Here's the study questions for the first part of our reading of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, "The Miller's Tale" and "The General Prologue" (ll. 717-860). Last week's response to Sir Gawain were even better than I could have hoped! In your answers this week, remember to try to include as many quotations (with line or page numbers) and concrete details as you can. (One nice thing about this blog is that it can act as a study aid for your midterm and final exams!)
Question 1 (Debbie): Based on what you have read of "The General Prologue" and the Prologue to "the Miller's Tale," describe the setting in which these tales are told. Pay particular attention to the sorts of people telling the tales and listening to them. How does the setting (and the people) differ from that depicted in the beginning of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight?
Question 2 (James): The Canterbury Tales are reported to us by a narrator (who we eventually learn is called "Geoffrey Chaucer"). Based on what he says in "The General Prologue" (ll. 717-860) and in the Prologue to "The Miller's Tale," how would you describe the narrator as a character? What sort of person do you imagine him to be? (Bonus: what sorts of artistic freedoms do you think Chaucer might have won himself in telling his tales through other characters? Hint: in the late 14th century, poets were supposed to write either courtly romances, or poetry in support of the Church.)
Question 3 (Valerie): Before we hear the description of the Miller in the Prologue to his tale, the narrator describes him in "The General Prologue." Read lines 547-68 of that description (in the Norton, pp. 231-32), and translate it into your own words. Most of the tougher Middle English words will be translated in the Norton, and the ones that aren't you can look up here. The write a quick few sentences about why you decided to translate it how you did. Feel free to translate the passage into verse or prose, and have fun with it! (Hint: that funny word "eke" just means "also").
Question 4 (Mardy): Based on the description of the Miller in the "General Prologue" (ll. 547-68), the Miller's Prologue, and the very beginning of the "Reeve's Tale" (in your handout, pp. 98-99), what do you think the effect is of having this tale told by the Miller? Does it change our attitude towards it? And what's a Miller, anyways?! How does his social class and character clash with or complement that of the other characters, either those in his tale or in the audience (e.g. of the Host, or of the Monk, or the narrator)?
Question 5 (Sophia): Read the anthology's paraphrase of "the Knight's Tale" (Norton, p. 238), the very end of that tale printed in your handout (pp. 78-79), and the description of the Knight from "the General Prologue" (Norton, lines 43-63, p. 219-220). What parallels do you think there might be between the two tales? And what contrasts? Why do you think Chaucer decided to have the Miller's tale follow right after the Knight's tale?
Question 6 (Verthandi): Compare and contrast some of the characteristics of Absolon, from "the Miller's Tale," and Sir Gawain, from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. How are they similar? How are they different? Do we learn a "moral" at the end, like Gawain (supposedly) did? (Hint: do you think Chaucer is satirizing anything? What?)
Question 7 (Carrie): What do you think is the tale's take on marriage? Does it resemble what you would imagine marriage to be like in Medieval times? Does it have anything to do with social class or economics?
Question 8 (Emily): Like Mark did last week, read through these questions, and read the tale, and write a question for me to answer. It could be about the historical setting, the plot, the kind of poetry Chaucer was writing... anything you are wondering about! (This is a very very strange tale!) Just make sure it doesn't overlap too much with the questions above.
This is Debby answering Question 1.
回覆刪除The narrator gives us a clear direction in “The General Prologue” that a group of pilgrims who are going to Canterbury spend their first night at a hostelry in Southwerk (719). In “To ride by the weye doumb as a stoon; /And therfore wol I maken yow disport (775-776)” the Host of the inn comes up with a game for the pilgrims to avoid boredom. From line 794 to 798, we know that the storytellers are the pilgrims from different social classes while in “For to stonden at my juggement (779)” the narrator reveals the primary listener is the Host.
On the other hand, in the Prologue to “the Miller’s Tale,” the narrator narrows to some specific storytellers like the knight, the monk and the miller and the main listener Host has power to decide the next storyteller. On the way to Canterbury, after the knight finishes his tale, the Host wants the monk to tell the story. However, the drunk miller interrupts them and insists on telling his tale. At this moment, it seems that the tension between different social classes emerges because of the Host’s anger in “Some better man must first tell us another, So pipe down now” and “In Satan’s name, say on! You’re nothing but a fool, your wits are drowned.”
