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