Click on the image to enlarge.
Showing posts with label Chaucer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chaucer. Show all posts
Friday, 6 June 2008
Thursday, 5 June 2008
Wednesday, 30 April 2008
Chaucer's poetic style - his use of epithets: Page 9
An epithet is a term used to characterise a person or thing, such as “rosy-fingered” in “the rosy-fingered dawn” or “the Great” in “Catherine the Great.”
It is a term used as a descriptive substitute for the name or title of a person, such as “The great communicator” for Tony Blair and “The iron lady” for Mrs Thatcher.
“Fresshe May” from "The Merchant's Tale".
Does Chaucer always involve irony when he uses epithets or are can they just be interpreted as part of the formulaic base of oral phrases that his audience would have expected to hear? Or does exploit each way of interpreting them between as part of his expressive range?
See page 2 for instructions on activities.
Chaucer's poetic style -hyperbole: P8
Another oral characteristic in Chaucer's tales and in particular, "The Merchant's Tale", is hyperbole – that is, exaggeration in description, effects, numbers. It adds emphasis and/or heightens the comedy, danger, passionate, dramatic, etc.There is more hyperbole in Chaucer’s style than is usually consciously recognised.
Hyperbole is a fundamental human characteristic which gives ordinary speech much of its emotional and imaginative impact. “There were thousands of them!” (meaning an unexpected number.) and “I’m frozen”, hyperbole and a metaphor for being cold.
Chaucer stylistically uses hyperbole to bring discipline, point and heightening.
For the patient Griselda Chaucer uses hyperbolical feelings and actions – through her extreme patience and the cruelty of her husband is extreme, etc.
The patient Griselda from “The Clerk’s Tale”
Audiences were not always expected to give their full sympathy to characters whose actions were hyperbolic.
See Page 2 for instructions on activities.
Chaucer's poetic style - addition and association (metonymy) and, and, and - Page 7
Another aspect of "The Redundant Style".
Common speech, and oral verse and prose, tend to proceed, as the above example suggests, by the addition of material and events, rather than by analysis.
For instance, in The General Prologue there are lively character sketches but they are not analytical. One detail is added to another. This is true of the sequence of events in traditional stories.
In general the oral poet is not much interested in causation, because he uses pre-existent underlying patterns and structures.
Association, more technically called metonymy, is created by, juxtaposition, likeness (metaphor) and connection.
Fundamental for oral poetry and speech, metonymy depends on associations formed by habit (memory and experience)
By metonymy
words can be relied on to evoke particular associated accepted ideas and feelings. These words naturally depend on social, moral, and intellectual structures, some of which have been lost.
We therefore may easily overlook the richness of oral poetry because we do not know, or we neglect the social, moral, and intellectual context, which is the associative structure.
Metonymy works with other elements of style.
Although metonymy depends on association and addition, not likeness, to make connections, it may join with likeness contribute towards various kinds of wordplay that characterise oral poetry. For instance, puns where the likeness of sound can have two different meanings, often with comic effect.
As literacy progressed and became dominant from the seventeenth century onwards, puns became despised and other wordplay disliked. Puns are used in Shakespeare but were later regarded as a fault, but were overlooked in Chaucer until recently.
Common speech, and oral verse and prose, tend to proceed, as the above example suggests, by the addition of material and events, rather than by analysis.
For instance, in The General Prologue there are lively character sketches but they are not analytical. One detail is added to another. This is true of the sequence of events in traditional stories.
In general the oral poet is not much interested in causation, because he uses pre-existent underlying patterns and structures.
Whenever you see a series of “ands” you have a additive and non-analytical style. There are few subordinate clauses and every detail seems to be presented with the same prominence. There is, as it were, no perspective. (For instance, the Bible’s –Genesis – on creation).
(Chaucer definitely has a perspective and so does his narrators but there are points in their storytelling that is simply additive.)
Association, more technically called metonymy, is created by, juxtaposition, likeness (metaphor) and connection.
Fundamental for oral poetry and speech, metonymy depends on associations formed by habit (memory and experience)
By metonymy
words can be relied on to evoke particular associated accepted ideas and feelings. These words naturally depend on social, moral, and intellectual structures, some of which have been lost.We therefore may easily overlook the richness of oral poetry because we do not know, or we neglect the social, moral, and intellectual context, which is the associative structure.
Metonymy works with other elements of style.
Although metonymy depends on association and addition, not likeness, to make connections, it may join with likeness contribute towards various kinds of wordplay that characterise oral poetry. For instance, puns where the likeness of sound can have two different meanings, often with comic effect.
As literacy progressed and became dominant from the seventeenth century onwards, puns became despised and other wordplay disliked. Puns are used in Shakespeare but were later regarded as a fault, but were overlooked in Chaucer until recently.
See page two for an explanation of the activites.
Chaucer and "the redundant style” - the influence of an oral culture - Page 6
At first this sounds odd if we apply the modern meaning to the word, redundant, as superflous. Here this term applies to a style of writing that was steeped in rhetoric and the oral culture prevalent before printing changed the medieval world.
•The kind of style, aiming at eloquence and copiousness is technically described as “The redundant style” and it is based in a social oral culture.
•Redundancy, having established the central point, emphasises it by repetition and then allows the audience to meditate on its implications.
•Poetry that has a social oral base helps turn literate learned matter into an oral style.
•Such speeches need to be read with the ear, without impatience to get on with the action. (Leisurely progress.)
•When listening, an audience needs guide-lines to what is going on, advance notice of the next subject, and appreciates the sense of leisurely collaboration.
Repetition with variation (the redundant style)
•The kind of style, aiming at eloquence and copiousness is technically described as “The redundant style” and it is based in a social oral culture.
•Redundancy, having established the central point, emphasises it by repetition and then allows the audience to meditate on its implications.
•Poetry that has a social oral base helps turn literate learned matter into an oral style.
•Such speeches need to be read with the ear, without impatience to get on with the action. (Leisurely progress.)
•When listening, an audience needs guide-lines to what is going on, advance notice of the next subject, and appreciates the sense of leisurely collaboration.
Repetition with variation (the redundant style)
This is often used to create heightened feeling. (i.e. Hamlet’s “To be or not to be speech” is a set of variations which are repetitions on the same theme.)
The social context of orality allows repetition to develop poetic power.
The social context of orality allows repetition to develop poetic power.
It is easily misunderstood because its oral origins have been forgotten.
To repeat (the redundant syle)
To repeat (the redundant syle)
In opera it fulfils the role of an aria – it involves repetitions and variations on a given theme.
It emphasises through its repetitions and allows the audience to meditate on its implications.
"We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender! " Part of the famous speech by Winston Churchill in 1940.
It emphasises through its repetitions and allows the audience to meditate on its implications.
"We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender! " Part of the famous speech by Winston Churchill in 1940.
Chaucer's poetic style - sententiousness (a style full of aphorisms – instructive sayings.) Page 5
Traditional social wisdom is articulated using formulas and set phrases, ‘What oft was thought’, results in a particular tone and style.
The use of proverbs and “sentences”: remarks long accepted in society for their general truth and applicability. The idea of summing up fraught situations with apt traditional phrases.
These phrases can be ironical but are not necessarily so.
“As many schools make students hard to collar,
A woman many-schooled is half a scholar.” Januarie, L. 1427-8 ("The Merchant's Tale".
The sententious style lends itself to authorial comment of the kind familiar to oral narrative and song. The story-teller comments on his story to the listening audience and his comments may be serious or comic according to the effect desired.
Proverbs are used “to enforce with th’ effect of my mateere”.
Chaucer’s style is continuously sententious throughout his work with a deeply proverbial style.
