"The Miller's Tale" is a perfect complement to "The Knight's Tale" in a number of ways. The Knight's story is long with specific transitions and long speeches. The Miller's story is fast-pace with no transitions and lots of quick dialogue. There is the theme of elevated and courtly love juxtaposed with a bawdy and lustful type of love. Finally, The Knight is an eloquent, though long-winded, story teller while the Miller is quick with no loose ends. What I find to be even more interesting are the women.
Emelye, we agreed, seems to be a flat and lifeless character, so to speak. She plays no real role in the action, and what action she has is just further proof of her passivity, "(For wommen, as to speken in comune, / Thei folwen alle the favour of Fortune)" (2681-82). Granted she does not want to marry, therefore, does not put much thought into it. She is the ideal woman of a courtly romance. However, Chaucer takes the untouchable woman of the courtly romance and makes her tangible, at least for Palamon. The flatness of her character is a little disappointing, but not for long.
I took another look back at "The Knight's Tale" after reading "The Miller's Tale," and I found that Emelye is not as flat anymore. She is more dynamic in a comparison with Alisoun. Yes, Alisoun is more of an active player in "The Miller's Tale," but it was too obvious what was going to happen. She is a younger wife to and older man, and she is approached and wooed by a young clerk. Were we really surprised by that? In contrast, Emelye, though passive, takes on more depth as a character. She is willing to give up what she wants for what she must do. She knows she has no choice.
The "fallen woman" theme has been quite popular for a long time. Thanks, Eve. So, it comes as no surprise that Chaucer would give us a young, lustful, trickster woman. It takes no effort to fall victim to the appetites of the flesh or the vices.
Thoughts?
I find your ideas intriguing. I've always thought of Emelye as passive. I'm not sure I agree that Emelye is dynamic, although I agree Alisoun is predictable. I am curious. What do you make of Emelye's mourning of Arcite? She could be truly mourning the man she knew of as Philostrate. Or is she just doing what she is expected to do at a funeral. I'm troubled by the lack of power of Diane. I'm used to her being a much more powerful goddess, one who could turn Actaeon into a hart just for looking at her.
ReplyDeleteI find your comments about Diane interesting. She is usually a more powerful goddess, but Chaucer appears to be using her as he saw fit. He could be using Diane's more passive characteristics. As far as Emelye's reaction to Arcite's death, I would think that she was mourning Philostrate rather than Arcite. At the same time, she could have been mourning because she was supposed to marry the man who won the tournament. That would mean that Arcite was the one who loved her more: that is what she prayed for. The intervention of the gods in Arcite's death, which changed the rules, could mean that she was not getting the man who loved her the most. I hope that makes sense. I am just thinking out loud. Thoughts?
DeleteWow, I'm so glad you said this. I've only looked at this from the guys' p.o.v.s. So you think Emelye and Philostrate got together too? I'm not sure I agree about the interpretation of who loves Emelye more, although I think you could argue it. Emelye prays to be married to the one who most desires her (p.87, 2325). I know winning the tournament was supposed to signal greatest desire, but praying to Venus also for love over winning also signals greatest desire. But it makes me want to go through the story again and see which argument I can best support.
DeleteI kind of see Emelye and Alisoun as both making the best of a bad situation. Both women kind of end up with a backup choice, don't they? (E gets the "if I can't have what I want, then.." whereas A gets a jealous husband but the opportunity for a lover. Let's face it, at this point, now that everyone thinks John is wood, she can probably get away with more).
ReplyDeleteBut the fact that they both are in this position tells me a lot, I think...
To begin with, I wanted to agree with the fact that "The Knight's Tale" and "The Miller's Tale" complement each other really well by taking a long more classical type of story, and balancing it with a shorter more comical one. I agree that the behavior of Alison in "The Miller's Tale" was expected, though I do not like her. I think it was necessary for Chaucer to give us a character like her. In a way I feel like Chaucer subtly makes a point to have a character like her to show that women are not alway innocent pure bystanders, but can be tricky and deceiving as well.
ReplyDelete