlac our teacher? Or just another “choice of life?”

Q4: Rasselas is something of an everyman, in that he represents the composite human being on his or her journey toward adult understanding. However, he is also colossally naive and knows nothing about the outside world. If he does represent us, however, what is our biggest flaw when we attempt to find contentment and purpose in life? What does he consistently fail to see or understand? 

For Wednesday: Twelfth Night, Act Five and “A Modern Perspective” by Catherine Belsey (pp.197-207)

NOTE: No class on Monday, since I’ll be out of town getting a root canal(!). Also, if you don’t have the Folger edition of Twelfth Night, I’ll leave a few copies of Belsey’s essay in my door. Come get it on Monday if you need it.

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Belsey reminds us that Viola is named (as Viola) only once in the play, and then in Act 5. She goes on to mention that she “has no fixed location in the play. Even when she speaks “in her own person”—and it is not easy to be sure when that is—the play does not always make clear where we are to “find” her identity “ (203). Why do you think Shakespeare makes Viola so transparent in the play and so difficult to pin down? How does that affect the idea of both Olivia and Orsino falling in love with her?

Q2: How does Malvolio change in Act Five? While he’s still very much the same character, what about his language and his words undergoes an interesting transition? How do we—and Olivia—read him differently in the final act? (or, how does Shakespeare suggest we do?)

Q3: What do you think Belsey means when she writes that “The spectators of Twelfth Night are at one moment detached observers of love’s extravagance and its self-indulgence, while at another they are invited to participate in its pains and pleasures, sharing the point of view of the fictional lovers themselves” (206)? Why does Shakespeare offer this double perspective for the audience, and can you think of a moment where it shifts for you, as a reader?

Q4: Interestingly, in a play about love, none of the men seem remotely in love with the women in question: Sebastian has no reason to love Olivia (he doesn’t even know her!), and Orsino never quite convinces us that he loves Olivia, either. The men are much more convincing when espousing their love for other men: Orsino for Cesario, and Antonio for Sebastian. Why do you think this is? Why can men speak of love more convincingly among each other than to the opposite sex?

Short Paper #2: Dramatis Personae

Words are grown so false I am loath to prove reason with them (Fool, Act 3.1)

INTRO: For your second short paper, I want you to perform the role as a resident scholar, or dramaturg, for an upcoming ECU production of Twelfth Night. In this case, imagine the actors are totally clueless about how to interpret some of their lines, so you are asked to work closely with one of the leads—your choice—to help him or her understand the character in question through a close reading of some important lines. The characters you should consider are Viola, Orsino, Olivia, Malvolio, Fool, Maria, Sir Toby, and Sir Andrew. Imagine that the actor doesn’t really know who this character is or how the lines help “clothe” them in personality and ideas. As an English major, you have a unique insight into language that can help them ‘see’ the character through the labyrinth of Shakespeare’s speech.

PROMPT: So for this paper, write a “Welcome to the Character” letter to the actor helping him or her understand who this character is through their language. Choose 2-3 passages, either entire speeches or short exchanges, to examine and analyze for the actor. Help them understand (a) what a few actual lines mean through translation, and (b) why these lines are significant to the character and to the play at large. Assume they have read the play but have only a very vague understanding of it. So in your paper, help them understand the context of the scene and why the character says and does what he/she does in this moment. But focus mostly on the language rather than the plot: don’t tell us what happens blow by blow, but use the language to reveal who the character is based on what he/she says—and how he/she says it.

EXAMPLE: In Act 3, Scene 1, the Fool gives Viola a typically witty answer to her simple question, “Dost thou live by the tabor”?, meaning, “do you make a living as a musician?” Instead of simply saying” no,” he snaps back, “No, sir, I live by the church,” which is satirical, since it suggests that he gets his living from the church, though it could also mean I live near it. When Viola protests that this is a terrible imprecise way to speak, he responds, “To see this age! A sentence is but a chev’ril glove to a good wit. How quickly the wrong side may be turned outward” (91). Since a “chev’ril glove” is a glove which stretches to accommodate many hands, so, too, a sentence can accommodate many meanings, and it’s the Fool’s job to twist and turn a word into every possible use—all the better to frustrate and tease his audience. This is also Shakespeare’s way of commenting on his art, since he lives in “this age!” which allows him to display language in every possible light for a paying audience. Thus, the Fool is often Shakespeare’s mouthpiece, commenting on the act of writing a play and of writing itself.

