The End

It’s sad to say goodbye to such a great class. It has been a lot of fun. On the subject of endings, I am fascinated by Chaucer’s ending of the Canterbury Tales. The whole time I was thinking it would end much as it began, in the framing narrative with a declaration of the winner and some parting comments. Instead we get and ending that seems to flow directly from the Parson’s “tale,” focusing on Chaucer’s works and revoking a good number of them:

Wherefore I beseke yow mekely, for the mercy of God, that ye preye for me, that Crist have mercy on me and foryeve me my giltes; and namely of my translacions and enditinges of worldly vanitees, te whiche I revoke in my retracciouns: as is The Book of Troilus, The Book also of Fame, The Book of the xxv Ladies, The Book of the Duchesse, The Book of Seint Valentines day of the Parlement of Briddes, The Tales of Caunterbury, thlike that sownen into sinne…(1083-1085).

It is quite surprising to see him equivocate his “giltes” with a list of his work, or at least make them something he needs forgiveness for. It sounds very much like a confession to the reader, the person who understands the stories and what he could be forgiven for. While there were parts of the tales that I thought he might appropriately apologize for (Melibee perhaps), I was surprised to see the CTs in that list. I have heard of some of the other works in there but haven’t read them, so can’t say what is in them. All the same, these are works that people are still reading some six hundred years later and this list makes me wonder if we he would want us to. It’s a strange feeling. I read the notes for this section and they explain that there are many theories about why this is here, from deathbed recantations to mistaken inclusions to literary convention. They way this is written makes me want to say that this ending is the one that is meant to be here, perhaps because it comes so strongly on the heels of “The Parson’s Tale.” It is almost like Chaucer was moved by what he was writing while he was writing it, and by the end did not have the heart to return to the framing narrative.  It makes the whole question of who had the best story moot. Not the ending I was expecting at all.

What's your type?

Suzanna and I were discussing some of the different characters so far in the Tales, and it got me thinking about what kinds of personalities we are seeing/dealing with on this journey.

Have you ever taken a Myers-Briggs test before, and if so, what are you?
If not, I'm going to include one here with directions on how to take the test and to score it.

I'm curious who everyone might identify with the most, and who might be the most similar to us in the group of Pilgrims. I also wonder what different characters, from the WOB to the MOL and Miller, might be in the spectrum!

Oh, and PS, I'm an ENFP!

Attractive Virtue?

Is Custaunce someone who encompasses the seven virtues, thus she is seen as desirable because she is the embodiment of the most positive attributes of Christianity?

The seven virtues are generally thought to be Prudence, Constancy, Justice, Temperance, Faith, Hope and Love.  The first four were considered the natural virtues, and were lauded from much earlier by Greek Philosophers as things which makes a person great. Being even tempered and balanced, being consistent in your dealings with the world, making smart decisions, and acting in a fair and just manner were explained as the best way to live a moral life.  The final three, as seen in 1 Corinthians 13, are the three cardinal virtues—Faith, Hope and Love/Charity, each offering different ways to interact and integrate faith into anyone’s life.  As James Kennan wrote in his article “Proposing Cardinal Virtues,” that “Philosophers and theologians have recognized that being virtuous is more than having a particular habit of acting, e.g. generosity. Rather, it means having a fundamental set of related virtues that enable a person to live and act morally well.”

This makes me think that perhaps Custance is someone who shows different examples of these traits, and thus is attractive to others, because she does what St. Francis of Assisi encouraged by preaching the gospel to all nations, and if necessary, use words.  While we don’t see active interaction by Custance in most of the Man of Law’s tale, are these seven traits the things which make her so desirable to others and make her the best woman in the story?

Do you see these trait in her?  Do they make her attractive or desirable? What do you think?

Keenan, James F. "Proposing Cardinal Virtues." Theological Studies 56.4 (1995): 709-729. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Apr. 2013.

The Believability of Chaucer's Stories

While reading The Man of Law's Tale this week a few thoughts kept occurring to me, all of which centered on believability. In noticing how much more I liked this tale as opposed to the previous ones we have read, and exploring the reasons as to why this was the case, I kept coming back to the act of story telling. Stories can have such depth and power but their ability to influence or inform individuals is entirely dependent upon how one chooses to interpret what is being said.

Taking this into consideration, I then pose these questions: How much of what Chaucer says do we believe? How fictional are his tales - do we believe some, all or none of what he says? Why may we tend believe some parts more than others? More importantly though, do we even need to believe him - or should we simply accept his tales with good faith? 

I ask these questions because as I was reading the story of Custance I was having trouble making sense of my surprising and genuine interest in the tale. I say surprising because when I read the previous tales – especially the Reeve’s - I had to constantly remind myself to keep on reading. I needed to forcefully place myself in the mindset of Chaucer and his companions for it wasn’t something that came naturally to me. In other words, I was too aware of the fact that I was a 21^st century college senior from Maryland while I was reading, and this inhibited me from truly immersing myself in the narrative or it’s meaning.

Overall, speaking specifically about the Reeve’s tale, I found that I was having trouble getting beyond my disbelief, and that that was what was keeping me from truly understanding or enjoying Chaucer’s story. The Reeve’s tale felt much too forced for me, and because of this I simply didn’t believe it. My disbelief is also what prevented me from enjoying the tale. As I began to think further, however, I came to the conclusion that maybe this was just what Chaucer had intended.