Alliteration hammers home the familiar.
Apostrophe is a form of direct address that gives the narrator’s moral attitudes and these can sometimes be ironic.
See page two for instructions for activities
The use of proverbs and “sentences”: remarks long accepted in society for their general truth and applicability. The idea of summing up fraught situations with apt traditional phrases.
These phrases can be ironical but are not necessarily so.
“As many schools make students hard to collar,
A woman many-schooled is half a scholar.” Januarie, L. 1427-8 ("The Merchant's Tale".
The sententious style lends itself to authorial comment of the kind familiar to oral narrative and song. The story-teller comments on his story to the listening audience and his comments may be serious or comic according to the effect desired.
Proverbs are used “to enforce with th’ effect of my mateere”.
Chaucer’s style is continuously sententious throughout his work with a deeply proverbial style.
Alliteration hammers home the familiar.
Apostrophe is a form of direct address that gives the narrator’s moral attitudes and these can sometimes be ironic.
See page two for instructions for activities
Monday, 31 March 2008
Tuesday, 4 March 2008
Monday, 4 February 2008
A Heads Up Guide to "The Merchant's Tale by Chaucer Part One
This is a useful explanation of the first half of the Tale. It will help you understand the Tale as you read it in the original. It is by Dr. Dana Symons who has been credited below.
Heads up guide to the Merchant
Here's the interlinear translation, though by this time you should really be reading on your own! See the Harvard page on the Merchant for a very brief summary and links to many analogues of the tale (our course text includes only one).
This poem is rife with irony, double meanings, and sly messing about with the reader. It's among Chaucer's best poetry, so don't be put off by what may seem intially a dry discourse of "authorities" on marriage - if you've been following what we've read so far, you'll begin to have an insider's understanding of what Chaucer is doing in this poem, and that insider's perspective should make these passages anything but dry. Get into the spirit of it if you can and wallow in Chaucer's clever manipulations of his materials. Here the Merchant openly gives voice to the marriage debate, which has been raging quietly (or perhaps not so quietly!) among the Canterbury pilgrims through their tales.
Notice first the Merchant's response to the Clerk's Tale (like the Host, he doesn't seem to get it - or maybe he does...). This tale takes us back to the fabliau genre but is written in a much more elevated style than the earlier fabliaux in CT. Like the Miller, the Merchant tells a tale of an older man (a knight) married to a very young woman, in this case with the names "January" and "May" to emphasize the mismatch in their ages. The tale is further complicated in the second half by the interference of the gods Pluto and Proserpine, who are a married couple themselves and take sides (more on that in the next "heads up guide"). Much of the first half of the tale is devoted to a debate on marriage, opened by the narrator's own discourse on marriage, perhaps drawing on the Clerk's Tale for some of the idealized notions about wives, and then conducted by January and his two brothers, Justinus and Placebo. January tells them he wishes a young wife because young wives are malleable, unlike older ones who have been schooled by clerks and are half clerks themselves (!). Placebo, a flatterer, agrees with everything January says, while Justinus argues against January taking a wife (even at one point citing the Wife of Bath!).
Much like the Wife of Bath's Prologue, the first section of the Merchant's Tale consists of quoting, paraphrasing, and glossing various authorities, in this case for or against marriage, so think about the arguments outlined in light of the other tales we've read; in particular, how does having read the Wife of Bath's Prologue and the Clerk's Tale affect your understanding of the many arguments that are made in the Merchant's Tale?
What does Justinus's citation of the Wife of Bath do to complicate further the multilayered Canterbury Tales narrative (that Chaucer can't let us forget for an instant who's in control of this reading experience, can he?).
Towards the end of the first section you are reading, January and May's wedding feast is held, which has some of the most elegant rhetorical flourishes in all of Chaucer's work. It's at the end of the feast that Damian, a young squire serving in January's household, is introduced as a rival for May's affections (you know what's coming now, don't you?). Both men are "ravished" by their desire for May, but the narrator leaves Damian to languish in lovesickness while he follows January and May into their nuptial bed. There, January's rough beard scratches May like sharkskin, his neck-skin shakes, and he talks to her in many a double entendre before lustily "playing" with her throughout the night. In the midst of this, the narrator says, "God knows what May thought in her heart."
Much food for thought here - I leave you to it. There will be a separate "heads up guide" for the second half of the tale.
by Dr. Dana Symons of Simon Fraser University
Repost
Heads up guide to the Merchant
Here's the interlinear translation, though by this time you should really be reading on your own! See the Harvard page on the Merchant for a very brief summary and links to many analogues of the tale (our course text includes only one).
This poem is rife with irony, double meanings, and sly messing about with the reader. It's among Chaucer's best poetry, so don't be put off by what may seem intially a dry discourse of "authorities" on marriage - if you've been following what we've read so far, you'll begin to have an insider's understanding of what Chaucer is doing in this poem, and that insider's perspective should make these passages anything but dry. Get into the spirit of it if you can and wallow in Chaucer's clever manipulations of his materials. Here the Merchant openly gives voice to the marriage debate, which has been raging quietly (or perhaps not so quietly!) among the Canterbury pilgrims through their tales.
Notice first the Merchant's response to the Clerk's Tale (like the Host, he doesn't seem to get it - or maybe he does...). This tale takes us back to the fabliau genre but is written in a much more elevated style than the earlier fabliaux in CT. Like the Miller, the Merchant tells a tale of an older man (a knight) married to a very young woman, in this case with the names "January" and "May" to emphasize the mismatch in their ages. The tale is further complicated in the second half by the interference of the gods Pluto and Proserpine, who are a married couple themselves and take sides (more on that in the next "heads up guide"). Much of the first half of the tale is devoted to a debate on marriage, opened by the narrator's own discourse on marriage, perhaps drawing on the Clerk's Tale for some of the idealized notions about wives, and then conducted by January and his two brothers, Justinus and Placebo. January tells them he wishes a young wife because young wives are malleable, unlike older ones who have been schooled by clerks and are half clerks themselves (!). Placebo, a flatterer, agrees with everything January says, while Justinus argues against January taking a wife (even at one point citing the Wife of Bath!).
Much like the Wife of Bath's Prologue, the first section of the Merchant's Tale consists of quoting, paraphrasing, and glossing various authorities, in this case for or against marriage, so think about the arguments outlined in light of the other tales we've read; in particular, how does having read the Wife of Bath's Prologue and the Clerk's Tale affect your understanding of the many arguments that are made in the Merchant's Tale?
What does Justinus's citation of the Wife of Bath do to complicate further the multilayered Canterbury Tales narrative (that Chaucer can't let us forget for an instant who's in control of this reading experience, can he?).
Towards the end of the first section you are reading, January and May's wedding feast is held, which has some of the most elegant rhetorical flourishes in all of Chaucer's work. It's at the end of the feast that Damian, a young squire serving in January's household, is introduced as a rival for May's affections (you know what's coming now, don't you?). Both men are "ravished" by their desire for May, but the narrator leaves Damian to languish in lovesickness while he follows January and May into their nuptial bed. There, January's rough beard scratches May like sharkskin, his neck-skin shakes, and he talks to her in many a double entendre before lustily "playing" with her throughout the night. In the midst of this, the narrator says, "God knows what May thought in her heart."
Much food for thought here - I leave you to it. There will be a separate "heads up guide" for the second half of the tale.
by Dr. Dana Symons of Simon Fraser University
Repost
Wednesday, 30 January 2008
How to annotate Chaucer's "The Merchant's Tale"
How to annotate Chaucer for understanding and interpretation in “The Merchant’s Tale”
For literal understanding:
- underline words and phrases that you do not understand, and find their meanings in your text's glossary and notes; write their meanings near them on the text. Be prepared to translate a line and sometimes several lines for understanding meaning as opposed to working through the lines word for word. (Sometimes phrases, old disused proverbs, sayings and early grammar can only be understood by looking at lines for contextual understanding.)
