The Franklin, Sir Orfeo and the Breton lai

Does the Franklin's Tale function as a Breton lai, keeping with tradition of a lai like Sir Orfeo ? Throughout the Franklin's Tale characters like the company of each other, and the activities it generates, to a degree beyond that of most players in the Canterbury Tales. The companionship of friends, relatives, and associates is evidence that the story consciously evokes the community from which the characters emerge. Further, these characters take a clear responsibility for public opinion; consider Arveragus's "To no wight telle thou of this aventure." Most significantly, perhaps, is a social status that does not always respond to the level of aristocracy, seen especially in the role of the clerk of Orleans. In short, the Franklin's Tale addresses the concerns of an actual society in ways that are not found in most romance. The prominence of the social situation lies in Chaucer's conscious choice of the Breton lai as the genre of this tale, and for his discretion in observing the conventions of the form throughout. A closer look at social references in the extant lays strongly supports the view that Chaucer inserted them into his poem in imitation. The lays place considerable emphasis on social order as well as on human relationships. Sir Orfeo's responsibility is almost as much with the continuing well-being of the state as with recovery of the abducted queen. Equitan comes to an evil end because he neglects his royal responsibilities to woo a woman of inferior status. Similar demands of society are present in the Franklin's Tale, not just peripherally, but centrally. The social milieu detailed in this tale thus fits the social context of other Breton lais, both French and English. Is this coincidence or intent? There is compelling reason to believe that Chaucer was familiar with the lai form and that he used its social dimensions with enormous art. Chaucer is far too cautious a writer to use the term Breton lai just to induce a romantic subject matter and a geographical background. He was well aware of the ways in which the lai departed from typical romance conventions and used them easily and skillfully, embroidering in the same way, although for a different purpose, than he did conventions of the metrical love in Sir Thopas later.

Wife of Bath: An exercise in travel.

A Pilgrimage is a journey to a sacred place that is either physical or spiritual, sometimes both. In Medieval English literature characters go on expeditions that often define their character. In The Canterbury Tales, the Wife of Bath transforms into the voice of reason and experience through obstacles and challenges that test the human condition in marriage. The conceptions that play out in her prologue and tale, this “travel” narrative, both literal and figurative are there to test the her character. In every work, the protagonist follows a path, both specific and unspecific, to improve their well-being. Moving from one place to another, either spiritually or physically, hints at a noticeable change for the person both internally and externally. In essence, the movement creates a path that the characters must follow in order to accomplish what they have been motivated toward. In due course, whether the change is expected or unexpected, the person reaches a point at which they change because of the knowledge they have gained from the experiences on the journey.

The Canterbury Tales is a set of stories recorded by Geoffrey Chaucer during an arranged pilgrimage to the tomb of Thomas a’Beckett, Bishop of Canterbury. There were to be a total of 120 stories in The Canterbury Tales; Chaucer only completed 22. Nevertheless the frame work he adopted for the stories was a plausible one. Moreover, by reporting the responses and relations that each tale evoked from all of the pilgrims, Chaucer added dramatic tension and even greater harmony to the assortment of tales. Chaucer was able to amass a diverse group of people from extensively divided social classes. This pilgrimage was an important one in the life of the church but also in the life of the sinner. The General Prologue is an introduction to the character; Chaucer is concerned with establishing the identity of each narrator. The pilgrimage begins in a little pub outside of London sometime in April when people are accustomed to taking trips of this sort. Chaucer feels obligated to tell the stories of each person truly. He feels that no one should be offended by language or content because he argues that the story-teller is telling the truth and is, in fact, confessing. In the case of the confession and the pilgrimage, The Wife of Bath tale stands out. Chaucer sets up an unusually long prologue in order for the audience to understand the impetus of her story. She is a powerful woman, who has been married five times, but her experiences within the marriages are more important than her authority; she has become anti-male. Her prologue and the tale are a combination of narration and confession. Since she has been married five times she no longer accepts male dominance over her, hence the premise of her tale. She is not apologetic for who she is; she is prepared to take communal authority over those who speak against her. Her sole purpose is sovereignty.