REQUIREMENTS

• 2-3 pages, double spaced
• Close reading from at least 2 separate scenes, with quotes and discussion
• Addressed to one audience—the actor of the part—and not to the professor or the class
• Due Friday, October 27th by 5pm

For Wednesday: Twelfth Night, Act Four

Since Act Four is such a tiny slip of an act, I'll only give you one question to respond to...

Q1: At the end of Scene 1, Olivia, mistaking Sebastian for Cesario, tells him, "O, say so, and so be!" Why might this be the motto of the entire Act (if not the play)? How do characters change identities and fortunes merely by the act of speech? Discuss how someone in this act uses language to change themselves or are changed by someone else's language. Why does this work in the world of Shakespeare's play, and is this true outside of the play? Are we really constructions of our and other's language?

For Friday: Twelfth Night, Act Two

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: Close read some part of Viola’s speech in Act 2, Scene 2, which begins “Fortune forbid my outside have not charmed her!” This is a soliloquy, which means she is speaking to the audience alone; what does she reveal of her innermost thoughts? Is she proud to have conquered Olivia’s affections as a “man”? Does she blame Olivia for her conquest? Or Orsino?

Q2: Why do the comic characters—Sir Toby, Maria, Sir Andrew—dislike Malvolio so much? What grievances do they have against him which require Maria’s cruel vengeance? And related to this, what real-life characters or types might Shakespeare be satirizing for his audience with Malvolio’s character? (why is he a character we love to hate—or mock?)

Q3: In Scene 4, Orsino and Viola have a debate on who loves deeper: a man or woman. This is the kind of argument The Wife of Bath would have relished. Does Shakespeare seem to have read Chaucer in this scene? Is he responding to ideas he might have encountered in The Canterbury Tales? Where do we hear an echo of that famous work? And does Viola/Shakespeare seem to agree with the Wife?

Q4: Scene 5 is one of the funniest scenes in all of Shakespeare, and barely contains a drop of verse from beginning to end. What makes this such a universal scene, and one that stages particularly well for a modern audience? (also, how does Shakespeare take pains to make the language relatively easy to follow)? 

For Wednesday: Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act One

If you missed class on Monday or want to watch more of the 1969 production I showed in class, click on the link above (note that it’s somewhat out of order, and they omit some speeches).

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Scene 3, between Sir Toby, Maria, and Sir Andrew, is completely in prose, as opposed to the iambic pentameter of the previous Scene. Why do you think this is? How does it change the sound of the dialogue, and how do you think it affects the authors who interpret it? You might recall how the actors performed this in the 1969 production. Did you notice a change in Scene 3 from the rest? Should you?

Q2: Orsino’s opening speech in Act 1, Scene 1 is a love poem very similar to the ones we read in our Elizabethan Poetry anthology. Close read these lines and discuss how this is itself an anti-sonnet sonnet: what is his complaint about love, and what is he hoping his love sonnets/music will do for him? Again, read it like a poem and look for the metaphors and imagery.

Q3: Read the dialogue between Viola and Olivia Act 1, Scene 5 carefully: though the exchange begins in prose, it suddenly switches into imabic pentameter verse at line 238 with the line, “ ‘Tis beauty truly blent, whose read and white/Nature’s own sweet and cunning hand laid on.” Why do you think Viola switches into verse here, even though Olivia remains speaking prose...at least until line 256, when she switches, too. Why would Shakespeare switch the language: how are we supposed to ‘hear’ and read it differently?

Q4: The Shakespearean actor Alan Howard claimed that Elizabethans used language “like food, and they probably used words much more sensually, almost eating words.” How do we see this sense of eating and drinking language in Act One? Which characters most delight in words, not only what words mean, but how they can be twisted into different forms—particularly in puns and innuendos. Why might this be especially important in comedy?

For Wednesday: Shakespeare's Sonnets, Part II

Since we only got to read a few Sonnets, and I want to provide a good introduction to Shakespeare before we read Twelfth Night, I want to spend one more day on the Sonnets. So re-read the ones in our book, and expect an in-class writing during Wednesday's class. And since you were enterprising enough to look on the blog, guess what sonnet it's going to be over?

...Sonnet 138! 

What's interesting about Sonnet 138 is that it exists in two different versions (as students who took my Critical Responses to Poetry class might remember). Here's the other version, which you're welcome to read and compare them before Wednesday's class, where we'll talk about this at length.