For interpretative understanding
- themes: characterisation, stereotypes and individualisation, themes: marriage and the marriage debate, the position of women, blindness and seeing, deception and self deception, appearance and reality, youth and age, etc.
- note the historical and cultural context, arguments, imagery of gardens, animals and time; irony, alliteration, motifs, realism, digressions from the narrative, parallel plots and echoed themes, implied criticism, courtly love, literary contexts, myth and folklore, fate, commonly held beliefs such as lady fortune, superstitions, astrology, the use of “auctorites” including Biblical figures to support arguments, aspects of the form (fabliau –genre and form), realism, apostrophe, satire, social commentary.
The Teller and the Tale
Always establish WHO is speaking and becomes the narrator. What is their attitude to what they are talking about? (Sincere, self-deluding, serious, angry, patronising, obsequious, ironic, etc.) How does the language and imagery that they use inform or colour their views. Are they undertaking a lengthy digression from the narrative? Why? How are themes expressed through the narrators?
Monday, 14 January 2008
Chaucer and context - the individual and society in modernity
This is an interesting Marxist interpretation of how society changed from the middle ages to the age of individualism. It should prove useful for interpreting the context of Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales".
Tuesday, 4 December 2007
A Head's Up Guide To "The Merchant's Tale" Part 2
This is a useful explanation of the second half of the Tale. It will help you understand the Tale as you read it in the original. It is by Dr. Dana Symons who has been credited below.Heads up guide to the Merchant, part 2
Here's the interlinear translation and the Harvard page on the Merchant.
The first half of the Merchant's Tale generates sympathy for May through a detailed description of how January was rough in bed with her, including the narrator's comments that "The bryde was broght abedde as stille as stoon" (1818) and "God woot what that May thoughte in hir herte / Whan she hym saugh up sittynge in his sherte, / In his nyght-cappe, and with his nekke lene" (1851-53). We also don't have a very high opinion of January; he's gullible, but he's also overly concerned with his own desires. How does the narrative encourage us to respond to the characters in the second half? Is this a tale of a "wicked wife"?
How does Damian compare to other lovers we've seen? (Palamoun, Arcite, Nicholas, Absolom). Are we supposed to feel sympathy for him? And when January expresses concern over Damian's "sickness," does it make January seem more likable or sympathetic? Should we feel sorry for him? Or does it simply increase the irony of the situation? Later on, how should we interpret January's blindness? His jealousy?
Even more than in the first half of the tale, we get details about May's thoughts and feelings: though the narrator sometimes coyly says he can't say what she thought, on other occasions he gives us explicit details. What effect does this have? How does this treatment of a female character's desires and thoughts compare to the portrayal of other women in the Canterbury Tales? What does the fact that May reads Damian's letter in the privy, January's insistence on always having a hand on her once he's gone blind, and January's locked garden suggest about privacy in the tale?
Notice that line 1986, "Lo, pitee renneth soone in gentil herte!" is almost exactly the same as line 1761 of the Knight's Tale, "For pitee renneth soone in gentil herte." Why the echo? How should we interpret this?
When January and May are in the garden near the end of the tale, Pluto and Proserpina intervene. Pluto, like many other men in CT, rehearses a number of negative stereotypes about women gleened from various "auctoritees," but his wife Proserpina counters him by arguing that there are indeed many virtuous women too.
What does the debate of the gods here add to the tale's treatment of marriage and gender issues?
Finally, what was your reaction to the end of the tale?
by Dr. Dana Symons of Simon Fraser University
A Head's Up Guide To The "Merchant's Tale" Part 1
This is a useful explanation of the first half of the Tale. It will help you understand the Tale as you read it in the original. It is by Dr. Dana Symons who has been credited below.
Heads up guide to the Merchant
Here's the interlinear translation, though by this time you should really be reading on your own! See the Harvard page on the Merchant for a very brief summary and links to many analogues of the tale (our course text includes only one).
This poem is rife with irony, double meanings, and sly messing about with the reader. It's among Chaucer's best poetry, so don't be put off by what may seem intially a dry discourse of "authorities" on marriage - if you've been following what we've read so far, you'll begin to have an insider's understanding of what Chaucer is doing in this poem, and that insider's perspective should make these passages anything but dry. Get into the spirit of it if you can and wallow in Chaucer's clever manipulations of his materials. Here the Merchant openly gives voice to the marriage debate, which has been raging quietly (or perhaps not so quietly!) among the Canterbury pilgrims through their tales.
Notice first the Merchant's response to the Clerk's Tale (like the Host, he doesn't seem to get it - or maybe he does...). This tale takes us back to the fabliau genre but is written in a much more elevated style than the earlier fabliaux in CT. Like the Miller, the Merchant tells a tale of an older man (a knight) married to a very young woman, in this case with the names "January" and "May" to emphasize the mismatch in their ages. The tale is further complicated in the second half by the interference of the gods Pluto and Proserpine, who are a married couple themselves and take sides (more on that in the next "heads up guide"). Much of the first half of the tale is devoted to a debate on marriage, opened by the narrator's own discourse on marriage, perhaps drawing on the Clerk's Tale for some of the idealized notions about wives, and then conducted by January and his two brothers, Justinus and Placebo. January tells them he wishes a young wife because young wives are malleable, unlike older ones who have been schooled by clerks and are half clerks themselves (!). Placebo, a flatterer, agrees with everything January says, while Justinus argues against January taking a wife (even at one point citing the Wife of Bath!).
Much like the Wife of Bath's Prologue, the first section of the Merchant's Tale consists of quoting, paraphrasing, and glossing various authorities, in this case for or against marriage, so think about the arguments outlined in light of the other tales we've read; in particular, how does having read the Wife of Bath's Prologue and the Clerk's Tale affect your understanding of the many arguments that are made in the Merchant's Tale?
What does Justinus's citation of the Wife of Bath do to complicate further the multilayered Canterbury Tales narrative (that Chaucer can't let us forget for an instant who's in control of this reading experience, can he?).
Towards the end of the first section you are reading, January and May's wedding feast is held, which has some of the most elegant rhetorical flourishes in all of Chaucer's work. It's at the end of the feast that Damian, a young squire serving in January's household, is introduced as a rival for May's affections (you know what's coming now, don't you?). Both men are "ravished" by their desire for May, but the narrator leaves Damian to languish in lovesickness while he follows January and May into their nuptial bed. There, January's rough beard scratches May like sharkskin, his neck-skin shakes, and he talks to her in many a double entendre before lustily "playing" with her throughout the night. In the midst of this, the narrator says, "God knows what May thought in her heart."
Much food for thought here - I leave you to it. There will be a separate "heads up guide" for the second half of the tale.
by Dr. Dana Symons of Simon Fraser University
Heads up guide to the Merchant
Here's the interlinear translation, though by this time you should really be reading on your own! See the Harvard page on the Merchant for a very brief summary and links to many analogues of the tale (our course text includes only one).
This poem is rife with irony, double meanings, and sly messing about with the reader. It's among Chaucer's best poetry, so don't be put off by what may seem intially a dry discourse of "authorities" on marriage - if you've been following what we've read so far, you'll begin to have an insider's understanding of what Chaucer is doing in this poem, and that insider's perspective should make these passages anything but dry. Get into the spirit of it if you can and wallow in Chaucer's clever manipulations of his materials. Here the Merchant openly gives voice to the marriage debate, which has been raging quietly (or perhaps not so quietly!) among the Canterbury pilgrims through their tales.