Her tale is a romance tale, but it is an unusual one. A boy has been charged with rape and will be put to death. The women of the court decide they were the only ones that had the right to pass judgment and punishment on this boy. So they take him to their own court where, as punishment, he must find out what women really want. For a year and a day he is allowed to wander trying to find the answer; if he is able to find out he will live, if he fails to do so he dies. He finally meets a woman so ugly he cannot ley his eyes upon her just as his time is running out. She proceeds to present him with a contract; she will tell him what all women want if he, in turn, agrees to marry her. She explains that women want sovereignty over men. She also reminds him that although he is noble he is not gentle in her sense of the word. She lectures to him about the importance of learning compassion, consideration and Christian love. The woman then presents the boy with another contract. The contract is such that she is to remain an old and ugly woman but remains faithful by his side or she becomes young, and the most beautiful woman but is unfaithful. He then leaves the decision up to her; she chooses beautiful but faithful because he was willing to sacrifice his own happiness and pleasure by learning from his mistakes. He goes back to the court a changed man, changed for the better because he was able to examine that which was essential and that which was not.

What the tale establishes is the conception that women are only truly able to exercise sovereignty through the scope of the man's allowance.

A Chaucerian Pub Joke

The Chaucer Pubbe Gagge

Three fellowes wenten into a pubbe,
And gleefullye their handes did rubbe,
In expectatione of revelrie,
For 'twas the houre known as happye.
Greate botelles of wine did they quaffe,
And hadde a reallye good laffe.
'Til drunkennesse held full dominione,
For 'twas two for the price of one.
Yet after wine and meade and sac,
Man must have a massive snack,
Great pasties from Cornwalle!
Scottishe eggs round like a balle!
Great hammes, quaile, ducke and geese!
They suck'd the bones and drank the grease!
(One fellowe stood all pale and wan,
For he was vegetarianne)
Yet man knoweth that gluttonie,
Stoketh the fyre of lecherie,
Upon three young wenches round and slye,
The fellowes cast a wanton eye.
One did approach, with drunkene winke:
"'Ello darlin', you fancy a drink?",
Soon they caught them on their knee,
'Twas like some grotesque puppettrie!
Such was the lewdness and debaucherie -
'Twas like a sketch by Dick Emery!
(Except that Dick Emery is not yet borne -
So such comparisonne may not be drawn).
But then the fellowes began to pale,
For quail are not the friende of ale!
And in their bellyes much confusione!
From their throats vile extrusione!
Stinking foule corruptionne!
Came spewinge forth from droolinge lippes,
The fetide stenche did fille the pubbe,
'Twas the very arse of Beelzebubbe!
Thrown they were, from the Horne And Trumpette,
In the street, no coyne, no strumpet.
Homeward bounde, must quicklie go,
To that ende - a donkey stole!
Their handes all with vomit greased,
(The donkey was not pleased,
And threw them into a ditche of shite!)
They all agreed: "What a brillant night!"

This joke is in answer to Erin Webb's rap post. I heard this a while ago and thought I would share. It is absolutely brilliant since it is simply a "pub joke." The three pilgrims I envision as the "three men" are the Miller, the Reeve and the Pardoner. Try reading it out loud, it's fun and challenging at the same time. Something as simple a joke in middle English sounds at once ridiculous as it is "proper."

Here is the youtube video of the stand-up comic Bill Bailey doing it's fantastic.

The Wi-Fi of Bath.

This to me seems appropriate. In the day and age in which people are obsessed with material possessions we should stop to pause and assess the situation. Whereas now husbands and wives often grapple with time spent on phones, computers, and smart phones, all the Wife of Bath wanted was a little less consternation and a little more freedom. Ahhh where time has gone.

This one's going out to Erin Riley tonite.

The Franklin's Tale.

"A ship al steerelees:" religion & identity in the Man of Law's Tale

At a recent conference on medieval studies at Catholic University, a presenter addressed the relationships between daughters and fathers in The Canterbury Tales; in treating the Man of Law's Tale, she talked about the "dangerous space" that a daughter inhabits in transit from her father's house to her husband's house. Another paper at the conference, delivered by our own Usha Vishnuvajjala, addressed the life of Margery Kempe, who was able to construct a new identity-- outside of the one prescribed to her as a woman-- through religiosity. These two presentations together got me thinking about the way in which Custance is able to consolidate a self-determined identity as a "doghter of hooly chirche (675), a "doghter of [Christ's] chirche (567), only by inhabiting this watery middle space between daughter (of her earthly father) and wife. Even as a mother, Custance has the freedom to communicate or keep secret her paternally- or matrimonially-defined identity: "But what she was she wolde no man seye, / For foul ne fair, thogh that she sholde deye" (524-25).