Sonnet 138a

When my love swears that she is made of truth,
I do believe her, though I know she lies,
That she might think me some untutored youth,
Unskillfull in the world's false forgeries.
Thus vainly thinking that she thinks me young,
Although I know my years be past the best,
I smiling credit her false-speaking tongue,
Outfacing faults in love with love's ill rest.
But wherefore says my love that she is young?
And wherefore say not that I am old?
O, love's best habit is a soothing tongue,
And age in love loves not to have years told.
    Therefore I'll lie with love, and love with me,
    Since that our faults in love thus smothered be.

Fun, eh? More on Wednesday...

For Monday: Shakespeare’s Sonnets (pp.126-131)

NOTE: For some stupid reason, the book decided not to number the individual Sonnets on pages 126-131, but they are numbered in the table of contents. The Sonnets start with the poem “Look in thy glass,” and comprise the following poems:

Page 126: Sonnets 3, 15

Page 127: Sonnets 17, 18, 27

Page 128: Sonnets 29, 30, 55

Page 129: Sonnets 64, 66

Page 130: Sonnets 73, 91, 116

Page 131: Sonnets 130, 138

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: As in Sidney’s sonnets, Shakespeare is often writing anti-Renaissance love poems; that is, he critiques the very genre he is taking part in, and is self-conscious about the act of writing a love poem. We see this particularly in Nos. 18, 91, 130, and 138. Discuss how one of these poems is writing against the grain of the expected Renaissance cliches and sentiments.

Q2: The Sonnets (all 154 of them!) trace a loose story of a relationship from the wooing, the brief happiness, the betrayal, the jealousy, the break-up, the obsession, and finally, the love triangle of the poet, another woman, and the original lover. Discuss where one of these poems might appear in the ‘story,’ and how it might capture the poet’s response to the relationship.

Q3: Renaissance poems are obsessed with giving the lover immortality through verse, since art, alone, can transcend the ages. Though this had become a cliche by Shakespeare’s time, how does he breathe new life into this theme without making fun of it? In other words, how does he use metaphors and imagery to make us believe it? Examine one of the following sonnets: 3, 15, 17, 18, or 55.

Q4: Choose a line or two in one of these sonnets that has particularly unusual or tricky syntax: translate the line into readable, grammatical English and consider why he wrote it the way he did. What changes from translation to verse? What do we gain from the ‘difficult’ version? 

For Friday: "Astrophel and Stella" Sonnets by Sir Philip Sidney

NOTE: Remember your Mid-Term paper is due by 5pm on Friday! 

Normally, I would cancel class on Friday, but we have to cancel class next Friday since I'll be away at a confernece, so I don't want to lose two days (and I'm sure you don't either, right? :) ) So for Friday, read the Astrophel and Stella sonnets by Sir Philip Sidney on pages 140-144. This is a short selection of a longer sequence, so you can read them quickly, so try to re-read them and untangle some of the tricky syntax as we did in class on Wednesday.We are sure to take apart at least one or two of these beautiful sonnets in class, so be sure to read over them and pick a favorite! 

But mostly, work on your Mid-Term paper! Let me know if I can help! 

For Wednesday: Daniel, Fletcher, and Greville (see below)

For Wednesday: Daniel, “To Delia Sonnets” (33-36); Fletcher, “To Licia Sonnets” (66-68), Fulke Greville, “Caelica Sonnets” (80-83)

Sonnet: “A lyric poem consisting of a single stanza of fourteen iambic pentameter lines linked by an intricate rhyme scheme. There are two major patters of rhyme in the English sonnet:

1. The Italian or Petrachian sonnet falls into two main parts: an octave (eight lines) rhyming abbaabba followed by a sestet (six lines) rhyming cdecde or some variant…
2. The Earl of Surrey and other English experimenters in the sixteenth century also developed a stanza form called the English sonnet, or else the Shakespearean sonnet, after the greatest practitioner. The sonnet falls into three quatrains and a concluding couplet: abab dede efef gg." 

--from M.H. Abrams, A Glossary of Literary Terms (1993). 

NOTE: No questions for these Sonnets, since I want to do some writing in class on one or more of them. Just read them carefully and consider what a Sonnet sequence does: how does each one advance the story of a relationship—either from afar or from very close up—in these works. What conventions do these Sonnet use? What imagery? How do they conform to—or strive against—the Renaissance ideal? And most importantly, why do you think Sonnets were so popular in Elizabethan England? What did they allow their writers do say or do? 

For Monday: Elizabethan Poetry: Poems by Anonymous (1-8) and Campion (19-23)

[Above: The early music duo, Bedlam, performs a Campion song (not one of the ones in our book, alas) as it would have sounded in the 16th century.]