Notice first the Merchant's response to the Clerk's Tale (like the Host, he doesn't seem to get it - or maybe he does...). This tale takes us back to the fabliau genre but is written in a much more elevated style than the earlier fabliaux in CT. Like the Miller, the Merchant tells a tale of an older man (a knight) married to a very young woman, in this case with the names "January" and "May" to emphasize the mismatch in their ages. The tale is further complicated in the second half by the interference of the gods Pluto and Proserpine, who are a married couple themselves and take sides (more on that in the next "heads up guide"). Much of the first half of the tale is devoted to a debate on marriage, opened by the narrator's own discourse on marriage, perhaps drawing on the Clerk's Tale for some of the idealized notions about wives, and then conducted by January and his two brothers, Justinus and Placebo. January tells them he wishes a young wife because young wives are malleable, unlike older ones who have been schooled by clerks and are half clerks themselves (!). Placebo, a flatterer, agrees with everything January says, while Justinus argues against January taking a wife (even at one point citing the Wife of Bath!).
Much like the Wife of Bath's Prologue, the first section of the Merchant's Tale consists of quoting, paraphrasing, and glossing various authorities, in this case for or against marriage, so think about the arguments outlined in light of the other tales we've read; in particular, how does having read the Wife of Bath's Prologue and the Clerk's Tale affect your understanding of the many arguments that are made in the Merchant's Tale?
What does Justinus's citation of the Wife of Bath do to complicate further the multilayered Canterbury Tales narrative (that Chaucer can't let us forget for an instant who's in control of this reading experience, can he?).
Towards the end of the first section you are reading, January and May's wedding feast is held, which has some of the most elegant rhetorical flourishes in all of Chaucer's work. It's at the end of the feast that Damian, a young squire serving in January's household, is introduced as a rival for May's affections (you know what's coming now, don't you?). Both men are "ravished" by their desire for May, but the narrator leaves Damian to languish in lovesickness while he follows January and May into their nuptial bed. There, January's rough beard scratches May like sharkskin, his neck-skin shakes, and he talks to her in many a double entendre before lustily "playing" with her throughout the night. In the midst of this, the narrator says, "God knows what May thought in her heart."
Much food for thought here - I leave you to it. There will be a separate "heads up guide" for the second half of the tale.
by Dr. Dana Symons of Simon Fraser University
Wednesday, 5 September 2007
Student Exemplar Essays: how Chaucer creates humour by satirising religious and courtly love.
Chaucer creates humour by satirising values in religious and courtly love. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Chaucer was extremely successful at creating humour within his narratives, which is partly why his works were, and still are, so popular. Humour can be achieved through a variety of elements including plot, characterisation, language, pace, timing and circumstance. Chaucer used of all these, but largely drew upon the satirical portrayals of both the courtly love genre and religion within ‘The Merchant’s Tale’.
A courtly lover is a stock type for French literature, and usually shows the following four conditions; Humility, Courtesy, Adultery and the Religion of Love. Damyan initially shows humility, and courtesy is found in the closely observed etiquette of the marriage ceremony (with the priest blessing the bed and May staying in it ‘unto the for the day/As usage is of wive for the beste’). Damyan’s desire for adultery is made clear at the wedding (‘So sorre hath Venus hurt him with hire brond) and the ‘Religion of Love’ occupies much of the narrative from line 720 onwards. However despite the narrative complying with such conventions, the whole genre of courtly love is indirectly satirised through the characterisation of the courtly love players; Januarie is lecherous, May is greedy and Damyan is lustful. These undesirable qualities add humour to the narrative, as none of them are deserving heroes but ridiculous characters in a comical narrative. Despite courtesy being displayed through other elements of the play; such as the rich and conventional setting of ‘Lumbardye’ (complete with all the finery and enlightenment of the Renaissance influence) and those mentioned above, courtesy, and therefore one of the four-fold conditions of courtly love, is often undermined to humorous effect in the narrative. Januraie rushes his guests to leave ‘As best mighte, savinge his honour’ only so that he can ‘dooth all his labour’ with May; the idea of an ‘oold and hoor’ man dashing around excitedly full of aphrodisiac whilst struggling to be polite conjures many both disturbing and hilarious images. He harshly dismisses Justinus’ sound advice (‘straw for thy Senek , and for thy proverbs!’), which tickles the audience because thy can already see through Januarie’s naivety and know that these words will probably come back to haunt him. He also undermines the condition of courtesy through his empty promise to check on Damyan, whereby he fatally decides to send May in his place; this is humorous as we are well aware of Damyan’s intentions. The genre is further satirised through the ridiculous, and laughable, imagery of May and Damyan having sex in a pear tree (‘in he throng’) whilst the blind, old Januarie clings to the trunk underneath. A sense of dramatic irony is achieved here at Januarie’s expense, as he, at first, has no knowledge of what rights are being violated whilst those listening to the Tale, although shocked by the nature of this act, are not particularly surprised by its occurrence. The act of May casting Damyan’s love letter of sorrow and wooing ‘softely’ down the toilet mocks and teases the poetically praised divinity of love and romance; although practical is not poetic. This situation prompts further chuckling, for the lofty concept of love is greeted by the crude humour of a 14th century toilet-hole.
Within a courtly love story there is usually some reason why the adulterous lover and his/her partner are ill-suited for each other. Often a matter of age, the contrast within this narrative is so extreme, unavoidable and full of such grotesque description that the genre is given a pronounced satirical edge. The ‘fresshe’, fairy-like, enchanting lady May (‘fulfild of alle beautee and pleasaunce’) is a dramatic contrast to the ‘oold and hoore’ croaking Januarie, which satirises this courtly love situation beyond its required proportions. Chaucer goes into great detail to subtly enhance such physical diversity, for example between lines 534-537 the word ‘beautee’ is repeated 3 times to reinforce our aesthetic appreciation of May, whilst the repulsive onomatopoeic ‘the slake skin aboute his nekke shaketh’ further draws out our disgust, and exaggerates just how unfit the two are for each other. This emphasis also heightens the humour and our comical appreciation of the situation. Another aspect of courtly love is the ‘Religion of Love’ which basically means that the courtly lover must consummate his lust in order to be cured. Lines 174-182 allow the Merchant’s sarcasm towards this idea penetrate the text, and he mocks ‘gentil’ May’s piteous decision to save Damyan from dying of lust by granting him ‘hire grace’. This has humorous undertones, as the audience all knows what is meant by this subtle language and the hinting of adultery, dressed up in honourable pretence and viewed in such a sarcastic light, make the audience squirm with delight. Although the Medieval World view maintains that any adulterer is a breaker of the ten commandments and must therefore go to hell, courtly love is indirectly satirised through the mocking of May’s moral vice, as the narrator sarcastically declares ‘Lo, pitee renneth soone in gentil herte’, women have a noble generosity which will save a dying man, and that any ‘tyrant’ that would not try to do so has a ‘herte as nhard as any stoon’ and rejoices in her ‘crueel pride’. The harsh and dramatic tone of this of this verse almost verges on rhetorical declamation, and enhances the ironic drama and sarcastic conviction behind such comments; the audience knows that this is not the narrator’s true beliefs. This undermines the enthusiastic praise which the Merchant narrator gives the merciful May, and thus satirises the ‘Religion of Love’, whilst prompting some smiles along the way.