I'm interested in the element of self-determination in the Man of Law's Tale primarily because Custance-- "born to thraldom and penance" (286)-- actually seems like the least self-determining person ever, except for maybe Griselda. What do other people think? If Custance's religiosity can be seen as an expression of agency (even subversion?) in the social structure that assigns her roles based on her relationships with men-- how do we understand Alla's mother's religiously-motivated grab for power?

This amazing spam-fest is winding down.

*

Here is a beautiful illustration of the "ship al steerelees"-- Constance by Albert Pinkham Ryder:

The Canterbury Tales & Rap

So, a rap remix of the Canterbury Tales would already be pretty sweet, but I especially wanted to present for your meditation what rapper Baba Brinkman sees as pronounced continuity between hip-hop and the CT:

The most remarkable analogies I found between Chaucer and hip-hop were not only historical, however; they were also reflected explicitly in the organizational structure of The Canterbury Tales. The text consists of a collection of stories that Chaucer wrote over the course of about fifteen years towards the end of his life. Some of the Tales were apparently composed before he began the compilation, while others were obviously tailor-made for the project. To bring all of these different stories together into one, Chaucer creates a fictional company of pilgrims riding on horseback from London to Canterbury, who all decide to play a game to help pass the time along the way: a storytelling contest. Each tale represents an entry in the contest by one of the pilgrims, and Chaucer ascribes certain personality traits to each of them, which are then reflected in the tale. What begins on the surface as a religious pilgrimage soon takes a profane turn when the stories become a vehicle for challenges and insults aimed at the other pilgrims. Chaucer employs the competition as a unifying principle, and also as a device to expose social tensions among the pilgrims, while showcasing their different storytelling techniques and levels of ability.

The clearest analogy for this storytelling contest model in hip-hop culture is the phenomenon of the freestyle battle, a live performance event that underlies the majority of recorded rap lyrics either in style or content. By definition, a freestyle is a rap that is unwritten and unrehearsed, composed by the rapper in the moment of performance, with rhymes that are improvised on beat and, when required, on topic. A freestyle battle is when two or more rappers compete in this way head to head, using punch lines, boasts, and insults to out-rhyme and outwit their opponents. The two terms aren’t interchangeable though, since written rhymes are sometimes used in battles, and freestyles are often simple demonstrations of ability rather than direct competitions. Freestyle and battling perform the same function in hip-hop culture as Chaucer’s storytelling competition does in The Canterbury Tales, dramatizing social tensions among rappers and showcasing different techniques and levels of ability. These systems were developed in response to the particular conditions of hip-hop’s genesis.

The frame for Brinkman's rewrite is a rap fan stumbling onto a tour bus that takes off unexpectedly toward the next venue; the rappers on the bus agree to pass the time by battling with the MC assuming the role of the Host. You can read the rest of the introduction for Brinkman's The Rap Canterbury Tales here; I def. recommend listening to the provided song samples, and you can see part of Brinkman's adaptation of the Pardoner's Tale here.

In a burst of ill-advised pride, the first
Of the three rioters replied, "This guy
Is a spy, or worse! I guess Death is his master,
And gives him everlasting life forever after,
A benevolent benefactor, perhaps, to have protecting you,
But nothing gets a confession faster than weapons do!"

*

On a related note:

Religious recasting in the Clerk's Tale

The day our class read the Clerk's Tale, there was some discussion about how the story could possibly work as a religious fable, and I have reflected upon that for a (long, distracted) moment. I don't think it is possible to understand the story of Griselda and Walter as a prescription for Christians to react with patience, humility and long-suffering (Griselda) to the tests of an inscrutable God (Walter)-- Griselda is too superhuman, Walter is too much of a douche, and the Clerk disclaims that "For greet skile is [God] that he wroghte, / But he ne tempteth no man that he boghte" (1152-53).

I do think, however, that the text suggests in several places a recasting of fable in which Griselda can be understood as a loving, enduring Christ figure and Walter as the faltering but forgiven Christian.

We know that Griselda was a shepherdess, "meke and stille" as "a lamb" (538) and committed to her "fadres reverence (231). Furthermore:

So wise and rype wordes hadde she,
And juggementz of so greet equitee,
That she from hevene sent was, as men wende,
Peple to save and every wrong t'amende (438-441).