In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the narrator begins the poem with some mythological events from the fall of Troy, Rome’s foundation to Britain’s origination (1-19). The mythological event emphasizes Britain’s political legitimacy. Moreover, in “King Arthur was counted most courteous of all, /Wherefore an adventure I aim to unfold. (26-27)” and “This king lay at Camelot at Christmastide (37)” the narrator not only implies the tale is about to start but indicates the tale’s place and time. Also, the people joined this tale are close to the authority like the queen and the knights which reveals the structure of the court. Although the settings and people in these two tales are quite different, however, they have something in common: they both involve a contest (a game).
This is James answering Question 2.
回覆刪除In “The Miller’s Prologue”, Chaucer as the narrator seems to depreciate the “unholy” words in Miller’s tale. As Chaucer said, “Should anyone not wish to hear, turn the page over, choose another tale, there’s plenty of all kinds, to please you all.” However, he still noted down Miller’s tale in Canterbury Tales, which made the story stand out. Although he kept providing the word that depreciated the Miller’s horrible tale, I think Chaucer was trying to satirize those who were hypocritical.
As a character, or a poet in Canterbury Tales, he gave out a lovely story to praise the Church and tried to please most of people in the group. We could describe him as a typical poet in the late 14th century, even if he seemed to pretend to be a typical poet.
In my personal view, what Chaucer’s main purpose was to use the “unholy” tales that stand out in Canterbury Tales to criticize the terrible problems that happened in the society in the late 14th century. In other words, I think that Chaucer was a social observer rather than a typical Church-supporting hypocritical writer.
This is sophia answering Question 5.
回覆刪除In “the General Prologue,” the knight is “a worthy man” who loves integrity, chivalry, honor, freedom and courtesy. Moreover, he had taken part in battles and tournaments. As what the narrator describes, the knight is such a distinguish man that he is honored by people. Slimily, according to the summary of "the Knight's Tale" (in Norton, pp.238) and the very end of that tale printed in the handout (pp. 78-79), the knights in “the Knight’s Tale” have fought in battle and the tournament just like what the knight of “the General Prologue” had done. But the knights in the tale do not fight in battles in Christian or fight for honor; instead, they fight for love. In the line “Who’s served you with his whole soul, heart, and might,” the knights seem to devote themselves to women; the action of fighting is not the result of getting integrity or honor, but is the result of passion.
“The Miller’s Tale” follows after “the Knight’s Tale”, and there are several huge differences between two tales. First, the narrator of “the Knight’s Tale” is the noble and distinguished knight; but on the other hand, Miller appears as a drunker. Second, the characters of two tales are different. The characters of “the Knight’s Tale” seem belong to the high class and distant from general people, since some vocabulary used by characters or the narrator contains “noble,” “matrimony” and “baronage.” In contrast, we have local people (the old carpenter, the jealous husband) and plotter (Nicholas) from “the Miller’s tale” whose speech is usually vulgar. For example, Nicholas says to Alison directly, “Now let’s make love at once.”
After outlining some difference between two tales, I think that the reason why Chaucer decided to place “the Miller’s Tale” after “the Knight Tale” is that, he intended to show readers how far the actual life is from the romance of knight. Some ideas in “the Knight’s Tale” would seem too naïve in “the Miller’s Tale.” Because people would feel jealous to others and deceive others in “the Miller’s Tale,” and the bond of marriage does not actually exist between John and Alison. Moreover, I also guess that Chaucer might want to make his readers judge the value of two types of literature－idealism and romance versus representation of real life.
This is Emily answering Q8.
回覆刪除In the miller’s tale, we see the triangle relationship between the carpenter, the wife, and the lover. Through the plot of the story, how should we realize the social reality of the commoner in the late medieval era?
In the story, we can look at three different points: religion, love and loyalty. We know that the concepts of these three are the core values in the medieval era. However, in the miller’s tale, we may realize there are the violations of the core values in the medieval era. For instance, Nicolas makes fun of the carpenter through the story of Noah, which shows his unrespectable attitude toward the Bible figure (the religion). Also, Absolon violates the social code as a parish clerk, who pursues the one who had married, like “Alas! alack!/ Was true love ever so abused before?/Then kiss me, since I cannot hope for more/ For Jesus love, and for the love of me(pp.94)”. Moreover, the love between the carpenter and his wife seems weak. The young pretty wife Alison seems easily to be seduced by others. It is extremely different from the love story of a knight and a princess (the traditional love story in the middle age). Therefore, the loyalty in the miller’s story doesn’t appear. We may see that Nicholas cheat the poor carpenter (pp.86~90). He disobeys his master. Similarly, Alison has cuckoldry with the other man (pp83~84, 93). The two characters both violate the loyalty. It is also different from the middle age’s loyal spirit.