Religion can also said to be satirised for comic effect in ‘the Merchants Tale’, as the ‘auctorities’ are frequently misquoted throughout the narrative. For example Pluto uses the words of Solomon (‘Fulfild of sapience and of worldly gloerie/…To every wight that wit and reson kan’) to express how terrible and wicked womankind are. However Proserpine later reveals what a lecherous fool Solomon actually was, having over 300 wives and 1000 concubines, and worshiped false idols thus forsaking the true God. Now Pluto is the fool, as this revelation, if not already known by the Medieval audience, ridiculed his sincere beliefs. Similarly Januarie uses religious figures out of context in lines 151-163 when he reasons that a wife is a supportive, obedient figure who will always further her husband’s greatness. By drawing upon the examples of Rebekke, Judith, Abigail and Ester Januarie actually weakens his position as each of these women in turn deceived their husbands in a variety of manipulative ways, which ridicules not only his naivety but also, in a broader sense, satirises the way in which religion can be twisted and misused to justify one’s desires. This makes Januarie even more a fool, causing us to laugh harder at his ever-emerging incompetence and stupidity. The use of ‘Lo’ seems to imply that Januarie is taking on the language of a sermon, believing that he is communicating divine religious wisdom, when actually he is abusing it. It also puts a structural irony on Januarie as he is demanding everyone to ‘look’, when he himself cannot even spot the fundamental errors he is making. Such irony is carried through to the wedding blessing, when the Priest begs May to ‘be lyk Sarra and Rebekke’ (another example of a woman who deceived her husband in order to establish her own power) .This ignorant request seems to rest an element of fate, humorous in nature, on the rest of the tale, and satirizes the church for its own misuse of holy scripture. The church could also be seen as being satirized for sending May off almost to war, not a secure and holy future, as Januarie views “all relations between sexes as a kind of war” (Hussey), wanting to hold May ‘streyne/Harder than evere Paris did Eleyne’. The humour here being that Januarie is not a young and dashing Prince, driven by romance and love, but an old man driven by the direction of his desires; he is more of a Menelaus, if that. It could also be argued that the Church is subject to Juvenalian satire by allowing such an ill-matching couple to marry, as the immediacy of the engagement and diversity between both May and Januarie (‘tendre youthe’ and ‘stouping age’) forces one to question their motives. No one present at the wedding seems to be fooled; everyone is laughing, but not necessarily for the right reasons (‘Ther is swich mirthe-that it may nat be written’). Even the goddess Venus sees the hilarity in such a match: ‘For Januarie was bicome hir knight’, who is far from being young, gallant and noble. The mirth of the characters within the narrative is also enjoyed by the audience, as we laugh not only at the ludicrous situation itself but also the Merchant-narrators delicate treatment of such a bizarre ceremony (‘To small is bothe thy penne, and eek thy tongue/For to descriven of this marriage’).
‘The Merchants Tale’ does satirise both the genre of courtly love and religion to an extent within the narrative, and this frequently creates humour. The conventions of courtly love are satirised through characterisation and exaggerated, or undermined, to such an extreme by imagery and tone that the absurdity of the events are emphasised and mocked. In particular the ‘religion of love’ falls prey to the narrator’s sarcasm, which serves to enhance our comical appreciation of the witty narrative and its ridiculous characters. Religion is not satirised as much, and indeed Hussey believed it was barely attacked at all, however the use of misquoting biblical authorities and figures, alongside the blessing of such an ill-fitting couple, does seem to lampoon the church at least a little. Although other elements of the narrative, such as the choice of language combined with rhythm and pace, also contribute towards creating humour, it is the over-all culmination of all these factors which makes ‘The Merchant’s Tale’ a truly successful comedy.
By Louise Flower
Chaucer was extremely successful at creating humour within his narratives, which is partly why his works were, and still are, so popular. Humour can be achieved through a variety of elements including plot, characterisation, language, pace, timing and circumstance. Chaucer used of all these, but largely drew upon the satirical portrayals of both the courtly love genre and religion within ‘The Merchant’s Tale’.
A courtly lover is a stock type for French literature, and usually shows the following four conditions; Humility, Courtesy, Adultery and the Religion of Love. Damyan initially shows humility, and courtesy is found in the closely observed etiquette of the marriage ceremony (with the priest blessing the bed and May staying in it ‘unto the for the day/As usage is of wive for the beste’). Damyan’s desire for adultery is made clear at the wedding (‘So sorre hath Venus hurt him with hire brond) and the ‘Religion of Love’ occupies much of the narrative from line 720 onwards. However despite the narrative complying with such conventions, the whole genre of courtly love is indirectly satirised through the characterisation of the courtly love players; Januarie is lecherous, May is greedy and Damyan is lustful. These undesirable qualities add humour to the narrative, as none of them are deserving heroes but ridiculous characters in a comical narrative. Despite courtesy being displayed through other elements of the play; such as the rich and conventional setting of ‘Lumbardye’ (complete with all the finery and enlightenment of the Renaissance influence) and those mentioned above, courtesy, and therefore one of the four-fold conditions of courtly love, is often undermined to humorous effect in the narrative. Januraie rushes his guests to leave ‘As best mighte, savinge his honour’ only so that he can ‘dooth all his labour’ with May; the idea of an ‘oold and hoor’ man dashing around excitedly full of aphrodisiac whilst struggling to be polite conjures many both disturbing and hilarious images. He harshly dismisses Justinus’ sound advice (‘straw for thy Senek , and for thy proverbs!’), which tickles the audience because thy can already see through Januarie’s naivety and know that these words will probably come back to haunt him. He also undermines the condition of courtesy through his empty promise to check on Damyan, whereby he fatally decides to send May in his place; this is humorous as we are well aware of Damyan’s intentions. The genre is further satirised through the ridiculous, and laughable, imagery of May and Damyan having sex in a pear tree (‘in he throng’) whilst the blind, old Januarie clings to the trunk underneath. A sense of dramatic irony is achieved here at Januarie’s expense, as he, at first, has no knowledge of what rights are being violated whilst those listening to the Tale, although shocked by the nature of this act, are not particularly surprised by its occurrence. The act of May casting Damyan’s love letter of sorrow and wooing ‘softely’ down the toilet mocks and teases the poetically praised divinity of love and romance; although practical is not poetic. This situation prompts further chuckling, for the lofty concept of love is greeted by the crude humour of a 14th century toilet-hole.
Within a courtly love story there is usually some reason why the adulterous lover and his/her partner are ill-suited for each other. Often a matter of age, the contrast within this narrative is so extreme, unavoidable and full of such grotesque description that the genre is given a pronounced satirical edge. The ‘fresshe’, fairy-like, enchanting lady May (‘fulfild of alle beautee and pleasaunce’) is a dramatic contrast to the ‘oold and hoore’ croaking Januarie, which satirises this courtly love situation beyond its required proportions. Chaucer goes into great detail to subtly enhance such physical diversity, for example between lines 534-537 the word ‘beautee’ is repeated 3 times to reinforce our aesthetic appreciation of May, whilst the repulsive onomatopoeic ‘the slake skin aboute his nekke shaketh’ further draws out our disgust, and exaggerates just how unfit the two are for each other. This emphasis also heightens the humour and our comical appreciation of the situation. Another aspect of courtly love is the ‘Religion of Love’ which basically means that the courtly lover must consummate his lust in order to be cured. Lines 174-182 allow the Merchant’s sarcasm towards this idea penetrate the text, and he mocks ‘gentil’ May’s piteous decision to save Damyan from dying of lust by granting him ‘hire grace’. This has humorous undertones, as the audience all knows what is meant by this subtle language and the hinting of adultery, dressed up in honourable pretence and viewed in such a sarcastic light, make the audience squirm with delight. Although the Medieval World view maintains that any adulterer is a breaker of the ten commandments and must therefore go to hell, courtly love is indirectly satirised through the mocking of May’s moral vice, as the narrator sarcastically declares ‘Lo, pitee renneth soone in gentil herte’, women have a noble generosity which will save a dying man, and that any ‘tyrant’ that would not try to do so has a ‘herte as nhard as any stoon’ and rejoices in her ‘crueel pride’. The harsh and dramatic tone of this of this verse almost verges on rhetorical declamation, and enhances the ironic drama and sarcastic conviction behind such comments; the audience knows that this is not the narrator’s true beliefs. This undermines the enthusiastic praise which the Merchant narrator gives the merciful May, and thus satirises the ‘Religion of Love’, whilst prompting some smiles along the way.