Though depicting Griselda's first encounter with Walter, the following lines resonate with images of Jesus in Gethsemane:

And doun upon hir knes she gan to falle,
And with sad contenance kneleth stille,
Til she had herd what was the lordes wille (292-294).

as these lines do with images of the Trinity:

This thoghtful markys spak unto this mayde
Ful sobrely, and seyde in this manere:
"Where is youre fader, O Grisildis?" he sayde.
And she with reverence, in humble cheere,
Answerde, "Lord, he is al redy heere" (295-299).

Compared with Walter, who "in somme thynges... was to blame" (76) and "on his lust present was al his thoght" (80), Griselda makes a far more compelling vessel for divinity and beatitude. The Clerk's Tale then becomes the story of the faulty, perverse and petulant inclinations of mankind and Christ's patient love for the transgressor. In any event, I think such a recasting would make the whole story kind of-- less horrible.

What do you guys think? HOT OR NOT

no redeeming value what so ever

I swore next time I posted, I would say something that at least came close to being intellectual.

So much for THAT. Maybe tomorrow. I do plan on boring you with some babbling on my final paper (we should swap, and bore each other!) so...prepare yourself.

In the mean time, I personally feel that more people should make comics with Chaucer in it. I don't know why anyone hasn't yet. Or why no one has turned the entirety of The Canterbury Tales, or parts of it, into a comic. It would be fascin

ating. So many editions are illustrated, as I discussed earlier in the semester, and even though I personally think the illustrations are distracting when trying to read the tales, a comic book could just be...fun? I have no legitimate reason for wanting someone to make one, really, beyond that 'it would be cool.'

Anyway, since it's the beginning of finals week and we all deserve a laugh, have this Chaucer comic courtesy of Hark! A Vagrant

Ah, just kidding, comic is too big for Blogger to handle, click here to see it!

I think it's hilarious the cartoonist drew Chaucer the way he is depicted in that portrait we've all now seen a hundred times. Is that the only existing documentation of what Chaucer looked like? It's everywhere, seriously. Obviously I prefer to think of Chaucer the pilgrim looking different than Chaucer the author, I don't quite know why, for some reason when I read the tales I imagine them as separate entities that look differently. Let's now dwell in my psychosis, though.

(I honestly can't think of anything worse then a millionth day trip to Canterbury with beat poets. I don't know. There could be something worse. But I can't think of any right now...)

Holy Anachronism, Batman

I stumbled upon this a while ago, and meant to post it, and forgot. Because I have the memory of a goldfish. Anyway.

In this gadget filled era, what is one to do when one stumbles upon a word in Middle English in the works of Chaucer and one is without access to a decent Middle English dictionary? Fear not, because there is now a Chaucer Dictionary app for your iPod/iPhone.

I wish I were kidding. I'm not, here's the link to the app in the AppStore. And here is a handy screencap I made of it, if you don't want to actually scope out the link:

I wonder, is anyone out there willing to fork over the .99 cents to see if this app is worth it? I wonder how accurate it is, too, its translations. How useful it would actually be, as a dictionary.

This would have probably been more useful if I'd posted it earlier in the semester, as I intended. Sorry about that! But hey, just in case you have any last minute, er, Chaucer dictionary needs...right, here we are.

Part of me is thrilled Chaucer is being recognized, in even a tiny way, like this. Most of me is perplexed by the paradox of having a Middle English dictionary on my futuristic super phone. It's like whenever they act out classic novels on the holodeck on Star Trek.

I'm in serious danger of nerding myself into oblivion, so, time to move on.

Continuing my theme of Chaucer and technology, I've gotten addicted to the few audio recordings available at the VMI website. It was especially helpful in the beginning of the semester when I was adjusting to the Middle English. I had been hoping there'd be an audio book of all the tales in Middle English, but so far, no luck. I'm usually against audio books, too, I think they're for old people or people who fall asleep when they read (like my Mother, don't ask, long, long story). But I've been using the VMI website a lot lately as I prepare to recite, badly, Middle English for class.

I had high hopes for this post when I started, but it's rapidly losing all coherency. Better end now, then, while I still have a shred of self respect.

Melibee!

I really enjoyed this tale even with the incessant spewing of proverbs and the forgetfulness of the Melibeus and Prudence.