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Most of these poems (and all of the ones by Campion) were set to music and are more properly songs than poems. Indeed, these are the ‘pop songs’ of the 16th century, and many were quite famous, played over and over again for decades. How do they compare with modern songs/lyrics in their treatment of love? Do they have a similar relationship to falling in love, suffering in love, and breaking up? Or is there anything unique to the Elizabethan perspective?

Q2: How do one or more of these poems invoke the “death’s head” of a memento mori in their lines? Why do you think the poem invokes the presence of death in love lyrics? How might it relate to the painting of the two young men with the elongated skull (which we viewed in class)?

Q3: The Elizabethan period is famous for its syntax: note how many of the lines of specific poems seem ungrammatical, or place subjects in the wrong place, such as this line in Cherry Ripe: “Of orient pearls a double row.” Why do these poems consciously mix up the sentence structure when they could have been stated more conventionally? What is the advantage of mixed-up syntax?

Q4: Many of these poems have double entendres, or double meanings that are frankly sexual in nature—especially the poems of Campion. Where does a love poem seem to be both innocent and indecent at the same time? You might consider that the word “die” meant not only death but also “orgasm” to Elizabethan audiences.

Mid-Term Paper: The Missing Tale

He who repeats a tale after a man

Is bound to say, as nearly as he can,

Each single word, if he remembers it,

However rudely spoken or unfit

INTRO: Despite being a masterpiece of English literature, The Canterbury Tales is sadly incomplete, as each pilgrim was supposed to tell two stories on the way to Canterbury, and then two on the return voyage. As it stands, we have a single story from most of the pilgrims, with some of the most memorable ones being the ones we read in class: the Knight, the Miller, the Pardoner, and the Wife of Bath. But what of their second or third tales? Considering that all of the pilgrims used stories from an older tradition (either Greek, Italian, or English tales) it’s plausible that their next tales might have dipped into the rich well of Anglo Saxon literature, some of which Chaucer may have heard in translation or even read for himself.

PROMPT: For your Mid-Term Paper, I want you to discuss which Anglo-Saxon poem one of these pilgrims would have told for their Second Tale. Only choose one pilgrim and one poem, and use both poems to explain how the tale matches some element(s) of the pilgrim’s first story. For example, The Miller might be drawn to another story which parodies chivalric love (or love in general), whereas the Knight might relish a story of old heroic deeds in pagan lands. Consider why Chaucer would choose a specific poem for a specific pilgrim, and what the teller could do with this tale, based on his or her motives for telling the first one. Analyze elements of the pilgrim’s prologue and/or tale that sheds light on some aspect of the Anglo Saxon poem, and might help us understand themes and ideas hidden in the original. In other words, how could The Wife of Bath satirize male hypocrisy in “Wulf and Eadwacer”? Or how could the Pardoner sell his relics using a poem like “The Ruin”? Be sure to re-read each pilgrim’s description in “The General Prologue” to help you get a feel for their character and Chaucer’s critique about them.

NOTE: You can use a pilgrim whose tale we didn’t read, so long as you read their tale and analyze it in the same manner as suggested above. If you want to branch out, I particularly recommend the tales of the Clerk, the Nun’s Priest, the Merchant, and the Franklin.

DOUBLE NOTE: You can slightly change the story (if you want) based on the pilgrim’s motives and inclination. However, it has to be 80% the same and the change has to make sense within the world/logic of the poem itself.

REQUIREMENTS

• 4-5 pages double spaced
• Analysis of both poems, through quotes and discussion
• MLA citation throughout, with Works Cited page for the poems
• Due Friday, September 29th by 5pm

Bonus Post: The Sounds of Chaucer's England

NOTE: Don't be confused--the questions for "The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale" are below this one...

For those of you interested in probing a bit deeper into the sights and sounds of Chaucer's England, here's a brief clip showing the world Chaucer would have 'heard' in his day. Music was the chief means of transfering ideas from one land to another, since it required no translation and was immediately recognizable and enjoyable. Also, it was an even more effective way than literature of spreading the craze for secular languages, since you could learn a song in English or Italian and start singing it almost immediately, even if you barely knew the language. We don't have time in class to cover music or many other art forms, but here is a clip of an Italian 'Saltarello,' a famous dance that was imported throughout Europe and would be just as recognizable to Chaucer's ears. It's performed on period instruments by a German early music group called Ensemble Unicorn. Listen to it as you read "The Wife of Bath's Prologue" and be transported to another age...