Religion can also said to be satirised for comic effect in ‘the Merchants Tale’, as the ‘auctorities’ are frequently misquoted throughout the narrative. For example Pluto uses the words of Solomon (‘Fulfild of sapience and of worldly gloerie/…To every wight that wit and reson kan’) to express how terrible and wicked womankind are. However Proserpine later reveals what a lecherous fool Solomon actually was, having over 300 wives and 1000 concubines, and worshiped false idols thus forsaking the true God. Now Pluto is the fool, as this revelation, if not already known by the Medieval audience, ridiculed his sincere beliefs. Similarly Januarie uses religious figures out of context in lines 151-163 when he reasons that a wife is a supportive, obedient figure who will always further her husband’s greatness. By drawing upon the examples of Rebekke, Judith, Abigail and Ester Januarie actually weakens his position as each of these women in turn deceived their husbands in a variety of manipulative ways, which ridicules not only his naivety but also, in a broader sense, satirises the way in which religion can be twisted and misused to justify one’s desires. This makes Januarie even more a fool, causing us to laugh harder at his ever-emerging incompetence and stupidity. The use of ‘Lo’ seems to imply that Januarie is taking on the language of a sermon, believing that he is communicating divine religious wisdom, when actually he is abusing it. It also puts a structural irony on Januarie as he is demanding everyone to ‘look’, when he himself cannot even spot the fundamental errors he is making. Such irony is carried through to the wedding blessing, when the Priest begs May to ‘be lyk Sarra and Rebekke’ (another example of a woman who deceived her husband in order to establish her own power) .This ignorant request seems to rest an element of fate, humorous in nature, on the rest of the tale, and satirizes the church for its own misuse of holy scripture. The church could also be seen as being satirized for sending May off almost to war, not a secure and holy future, as Januarie views “all relations between sexes as a kind of war” (Hussey), wanting to hold May ‘streyne/Harder than evere Paris did Eleyne’. The humour here being that Januarie is not a young and dashing Prince, driven by romance and love, but an old man driven by the direction of his desires; he is more of a Menelaus, if that. It could also be argued that the Church is subject to Juvenalian satire by allowing such an ill-matching couple to marry, as the immediacy of the engagement and diversity between both May and Januarie (‘tendre youthe’ and ‘stouping age’) forces one to question their motives. No one present at the wedding seems to be fooled; everyone is laughing, but not necessarily for the right reasons (‘Ther is swich mirthe-that it may nat be written’). Even the goddess Venus sees the hilarity in such a match: ‘For Januarie was bicome hir knight’, who is far from being young, gallant and noble. The mirth of the characters within the narrative is also enjoyed by the audience, as we laugh not only at the ludicrous situation itself but also the Merchant-narrators delicate treatment of such a bizarre ceremony (‘To small is bothe thy penne, and eek thy tongue/For to descriven of this marriage’).
‘The Merchants Tale’ does satirise both the genre of courtly love and religion to an extent within the narrative, and this frequently creates humour. The conventions of courtly love are satirised through characterisation and exaggerated, or undermined, to such an extreme by imagery and tone that the absurdity of the events are emphasised and mocked. In particular the ‘religion of love’ falls prey to the narrator’s sarcasm, which serves to enhance our comical appreciation of the witty narrative and its ridiculous characters. Religion is not satirised as much, and indeed Hussey believed it was barely attacked at all, however the use of misquoting biblical authorities and figures, alongside the blessing of such an ill-fitting couple, does seem to lampoon the church at least a little. Although other elements of the narrative, such as the choice of language combined with rhythm and pace, also contribute towards creating humour, it is the over-all culmination of all these factors which makes ‘The Merchant’s Tale’ a truly successful comedy.
By Louise Flower
Student Exemplar Essays: Chaucer's presentation of ideas about marriage
‘The Merchants Tale’ has been seen as presenting a ‘debate on marriage’. Explore Chaucer’s poetic presentation of ideas about marriage. Include an examination of lines 307-364
In lines 307-364 Justinus is voicing his concerns about the haste and sense of immediacy behind Januarie’s decision to marry a young woman. Using the wisdom of the Roman academic Seneca, Justinus argues that a man ought to consider carefully who to give his possessions to, and certainly to whom he gives his body to ‘for alwey’. Justinus is strongly advising Januarie against marrying ‘withouten avysement’ as it is not child play; a lady could be wise, sober, a drunk, a shrew, proud, whorish or a ‘wastour of thy good’. It is here that we start to hear the Merchant narrator’s voice coming through. From the Prologue we are already aware that he is subject to a bitterly regretted marriage with a wife ‘the worste that may be’, and despite the Merchant’s earlier promise not to let his soured feelings towards women influence the story this is clearly not to be the case. Only a few lines later does Justinus himself reveal that he ‘have wept many a teere/Ful pryvely syn I have a wyf’, and such a marriage has only brought him great financial cost, care and duties rather than the bliss and earthly paradises of which Januarie naively anticipates. Justinus has now become a vehicle for the Merchant’s voice which becomes increasingly negative towards the concept of marriage, and as such Januarie’s rose-tinted spectacles take a repeated bashing; unfortunately to no avail. Justinus confesses that, although man shall find nothing in this world which is entirely perfect (the Medieval world view maintained that such a being could only be God), a man should seek a woman with more virtues than vices. He points out that this takes time to discover (‘And al this axeth leyser for t’enquire) since his own wife seems ‘stedefast’ to most crowds of women however he has since discovered this is not true (‘But I woot best where wryngeth me my sho’). Justinus’ tainted ideas towards marriage foreshadow the violation of Januarie’s own marriage vows later on in the narrative, claiming ‘Ye shul nat plesen hire fully years three-/This is to seyn, to doon hire ful plesaunce’. Januarie’s many years and lack of physical appeal, in direct to contrast to Damyan’s youth and sexual allure, render him incapable of satisfying the young and vibrant May, and so she later turns elsewhere to quench her desire for ‘plesaunce’; a wife requires constant attention indeed! However Januarie, choosing to hear only what is agreeable to his desires, dismisses Justinus’ words of advice as foolery, and adheres to ‘wyser men’ and ‘auctorities’, with rhetorical declamation in the line ‘Straw for thy Senek, and for thy proverbs!’. Januarie’s blindness towards reality is further emphasised by his acceptance of Placebo’s comment that a man who hinders matrimony is cursed; Januarie hears what he wants to hear, believes what he wants to believe: in a sense he has already gone blind.
