As odd as it seems, I
actually thought that the Summoner’s Tale was not nearly as scathing as I
expected, especially after reading the prologue. The tale just did not quite
live up to the remark that Satan should “Shewe forth thin ers, and lat the frere
se / Where is the nest of frères in this place” (1690-1691). I think part of it
was the contrast between it and the Friar’s Tale. In class we talked about the
moment right before the summoner is taken by the fiend. He had a chance to
repent and completely denied it, saying that “that is nat min entente…/…for to
repent me” (1630-1631). It seems there is a very specific place where the
summoner severely fails. I don’t see as much of that with the friar. Sure there
is the moment that he gets his reward for greed, but his offence does not seem
to come to a point like the summoner’s.
The closest to it is the
moment the sick man tells him about to take something he has hidden (the
location of which raises no question in the friar’s mind. odd). When the hears
it, “‘A!’ thought this frere, ‘that shal go with me!’” (2144). Even after he
got the sick man’s “contribution” then the friar sees nothing wrong in his own conduct.
He complains to the sick man, and he complains to lord of the land. We do not
even get his reaction to the squire’s unique solution. It seems the summoner is
trying to point out the persistent state of friars. Maybe the point is that friar’s
never see their wrong and are stupid, destructive, and greedy. Even so, it does
not seem like the summoner has “quiten him every grot” (1292) when summoner’s
are destined to hell but friars only have to put their nose to the wheel.
You raised a couple of questions in my mind. And of course I'm going to play devil's advocate because if I didn't the world would end, bushes would spontaneously burst into fire, Congress would cease to work....oh, wait....
ReplyDeleteTaken from Mann p. 848 note to 3806 of The Miller's Tale "The fart is not just a gratuitous obscenity, but a deliberate answer to Absolon's 'speak'. Classical and medieval grammarians defined speech (vox) in two ways: (1) in its physical aspect as 'broken air'...(2) in its intellectual aspect as 'a sound which signifies according to a convention'. Nicholas fart represent the purely physical element of speech, divorced from signification..."hot air".
The notes to The Summoner's tale have a similar gloss. p. 916-917 note 2149.
So maybe the significance to the fart is that the friars can't distinguish between gospel and meaningless hot air.
Also on p.918 (Summoner's Tale) in the note on lines 2253-2277, it says the scenario has similarities to medieval pictures of Christ coming to his 12 disciples, who are pictured in a circle with the power of the Holy Spirit radiating out to them in 12 lines. Add this to the fart image, and it almost turns the friars' claims to holiness into sacrilege or even into an anti-Godly act.
Also, and this in NO WAY represents my personal feelings, your pointing out that the friar had no reaction to being told to reach into the arse of a sick man got me thinking. Is it possible that the lack of reaction hints at homosexuality as an aspect of friars? The other times we've seen connections with arses don't match the friar's reaction. The summoners under the devil's tale are clearly being punished by being in a place they don't like. In the Miller's Tale, connecting with the arse is an act of humiliation. To be crude(r), maybe the Summoner's answer to The Friar is, "OK, my guys might be stuck to Satan's arse, but at least we don't like arses the way you guys do."
OK, with the amount of comments I'm messing up today, and the fact that I started walking to school without shoes, I clearly need more coffee.
ReplyDeleteSo, it's the friars living on Satan's arse. Which actually supports the homosexual hint but gets rude of the crude comment at the end of my last post. I'm going back to re-read more (and see if I have enough change for coffee). Hopefully I won't have to correct more.
I really liked what you had to say about the Summoner's Tale, Andrew! I felt the exact same way the first time I read it... after reading the prologue I was prepared for another scathing tale that ended in the horrible misfortune or potential damnation of the Friar. However, this clearly isn't what we get and it was intriguing to think about the reasons as to why this is the case.
ReplyDeleteAfter the discussion today, I now feel like there is something powerful about the Summoner's choice of tale and how unexpectedly reserved it is - especially considering his prologue. I would like to believe that the Summoner got most of his harsh words and resentment towards the Friar out in his prologue. In my group today we all discussed the fact that if we were the Summoner we would have been dying with anger by the time the Friar's tale was over. This makes his choice of a relatively reserved tale all the more interesting. Approaching the tale simplistically and with an emphasis on common human qualities, we discussed the fact that maybe the Summoner kept his tale reserved in order to pay an even bigger insult to the Friar. I mean, if I were the Friar not only would I be angry with the Summoner (who I clearly already hate) for his insulting prologue, but I would be even more enraged after hearing his tale! The Friar had his chance to damn the Summoner in his tale – and so he did – but now he’s lost the ability to follow up the Summoner, whom I feel like made the Friar look a bit foolish with his restrained tale.
Also, I forgot to comment on Meg's comments in my post like I had intended to...
ReplyDeleteMeg - I really liked the comment you made about the Friar and potential homosexuality. When I got to that point in the tale I just kind of assumed the Friar's actions needed to be accepted by the reader. Even though I felt like it was strange that he would be so willing to reach his hand down to find what Thomas had "hidden" I just figured I needed to accept his willingness to do so as part of the story. I clearly felt something was odd about that situation (I mean, who wouldn't?) but I never explored any potential reasons behind the Friar's actions. You made a really great point that I hadn't considered before so thanks for pointing it out!
Also, I laughed really hard when I read the first little bit of your initial comment so thanks for helping me end my day with a smile! :)
Oh, the struggle of figuring out who wins in The Canterbury Tales. I think we'll never know but Meg, homosexuality? Oh. my...maybe lol. There is that possibility that Chaucer was going there it did take me as surprise that the friar did not think it was surprising or disrespectful. It also seems as if the sick man was clearly making a joke and there was not going to be a payment in his "arse". It's like if I was to ask someone if where is my $500 and they said in my ass. I'm not going to go look for it.
ReplyDeleteI originally thought the same thing about "the Summoner's Tale" that you did, Andrew. It was not the response I was expecting after the viciousness of "The Friar's Tale". While expecting a little more anger from the summoner, I thought his response was witty and hostile in a subtle way. While the Friar sent him to Hell, he made a joke out of him. What's worse? The way I ended up viewing it was that friar came out looking angry, and then was mocked. I think he's the one who lost the Battle of Words.
ReplyDelete