Now I have been thinking over some comments made in class on Friday and have come to the same conclusion I did then. Prudence is a feminist. Yes she forgoes her "motherly" role and chooses reason to sort out her husband's grief and issues with vengeance and revenge. And she irritatingly quotes learned men (though Melibeus does this as well but it seemed not to bother anyone as much) and does not have a real though of her own.

This is where I take issue. Do we not like Prudence because she does not play into what we believe to be the traditional role? Is it because she chooses to act upon reason rather than passion like a man? Why is it that we blame Prudence for the neglect of her child but not Melibeus?

I think it is interesting that when women do not fall into the completely traditional and stereotypical role there is something that leaves a bad taste in people's mouths...but why? Why can't a woman quote learned men? Is it so bad that she herself is obviously well-read? Or do we insist on saying that these quotes are used by Prudence because she cannot think for herself?

I know it seems a litle rant-y but I believe if it was Melibeus who was trying to calm Prudence with reason and he forgot all about Sophia then we would have had a completely different discussion on our hands.

Reformation Talk in the Prioress's Tale

Apologies, I seem to be spamming a bit today.

Anyway, on Tuesday, while we were discussing the Prioress's Tale, it was mentioned by Professor Wenthe that one of the possible motivations of the Prioress in telling her tale was to emphasize the importance of intent in prayer, rather then absolute perfect repetition. The boy didn't actually know what he was saying, he only knew it was for the Virgin Mary, and his Latin was most likely a little skewed. Something that didn't bother anyone in story, or the Prioress, but would have undoubtedly irked the more strict Catholic Priests.

I thought at the time, of the Prioress and her stance, "that's a bit Protestant-y." Which, okay, isn't a word, but legitemately the stance of the Prioress is a bit more liberal in thinking then the church at the time generally allowed. In particular, the idea of stict adherence to Church ceremony being ultimately less importance than spiritual intent is very similar to what one reformer within the Church, John Wyclif, was preaching about during Chaucer's time.

However, a majority of the readings I found while researching this topic seem to go out of their way to warn us away from being too free in applying any one religious label to Chaucer. We know for a fact hat he died a member of the church, and while reform was spoken of in his time, and certain associations he had would seem to link him to people like John Wyclif, there is no definitive proof that Chaucer was a Protestant-in-the-making.

Would I like to think he was? Of course. I also like to think, however, that he went out of the way to give us, through the pilgrims themselves and their stories, a wide array of individuals, many of them members of the church. There are alternately Monks who are evil and Monks who are pious, and arguing of religion and its potentially corruptible figures in the tales and outside of them.

Lawrence Besserman does a much better job then I possibly could dissecting the many possible readings into The Prioress's tale. If you're interested at all, I suggest you take a look at his article, Ideology, Antisemitism and Chaucer's "Prioress's Tale.

I can't begin to definitively state if the reformation language in the Prioress's Tale was purposeful, but I choose to believe so. If not necessarily because Chaucer himself adhered to such ideology, because he was aware of such talk and referenced it in an effort to display a truly varied collection of people and positions in life.

Thoughts?

Chaucer, now with more British pop stars...

So I have a friend who lives in London who has suffered through my endless diatribes about my classes, and who emailed last week with a link to a BBC website and one, ominous sentence in the subject line: thought you would want to see this.

Apparently the BBC did a recent adaptation of a handful of The Canterbury Tales. Among them, The Man of Law's Tale, The Wife of Bath, and The Miller's Tale. Below I've copied and the description of The Miller's Tale:



John (Dennis Waterman) runs a pub in suburban Kent. He hosts a regular Karaoke night, where his much younger wife Alison (Billie Piper) is queen bee. One night a smooth talking stranger, Nick (James Nesbitt), arrives claiming to be a talent scout and declaring that Alison has what it takes to be a star. Alison is drawn to him by the promise of fame, but his motives aren't quite what they seem.

My obsession with Billie Piper (thank you, Doctor Who) aside, I'm both intrigued and horrified. I immediately decided this mixture of feeling needed to be shared, and hence this blog post.

You can check out descriptions of the rest of the adaptations at the BBC's site, here.

Aforementioned Friend from London-town, has offered to get a hold of the DVDs for me, and what I would like to know is, if it's possible for me to get a hold of them and copy them, if people would be at all interested in witnessing the horror/hilarity?

Beyond that, what are your thoughts on these adaptations? The MFA in me would rather see originality then a constant reworking of older material, but I can't deny that in some instances these kinds of adaptations have proven to be wildly successful (Wicked, anyone?).