For Monday: "The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale"

NOTE: Feel free to read both the Prologue and the Tale for Monday, though we'll only have time to really discuss the Prologue on Monday. I'll reserve Wednesday's class for the Tale. This is one of the most significant works of Medieval literature, and certainly among the most influential. If you read nothing else in The Canterbury Tales, read this one! :) 

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: The beginning of the Wife of Bath’s Prologue is a defense of multiple marriages using her own interpretation of the Scriptures. What is her basic argument, and why might this have been shocking for its time—particularly considering the many Church figures in the audience?

Q2: At one point, the Pardoner interrupts, claiming he was thinking about marriage, but the Wife of Bath claims, “You wait...you’ll taste another brew before I’m done;/You’ll find it doesn’t taste as good as ale” (263). What are her views about marriage, especially considering she’s done it five times? Is she trying to discourage men and women from tying the knot, or does she simply have a less chivalric view of wedded bliss?  Discuss a moment that seems to illustrate this.

Q3: Toward the end of the Prologue, the Wife of Bath claims, “Lies, tears, and spinning are the things God gives/By nature to a woman, while she lives” (269). She goes on to say that “No one can be so bold—I mean no man--/At lies and swearing as a woman can” (264). How do you respond to her characterization of women in this Prologue? Is she a forward-thinking, bold-as-brass proto-feminist, or is she just another male stereotype of a greedy, nagging wife?  What sways you one way or the other?

Q4: How might the “Wife of Bath’s Tale” itself be a response to “The Knight’s Tale”? Why do you think she chooses a knight as her protagonist? Is the manner of his victory similar or different than that of Palamon and Nicolas?

For Friday: Chaucer, “The Pardoner’s Prologue and Tale”

Answer TWO of the following: 

Q1: Why do you think the tale begins with such a lengthy Prologue? Why doesn’t he simply get on with his Tale (especially since the Prologue somewhat undercuts the Tale’s effectiveness)?  Is he simply too discursive, like the Knight, or is there another reason behind this? 

Q2: The Pardoner says the theme of all his sermons is “money is the root of all evil.” Why does he specialize in this theme, and what does his theme suggest about the profession of ‘pardoning’ in general?

Q3: The Pardoner’s Tale is a classic medieval allegory: three ‘brothers’ arming themselves to find and murder Death. Why don’t they recognize him when they find him? What makes it so easy for Death to win, according to the Pardoner (or Chaucer)?

Q4: Why does the Pardoner try to sell his relics and pardons to the entire group after his sermon? Don’t they already know that both are worthless after hearing his Prologue? Why does Chaucer include this humorous sales pitch?

For Wednesday: "The Miller's Tale"

No questions this time around, though I will give everyone an in-class writing response to some aspect of "The Miller's Tale." Here are some things to consider when reading this poem...

* Why does the Miller get offended or disturbed enough to break the social order and tell the next story? Even the Host says he should wait his turn...

* How might some elements of "The Miller's Tale" be seen as a literal response to "The Knight's Tale"? Is it a satire or a lampoon? 

* What role does Alison play in the tale? How might she compare with the docile and dispirited Emily from the previous tale?

* Why do you think Chaucer wrote such vulgar elements and suggestions into his story considering his audience? Would they have approved of such language?

* How does Chaucer prepare the reader/his audience for this tale? His serious or disingenuous is he being?

* Who gets satirized the most in this tale: the Carpenter, Nicholas, Absalom, or Alison? Or perhaps the Miller himself?

For Monday: "The Knight’s Tale," Parts Three and Four (48-79)

Answer TWO of the following: 

Q1: Why does The Knight lavish such detail on the temples of Mars, Venus, and Diana? For someone who wants to cut to the chase, why does he lose himself in all the seemingly unnecessary detail? Or is there something Chaucer wants us to see here? Who is really writing these passages?

Q2: "Bathos" means an attempt to write great, moving poetry that utterly fails and becomes ridiculous, lame, or simply laughable. Throughout the poem, the Knight has many bathetic moments, either because he isn't the best poet, or he's satirizing the "lovers" in the poem. Discuss a moment which you think is bathetic and makes the poem temporarily come crashing down around the Knight's feet (hint: look at the speeches!). 

Q3: Discuss Theseus' final speech in the poem: since the Knight probably identifies with Theseus, what sentiments is he pronouncing here? How is he trying to end the poem? Do you think Chaucer concurs with this--or is he still mocking the Knight's pretensions? 