The decisive negativity and uneasiness towards both women and, therefore, marriage draws some parallels to Pluto’s speech later on in the narrative. Pluto speaks of all the treachery, deceit, faithlessness and frailty a woman has in her heart, claiming he can tell ‘ten hundred thousand’ tales famous for this. Such a declaration sheds a very pessimistic shadow over the nature of women, and therefore the bonds a man may try to tie with them. As Justinus used Seneca, so Pluto used Solomon to give such comments an authoritative weight, claiming that amongst a thousand men Solomon found one with true goodness (‘the bountee of man’), yet amongst a thousand women he found not one. This echo’s Justinus’ convictions of women often having many a vice and being untrustworthy, however the accusations here against women are even more extreme, and sadly there is no honourable character like Griselda within the ‘Merchant’s Tale’ to prove him wrong. Pluto speaks of womankind’s’ wickedness, harlotry and expresses his wishes for a wild fir and corrupt pestilence to ‘falle upon youre bodies yet to-nygth’. In the medieval world view women had little more rights than cattle due to their alleged ‘Inability to rationalise’, such slander such as this would have made union with such creatures intensely undesirable, as no man could wish for a woman or wife as terrible as those described by Solomon and Pluto. It is at this point Propespina decides to give a gift to all of womankind which, if man had knowledge of it, would push them further away from the desire to marry. She gives women the ability to deceive their husbands ‘Al hadde men eyn a thing with bothe his yen’ and excuse themselves from awkward situations so that men were as ignorant as geese. Such cunning and deceitful pragmatism reflects the nature of the Wife of Bath, and her methodical manipulation of men for her own (financial) ends.
A pervading pessimism and cynicism towards marriage is further enhanced throughout the narrative. Even the positive aspects are unconvincing since they are often under-cut by a sarcastic tone or irony. For example, at the start of the Tale the Merchant takes on the role as narrator, and voices many positive views on marriage through Januarie (calling it an easy and pure holy bond) He talks about a blissful life ‘bitwixe an housbonde and his wyf’, full of ‘joye’ and ‘solas’; an earthly paradise (‘That in this world is it a paradys’). However such virtuous and perfect impressions are ironic in light of the narrator’s true feelings as voiced in the Prologue; ‘We wedded men liven in sorwe and care’. In actual fact, marriage is not ‘honey-sweet’ but a snare which stops men from prospering. When the Merchant narrator, as Januarie, speaks of how quiet, obedient and loving a wife is, and defies the wisdom of Theofrastus to declare that a wife is an enduring ‘Goddes yifte verraily’, the other characters find this difficult to swallow. They know of the Merchant’s true feelings towards his shrewish wife of ‘hye malice’ who could drive even the devil mad (‘For thogh the fiend to hire ycoupled were/She wolde hym overmacche, I dar well swear’). The negative ideas these force into ones head from the outset turns a disbelieving ear on the next section of the tale, and ridicules the idea of a marriage being so pleasant as false and naively exaggerated. Such an idea seems foolishly divorced from reality, and as we discover the true, sordid nature of Januarie, who shares in such fantasy, we are further repulsed from maintaining such a view ourselves.
The use of Biblical quotes to justify a marriage may have an initial goodness, until one realises, as the Medieval audience would, the irony behind them. Januarie uses three biblical women as examples of perfect, supportive wives who assisted their husbands in some noble way; Judith, Abigail and Ester. However the irony is that each of these women actually achieved their ends by fooling their husbands, tricking and deceiving them, the extended irony being that May herself will also do this. This is an example of where Januarie uses scripture and ‘auctorites’ to twist and manipulate the wisdom and revelation to suit his own desires, even if he does not appreciate the true gravity behind them. His self-deception permits him to fester in a deluded marriage, transforming vice into virtue and perversion into purity (‘A man may do no synne with his wyf/Ne hurte hymselven with his owne knyf’).
The idea of marriage being animalistic and financially motivated is also presented. Januarie’s comment that if his wife were too old then he would little satisfaction in her and be forced to commit adultery (therefore risking hell) is a very primitive and unrefined belief. Surely marriage is for far loftier and spiritual purposes than casual sex? The marriage vows are even destroyed in a pear tree which, although humorous, has a very unsophisticated and devolutionary quality about them. Chaucer also used animal imagery in Januarie’s speech to emphasise his lack of respect for women as human beings, and indeed May would have had little more rights than Januarie’s own cattle. Januarie wants a young lady, with old fish and young flesh; he reduces such a woman to the animalistic metaphor: better is ‘a pyk than a pykerel/And bet than old boef is the tender veal’. The drinking of mulled wine, claret and hot spices ‘t’encressen his corage’ and the aphrodisiac on his wedding night put a very primal glare over what should be a joyful, loving scene, and reduces the marriage down to a mere question of sex, governed by desire and animalistic urgings. The listing effect in these lines speeds up the pace of the action and excites the audience’s attention in anticipation of the climactic moment. The wedding night its self contains more animal and financial imagery. The act of penetration is described to be like sharp briers to the skin of a ‘houndfyssh’ and the loss of May’s virginity as a labouring (‘Thus laboureth he til that the day gan dawe’). After this Januarie is frisky as a colt and ‘ful of jargon as a flekked pye’. Both May and Januarie have hardly married for love; this marriage consummates the want of an heir and care in old age, alongside May’s (presumable) desire for money (‘she was feffed in his lond/…hir riche array’). The blessing of the priest seems to make such motives acceptable, as Hussey noted; “Religion at heart allows him to remain a whoremaster, whilst ostensibly he is a truly married man”.
Chaucer does present a debate on marriage in the ‘Merchants Tale’; however it is a heavily one-sided one. Although some positive ideas about marriage are voiced, they are cut-down by the ignorance, naivety and repulsiveness of the character who utters them (i.e. Januarie) or they are made in an ironic or satirical light, such as Chaucer’s particular choice of Biblical examples. The Merchant narrator’s pre-disposed negativity towards the subject of marriage in general frequently infuses throughout the narrative, and generally make’s women seem like deceitful, cunning harlots and marriage as something animalistic and financially twisted. The fact that Chaucer wrote with such light humour and satire on the subject of marriage and cuckolding further denotes the more serious, divine, mutually loving and selfless side of marriage, which is barely even glimpsed at or mentioned within the ‘Merchants Tale’.
By Louise Flower
My students (two classes) applied Edexcel's grade criteria for this essay and awarded it a high B. They thought that it lacked the AO5ii (historical context) and relevance to the passage, particularly on "poetic technique" to grade it higher! Some thought, though, that it "dazzled" when it came to written style, even though a few thought that the sentences were staccato-like.
In lines 307-364 Justinus is voicing his concerns about the haste and sense of immediacy behind Januarie’s decision to marry a young woman. Using the wisdom of the Roman academic Seneca, Justinus argues that a man ought to consider carefully who to give his possessions to, and certainly to whom he gives his body to ‘for alwey’. Justinus is strongly advising Januarie against marrying ‘withouten avysement’ as it is not child play; a lady could be wise, sober, a drunk, a shrew, proud, whorish or a ‘wastour of thy good’. It is here that we start to hear the Merchant narrator’s voice coming through. From the Prologue we are already aware that he is subject to a bitterly regretted marriage with a wife ‘the worste that may be’, and despite the Merchant’s earlier promise not to let his soured feelings towards women influence the story this is clearly not to be the case. Only a few lines later does Justinus himself reveal that he ‘have wept many a teere/Ful pryvely syn I have a wyf’, and such a marriage has only brought him great financial cost, care and duties rather than the bliss and earthly paradises of which Januarie naively anticipates. Justinus has now become a vehicle for the Merchant’s voice which becomes increasingly negative towards the concept of marriage, and as such Januarie’s rose-tinted spectacles take a repeated bashing; unfortunately to no avail. Justinus confesses that, although man shall find nothing in this world which is entirely perfect (the Medieval world view maintained that such a being could only be God), a man should seek a woman with more virtues than vices. He points out that this takes time to discover (‘And al this axeth leyser for t’enquire) since his own wife seems ‘stedefast’ to most crowds of women however he has since discovered this is not true (‘But I woot best where wryngeth me my sho’). Justinus’ tainted ideas towards marriage foreshadow the violation of Januarie’s own marriage vows later on in the narrative, claiming ‘Ye shul nat plesen hire fully years three-/This is to seyn, to doon hire ful plesaunce’. Januarie’s many years and lack of physical appeal, in direct to contrast to Damyan’s youth and sexual allure, render him incapable of satisfying the young and vibrant May, and so she later turns elsewhere to quench her desire for ‘plesaunce’; a wife requires constant attention indeed! However Januarie, choosing to hear only what is agreeable to his desires, dismisses Justinus’ words of advice as foolery, and adheres to ‘wyser men’ and ‘auctorities’, with rhetorical declamation in the line ‘Straw for thy Senek, and for thy proverbs!’. Januarie’s blindness towards reality is further emphasised by his acceptance of Placebo’s comment that a man who hinders matrimony is cursed; Januarie hears what he wants to hear, believes what he wants to believe: in a sense he has already gone blind.