So. Thoughts?

The Pardoner

Okay, apparently the Pardoner is universally held to be contemptible, hypocritical and "grotesque" (Glenn Burger quoting Donald Howard), but I really like him, not (only) because he does gay kissing at the end. More than that-- I felt like the text was asking me to like him. That might be my own fancy at work. I just feel like, whatever his criminality and misanthropy, his great candor would be enough to illustrate Chaucer's favor. The fact that his entire story is quoted-- it's so boldly insincere and yet so frank.

He reminds me of Marmeladov, the confessional and unrepentant alcoholic in Crime & Punishment: "Yeah, I am a cheeky villain; I suck; it's all good."



PLEASE TELL ME YOUR THOUGHTS

Don't You Wish Your Creative Title Was Hot Like Mine: Troubled Binaries in the Physician's Tale

Hey, friends! I wanted to offer a brief response to Glenn Burger's reading of the Physician's Tale, as my reading differs on an intuitive level, and I'd like to hear other thoughts on it.

Burger's argument is that the Physician's Tale models the excision of the feminine from the masculine homosocial world/psyche: an excision that the Pardoner then performs by telling a tale with no female characters in it and that the pilgrims perform through their antipathy to the feminized Pardoner. However, I read the Physician's Tale as condemning the actions of Virginius and problematizing the ostensible meaning behind the "historial thyng," based on the differences between Livy's tale as it appears in Romance of the Rose and the Physician's Tale. For instance:

* In the story as told in Romance of the Rose, there is no pathos for the daughter-- Virginius leaves the court, he removes his daughter's head, he comes back. The Physician, on the other hand, describes Virginia with her arms around her father, asking for "grace" and "remedye" (236).

* The Physician's seemingly tangential (do Appias' actions constitute betrayal if Virginia did not know him, let alone store any faith in him?) preliminary invective:

And taketh kep of that that I shal seyn:
Of alle tresons sovereyn pestilence
Is whan a wight bitrayseth innocence. (90-92)

* And this weird seeming narrative mistake, when the Physician notes that, after Appias kills himself and Virginius pardons Claudius, "The remenant were anhanged, moore and lesse / That were consentant of this cursednesse" (275-76). Only no other villain was explicitly named in the story. Romance of the Rose explains that those "remenant" were the false witnesses against Virginius, but the absence of this explanation in the Physician's Tale seems loud. When I read it, I assumed it was the father who was the last "conentant of this cursednesse"-- the very next line explains, "Heere may men seen how synne hath his merite."

If we can read the Physician as in opposition to the actions of Virginius, the moments in the text when female becomes male--

* Nature (femininized) --> "vicaire general" (20)
* maistresses --> A theef of venysoun, that hath forlaft / His likerousnesse and al his olde craft" (83-84)
* Virginia --> Virginius

may not be instances of the masculine swallowing the feminine (as Burger suggests) but instances of gender transitivity. That relies, of course, on a subversive Physician, and it also implies a Pardoner at odds with Donald Howard's and Glenn Burger's "grotesque." But, uh, more on that anon.

The Franklin's Tale: No Creative Title Needed

The Franklin's Tale is my favorite tale as I said in class. But why you ask? I think it is the most accessible tale especially to scholars (and students) of the 21st Century.

It begins as a very simple love story about a lady, Dorigen, and her knight, Arveragus. I say a lady and her knight rather than a knight and his lady because as stated in line 730-35 "Ther was a knyght that loved and dide his payne/ To serve a lady in his beste wise;/ And many a labour, many a greet emprise,/ He for his lady wroghte er she were wonne./ For she was oon the faireste under sonne,/ And eek therto comen of so heigh kynrede

This is the first time we see a women presiding over a man because it befits he station to do so. I think it speaks to the relationship Chaucer has with his female storytellers and female characters. By establishing Dorigen's superiority over Arveragus from the beginning allows the reader to become more invested in her as a leading character. In the other tales involving women, even if they were a main component in the tale, we always dependent of the male counterparts story as well. Dorigen stands relatively alone in her will. After Arveragus is gone and Aurelius the Squire comes and makes his proclamation of love to Dorigen and she agrees it is to spare the feelings of the love sick servant. How was she to know that he would take and innocent agreement and find a magician to help him win?

