Gving Emelye a second glance

"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?