The decisive negativity and uneasiness towards both women and, therefore, marriage draws some parallels to Pluto’s speech later on in the narrative. Pluto speaks of all the treachery, deceit, faithlessness and frailty a woman has in her heart, claiming he can tell ‘ten hundred thousand’ tales famous for this. Such a declaration sheds a very pessimistic shadow over the nature of women, and therefore the bonds a man may try to tie with them. As Justinus used Seneca, so Pluto used Solomon to give such comments an authoritative weight, claiming that amongst a thousand men Solomon found one with true goodness (‘the bountee of man’), yet amongst a thousand women he found not one. This echo’s Justinus’ convictions of women often having many a vice and being untrustworthy, however the accusations here against women are even more extreme, and sadly there is no honourable character like Griselda within the ‘Merchant’s Tale’ to prove him wrong. Pluto speaks of womankind’s’ wickedness, harlotry and expresses his wishes for a wild fir and corrupt pestilence to ‘falle upon youre bodies yet to-nygth’. In the medieval world view women had little more rights than cattle due to their alleged ‘Inability to rationalise’, such slander such as this would have made union with such creatures intensely undesirable, as no man could wish for a woman or wife as terrible as those described by Solomon and Pluto. It is at this point Propespina decides to give a gift to all of womankind which, if man had knowledge of it, would push them further away from the desire to marry. She gives women the ability to deceive their husbands ‘Al hadde men eyn a thing with bothe his yen’ and excuse themselves from awkward situations so that men were as ignorant as geese. Such cunning and deceitful pragmatism reflects the nature of the Wife of Bath, and her methodical manipulation of men for her own (financial) ends.
A pervading pessimism and cynicism towards marriage is further enhanced throughout the narrative. Even the positive aspects are unconvincing since they are often under-cut by a sarcastic tone or irony. For example, at the start of the Tale the Merchant takes on the role as narrator, and voices many positive views on marriage through Januarie (calling it an easy and pure holy bond) He talks about a blissful life ‘bitwixe an housbonde and his wyf’, full of ‘joye’ and ‘solas’; an earthly paradise (‘That in this world is it a paradys’). However such virtuous and perfect impressions are ironic in light of the narrator’s true feelings as voiced in the Prologue; ‘We wedded men liven in sorwe and care’. In actual fact, marriage is not ‘honey-sweet’ but a snare which stops men from prospering. When the Merchant narrator, as Januarie, speaks of how quiet, obedient and loving a wife is, and defies the wisdom of Theofrastus to declare that a wife is an enduring ‘Goddes yifte verraily’, the other characters find this difficult to swallow. They know of the Merchant’s true feelings towards his shrewish wife of ‘hye malice’ who could drive even the devil mad (‘For thogh the fiend to hire ycoupled were/She wolde hym overmacche, I dar well swear’). The negative ideas these force into ones head from the outset turns a disbelieving ear on the next section of the tale, and ridicules the idea of a marriage being so pleasant as false and naively exaggerated. Such an idea seems foolishly divorced from reality, and as we discover the true, sordid nature of Januarie, who shares in such fantasy, we are further repulsed from maintaining such a view ourselves.
The use of Biblical quotes to justify a marriage may have an initial goodness, until one realises, as the Medieval audience would, the irony behind them. Januarie uses three biblical women as examples of perfect, supportive wives who assisted their husbands in some noble way; Judith, Abigail and Ester. However the irony is that each of these women actually achieved their ends by fooling their husbands, tricking and deceiving them, the extended irony being that May herself will also do this. This is an example of where Januarie uses scripture and ‘auctorites’ to twist and manipulate the wisdom and revelation to suit his own desires, even if he does not appreciate the true gravity behind them. His self-deception permits him to fester in a deluded marriage, transforming vice into virtue and perversion into purity (‘A man may do no synne with his wyf/Ne hurte hymselven with his owne knyf’).
The idea of marriage being animalistic and financially motivated is also presented. Januarie’s comment that if his wife were too old then he would little satisfaction in her and be forced to commit adultery (therefore risking hell) is a very primitive and unrefined belief. Surely marriage is for far loftier and spiritual purposes than casual sex? The marriage vows are even destroyed in a pear tree which, although humorous, has a very unsophisticated and devolutionary quality about them. Chaucer also used animal imagery in Januarie’s speech to emphasise his lack of respect for women as human beings, and indeed May would have had little more rights than Januarie’s own cattle. Januarie wants a young lady, with old fish and young flesh; he reduces such a woman to the animalistic metaphor: better is ‘a pyk than a pykerel/And bet than old boef is the tender veal’. The drinking of mulled wine, claret and hot spices ‘t’encressen his corage’ and the aphrodisiac on his wedding night put a very primal glare over what should be a joyful, loving scene, and reduces the marriage down to a mere question of sex, governed by desire and animalistic urgings. The listing effect in these lines speeds up the pace of the action and excites the audience’s attention in anticipation of the climactic moment. The wedding night its self contains more animal and financial imagery. The act of penetration is described to be like sharp briers to the skin of a ‘houndfyssh’ and the loss of May’s virginity as a labouring (‘Thus laboureth he til that the day gan dawe’). After this Januarie is frisky as a colt and ‘ful of jargon as a flekked pye’. Both May and Januarie have hardly married for love; this marriage consummates the want of an heir and care in old age, alongside May’s (presumable) desire for money (‘she was feffed in his lond/…hir riche array’). The blessing of the priest seems to make such motives acceptable, as Hussey noted; “Religion at heart allows him to remain a whoremaster, whilst ostensibly he is a truly married man”.
Chaucer does present a debate on marriage in the ‘Merchants Tale’; however it is a heavily one-sided one. Although some positive ideas about marriage are voiced, they are cut-down by the ignorance, naivety and repulsiveness of the character who utters them (i.e. Januarie) or they are made in an ironic or satirical light, such as Chaucer’s particular choice of Biblical examples. The Merchant narrator’s pre-disposed negativity towards the subject of marriage in general frequently infuses throughout the narrative, and generally make’s women seem like deceitful, cunning harlots and marriage as something animalistic and financially twisted. The fact that Chaucer wrote with such light humour and satire on the subject of marriage and cuckolding further denotes the more serious, divine, mutually loving and selfless side of marriage, which is barely even glimpsed at or mentioned within the ‘Merchants Tale’.
By Louise Flower
My students (two classes) applied Edexcel's grade criteria for this essay and awarded it a high B. They thought that it lacked the AO5ii (historical context) and relevance to the passage, particularly on "poetic technique" to grade it higher! Some thought, though, that it "dazzled" when it came to written style, even though a few thought that the sentences were staccato-like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)