Q4: Chaucer (or the Knight) doesn't allow Emily much room to be a character in her own right...but what does she reveal about herself, or the Medieval woman, in the poem? How does she comment on the practice of chivalric love from a woman's perspective? 

For Friday: "The Knight's Tale," Parts I and II

NOTE: Remember as you read that the Knight is telling this story--so the story comes through his perspective; but at the same time, Chaucer is telling HIS story through the Knight. So there are always two levels of storytelling going on in the tale. The trick is to figure out who is speaking when: Chaucer, or the Knight? 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Though the Knight is telling this story to the entire group, in some ways he has a very specific audience in mind: his son, the Squire. Why might we suspect that this story is really for him? How might this also help explain why tells a story of “long, long ago” instead of a modern tale of knights and battles? Consider, too, the difference between the Knight and the Squire in the General Prologue.

Q2: At the end of Part One, the Knight poses the question: “Now all you lovers, let me pose the question:/Who’s worse off, Arcita or Palamon?” Are we supposed to side with one of the lovers? Does one suffer a worse “hell” than the other? Or does this question have satiric undertones? (again, you might consider the audience)

Q3: Examine Theseus’ response to the lovers at the end of Part II: is this a mockery of the knight’s love or a defense of it? How might this be a commentary on the love story itself?

Q4: What kind of storyteller is the Knight? Remember that the narrator claims that “To tell a tale told by another man/You must repeat it as nearly as you can.” How does his storytelling differ from the narrator’s? What does he do well—or ill? Are we supposed to marvel at his rhetoric or find it somewhat lacking? In other words, does he strike us as a clumsy or a crafty poet?

For Wednesday: The Canterbury Tales: "The General Prologue"

NOTE: Be sure to remember Short Paper #1, due by 5pm--see assignment post below this one.

For Wednesday, read "The General Prologue," though we have no questions to answer; instead, I'll give you an in-class writing over some aspect of the work to respond to. Here are a few things to consider as you read:

* What apologies does the narrator make for the work to follow? What is his stated goal in writing the work--and why might this represent some of the new, humanistic trends in the 14th century (which we talked about in class on Friday)?

* Which pilgrims seem to come in for the most pointed satire? Why is this? Are they all of a certain class? Or are they more united in their careers?

* Conversely, which pilgirims does the narrator seem to admire the most? What qualities seems to protect them from his satirical eye?

* How is social class demonstrated by the pilgrims, all of whom are supposed to be united in humility and purpose? 

* We talked about the growing critique of the Church (not of religion, but of the people who control it) in class on Friday; where do we see this point of view in Chaucer's Prologue? Where might he be writing to a society disgusted and dismayed by Church corruption and the recent tribulations with the Black Death?

Short Paper #1 assignment--due next Wednesday!

Short Paper #1: Poetic Conversations

In the earth-realm all is crossed:

Wierd’s will changeth the world

(“The Wanderer”)

For your first Short Paper assignment, I want you to choose 2 poems in the anthology that seem to respond to one another. By “respond,” I mean that one poem seems to reply to a conversation that the first poem starts—as if both are having a discussion about a specific theme (death, fate, love, honor, etc.). Explain how the first poem states and illustrates the argument, using specific details from the poem. Then, explain how the second poem responds, elaborates, or contradicts these ideas in its own version of the theme. Think of each poem as two people sitting at a table, over drinks, talking long into the night about, say, “the forked ways of fate.” What does each one say, and how much do they ultimately agree with one another? Or, how might one help clarity or ‘translate’ the ideas of the first poem?

You can do any two works, but consider how certain poems seem to share similar themes and genres (as we discussed in class). You can even do “The Wife’s Complaint” and “The Husband’s Response” if you wanted, but if you do, make sure you go beyond the mere plot of the poems...show how one poem responds to the ideas and conversation of the first poem (and you can make The Wife respond to The Husband, etc.). Or you can be much more creative, such as having one Riddle respond to another Riddle, or have another poem respond to the challenge of a Riddle, etc. In short, just find two poems that seem like they go together in your mind, where one adds to the other in a significant (and poetic) way.

REQUIREMENTS

• At least 3 pages, double spaced
• Evidence of Close Reading: this means examining how the poems say what the say, and not just summarizing them (analyze, don’t summarize)
• Quote from the poems accurately and provide page numbers for each quotation
• No Works Cited is necessary for this paper, since you only have one source
• DUE IN ONE WEEK: Wednesday, September 6^th by 5pm