In my opinion, I think that the miller’s story shows another aspect of the medieval era. In the late medieval era, the rise of the middle class has changed its social status. Therefore, the traditional value in the middle age becomes less important. There is another reason. In different social classes, people’s values are different. Maybe so-called the concepts of loyalty, love, and religion seem less important to the commoner.
This is Mardy answering Question 4.
回覆刪除The narrator's way of telling the story makes The General Prologue easy to read. Tale is just like Tale. For me, this story told by Miller makes the story itself sounds smooth. Reader are like someone standing outside watching play happen behind the glass. Readers do not have to get involed, we can easily get into the story and tell the different parts. The attitude difference tells the theme's difference. My personal attitude did change from formal mood to relaxing mood, but i think afterall my attitude will remain the same as an outsider.
Here's Valerie's translation of ll. 547-68 of The General Prologue
回覆刪除The Miller was an overbearing fellow.
It was evident he had big muscles and bones.
He always got the prize of ram in wrestling.
He was so sturdy that he could heave the hinge of every door.
Also,he could break it with his head.
His beard was as red as a fox.
It shaped like a spade.
He had a wart on his nose.
Upon the wart there was hair.
The bristles were as red as the ears of some kind of animal, named "sowe".
His nostrils were wide.
A sword and a shield were often born by him.
Being a chatterer was his most serious sin and obscenity.
He had stolen corns and deducted from the grains far more than the lawful percentage.
He had a golden thumb, by heaven.
He wore a white kirtle.
And he could blow baggepipe well,
the sound of which was great enough to bring us out of town.(<--exaggerated dipiction,I guess.)
This is Verthandi answering Q6
回覆刪除In “The Miller’s Tale”, Absolon is described as a braggart, lovelorn and horny parish clerk. He likes to show off his versatility, such as playing guitar and singing, whereas Sir Gawain’s modesty, describing himself as the weakest both in physical and mental abilities among King Arthur’s knights. Unlike Sir Gawain’s politeness to the lady,
Absolon pursues Alison regardless of morality. He stands beneath Alison’s room window and sings love songs to woo her. He asks for a kiss shamelessly but Alison takes the chance to make fun of him. He does not have the broad heart like Sir Gawain and wants to take revenge on her though he hurts Nicholas unexpectedly at the end. Absolon’s characters are totally opposite from Sir Gawain’s. He is clumsy, foolish and love-blinding. In the contrast, Sir Gawain is graceful, witty and moral-obeying.
I think Chaucer is satirizing those church men in his age. They are eager for power, women and sell indulgence which violates God’s true will. And he also makes fun of those people who are easy to be persuaded, like the old man and his wife. He uses the character, Nicholas, to satirize those who are too smart but run themselves into troubles.
The work is apparently a satire. The story teller is a miller, the listeners who comes from kinds of classes. The language is vulgar. There are no social hierarchies in the tale, too. For example, in page 82, line 19 “Men ought to wed according to their state.” Though the miller does not explore who the lady is, we can guess her social class is far upper than the carpenter according to page 83 line18 “She was a peach, a dolly, and a daisy! /Fit for a prince to lay upon his bed.” It is interesting to find out question a carpenter has a “Lawful wedded wife.” For the lower class people, the law to their marriage is meaningless because of their poor. They have no properties to combine. However, the carpenter is a super rich merchant who has broken the social hierarchy by his wealth. Does he change the law’s custom which fit for the specific people? Furthermore, the carpenter not only lives luxuriously as the royalty, but he makes himself like a lord who raises many intellectuals—he has a scholar, Nicholas. The work makes me think of the comedy in Rome because of the chaos in social class. The traditional tragic hero’s image was not so popular in Rome’s age. Here The Miller’s Tale does neither strengthen the hero and the knight’s figure nor the Christian’s advantages. Converse to the Merlin, the scholar just likes cheap trick and as weak as a woman. And we do not ensure his knowledge is enough to realize the astrology since the carpenter knows nothing. Nicolas would quote some Bible’s stories to fool the carpenter and said “Haven’t you heard” in page 90. The carpenter obeys him for he likely scared to be looked down. Converse to the charming knight, Absolon was rejected by the lady. And we do not know who he really is. Read the whole tale, that "for the Satan's name" appears frequently seems acclaim the Christian merits are gone, aren't it?
回覆刪除By the way, I think the sentence in page 98 “Now God save all of us, my tale is done!” is interesting to think "us" means who?