After thinking about how much I enjoyed the Man of Law’s tale, and comparing the reasons as to why with all of the reasons why I did not like the Reeve’s, I began to notice similarities between the two stories in terms of their message of spirituality. I began to wonder if Chaucer didn’t intentionally play with the level of believability in his two stories specifically to highlight the ways in which individuals should/should not act. I’m planning on exploring this idea further – so my thoughts are not entirely complete just yet - but as of now it seems as though Chaucer could have most definitely been relying on his reader’s believability in his tales (or the lack there of) to highlight the right/wrong choices one should make in their everyday lives.

To briefly explain, in the Reeve’s tale, as we discussed in class, no character really comes out on top. Each individual we meet is flawed in some way, and as readers there isn’t really one particular that person that we’re pulling for. After reading the Man of Law’s tale, I began to believe that this was an intentional choice. It could be that by making the Reeve’s tale so hard to enjoy and believe, that Chaucer was trying to show us something – to tell us that if we seek revenge, deceit and trickery only to advance our own selfish ambitions, then we’re never going to win in the end. 

If we compare this idea to the Man of Law’s tale, and examine the treacherous life of Custance, although it appears as if aligning herself with God’s will brings her only strife and tragedy, in the end Custance is rewarded with a (somewhat) happy conclusion to her tale. Furthermore, given her devout actions and unfailing faith, even if we interpret Custance as having been cheated by her husband’s early death, there is enough textual evidence to remind us that she has the promise of eternal life to look forward to, she will undoubtedly gain salvation – a great deal more than can be said for the characters in the Reeve’s tale.

Overall, I believe that there is most certainly a connection between the Reeve and the Man of Law’s tales, and that this connection is directly linked by how much believability Chaucer allowed his readers to have when experiencing his two stories. By making one tale easier to believe and relate to than the other, we as readers are being directed towards an underlying message of spiritual morality. The Man of Law’s tale was so enjoyable to read that I personally felt much more apt to take what was being told not so much as a literal story but rather as a tale with a greater spiritual message.

Because I believed the Man of Law’s tale, and took what was being said with a grain of salt, I not only enjoyed the story more than the previous tales we had read but I was also able to pick out its significance of and meaning a lot easier. I’m curious to know if anyone else had a similar experience, as, like I said, I'm planning on exploring this idea further and would love to hear other opinions! :) 

Good Women?

A line in “The Miller’s Prologue” got me thinking of Chaucer’s The Legend of Good Women. Robin, the miller, has announced the story he’s going to tell. Osewold, the reeve and a carpenter, is offended and tells the miller he shouldn’t defame husbands and wives. Robin tells Osewold not to take it personally. One of the things Robin says is, “Ther been ful good wives many oon,/And evere a thousand goode ayeins oon bade” (3154-3155). Robin goes on to say he has a wife too, but doesn’t assume himself a cuckold. In The Legend of Good Women, Chaucer, like the miller, is in trouble for defaming women. Only Chaucer is in trouble with the god of love. The god of love calls Chaucer his enemy for writing so many bad things about love and women. Chaucer defends himself by saying:

But truly I wende, as in this cas,
Naught have agilt, ne doon to love trespas.
Forwhy a trewe man, with-outen drede,
Hath not to parten with a theves dede;
Ne a trewe lover oghte me nat blame,
Thogh that I speke a fals lover som shame.(Balade, 462-467)

These two excuses seem very similar to me.

There are a couple of other things that make me wonder if Chaucer was thinking of The Legend of Good Women while writing about the miller. The very first line of the balade is “Hyd, Absolon, thy gilte tresses clere;/ Ester, ley thou thy meknesse al a-doun” (249-250). We all know how it is going to end for Absolon and his gilt tresses. Chaucer continues to tell men to hide and women to come forward. When Alceste is defending Chaucer, she points out that not all his writing about women is bad, and she uses the story of Palamon and Arcite as one of the good examples (Balade, 420-421).

So does this change my understanding of The Canterbury Tales? Both the wife of Bath and the god of love agree that one of the most offensive items is The Romance of the Rose which Chaucer partly translated. Or in the god of love’s words:

Thou hast translated the Romaunce of the Rose,
That is an heresye ageyns my lawe,
And makest wyse folk fro me withdrawe. (Balade, 329-331)

Maybe as stories about women continue to go downhill with the reeve and the cook, the host functions like the god of love, redirecting Chaucer’s tales. “The Man of Law’s Tale” and “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale” certainly redeem women in diverse ways. Alceste asks the god of love to have mercy on Chaucer. At the end, Alceste will tell Chaucer that his restitution is to spend most of every year of his life writing about good women. Is this like a knight spending a year learning what women want? Perhaps with some of his Canterbury tales, Chaucer is still paying restitution.


Works Cited:
Chaucer, Geoffrey. "The Miller's Prologue." The Canterbury Tales. Ed. Jill Mann. London: Penguin, 2005. 114-17. Print.

Chaucer, Geoffrey. "The Legend of Good Women “Balade." OMACL: The Legend of Good Women. Ed. Douglas B. Killings. Online Medieval and Classical Library, Nov. 1996. Web. 23 Sept. 2013. <http://omacl.org/GoodWomen/>.