Yes, I understand we do crazy things for love, however Aurelius uses magic as the means to win his love (and notice that it is his love not hers). He takes advantage of her virtuous and piteous nature to essentially trick her into marrying him. Arveragus returns and releases Dorigen from their bonds with an open heart knowing that he would not be the one to cause her to forsake herself. Seeing what he has done to Dorigen, Aurelius proceeds to the same end. Which brings me to the other reason I love this tale. The two questions asked at very end "Lordynges, this question, thanne, wol I aske now,/ Which was the mooste fre, as thynketh yow?/ Now telleth me, er that ye ferther wende. (11621-1623)

Now I believe Arveragus is the more noble of the two. He releases, without question, Dorigen without questions because he has faith in her. Aurelius, if he truly loved her, would never have put her in that position. He takes away the one thing, according to the Wife of Bath's tale, women want, sovereignty. Aurelius uses trickery and magic to win Dorigen for himself, Arveragus uses his will, honor and loyalty.

Oh and why I think it is appropriate for 21st century scholars-How many of you out there, whether man or women, have been put in a position to see and escape only to realize you've been blindsided by and act of impossiblity?

There is much more to the tale than that which I have stated, some things I still have questions about. But please add your two cents!

Of queynte mirours and of perspectives: the Squire's Tale

Hello, friends! I hope you all enjoyed the Squire's Tale, as it is probably my favorite of the Canterbury Tales by virtue of its weirdness.

How is it weird and/or notable?

(a) The Squire's Tale is a pastiche of different kinds of stories (the epic, the romance, the beast fable) without really going anywhere. This is frequently ascribed to the Squire's youth and immaturity-- he wants to tell a cool tale like his dad, but he's not quite there-- but that seems to run counter to the Squire's portrait in the General Prologue:

He koude songes make and wel endite,
Juste and eek daunce, and weel purtreye and write.

(b) If you'll recall, Canacee (the main character of the Squire's Tale) shares her name with the main character of the story that the Man of Law descried in the introduction to his Tale, citing:

But certeinly no word ne writeth he [Chaucer]
Of thilke wikke ensample of canacee,
That loved hir owene brother synfully;
Of swiche cursed stories I sey fy!

(c) The Tale begins with the Host entreating the Squire to "sey somwhat of love; for certes ye / Konnen theron as muche as any man." The Squire replies,

Nay, sire... but I wol seye as I kan
With hertly wyl; for I wol nat rebelle
Agayn youre lust

Is he saying No, that he won't say somewhat of love, or that he doesn't know all that much about love? Either way, the Squire says that he will not rebel against the Host's lust, and then he heads into (1) a weirdo deliberate distortion of a romance, or (2) a story about incest. Either is an odd choice.

(d) A sundry internal discrepancies-- such as the falcon using a bird's preference for worms over "sugre, hony, breed and milk" (the food of the cage) to illustrate "newefangelnesse." Which doesn't make any sense.

(e) Telling her story of romantic woe, the falcon says that she "made vertu of necessitee"-- an echo of King Theseus' speech in the Knight's Tale.

(f) PITEE RENNETH SOONE IN GENTILE HERTE.

I reviewed a number of sources on the Squire's Tale for my annotated bibliography, so I can share some published suggestions, re: the Squire's eccentricities, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

What do you think? Squire's Tale: incomplete or deliberately truncated? Squire: wry? rebellious? confused? inept?

Wife of Bath: Battered Wife Syndrome?

Okay so I am probably going to ruffle many feminist feather's but after reading the Wife of Bath's Tale again I came up with a few questions that had never occurred to me before.

Is the Wife of Bath suffering from what is now classified as "battered wife syndrome"?

Is she as independent as she claims? If she does not need a husband why does she keep getting married?

How much agency does she really have?

The Wife of Bath admits that from the tender age of 12 she has been a married woman. SHe tells us that 3 were for money and 2 were for looks and love. She evens admits that she blamed them for ruining her marriages for absolutely no reason at all; she did it because she could. She defends her accusation by saying it is because "God has given women by nature deceit, weeping and spinning for as long as they live". If she feels the need to do this to every husband, and she understands it is unfair, why does she continue to do it? The one husband she does go into detail about, her fifth, the one that she promises to give all her life, love, and of course wealth to is the one that beats her, and apologizes with words of love, eventually causing her to lose hearing in her left ear. But after their argument he apologized and she claims "we fell into accord between ourselves" and they settle to have her control the estate.

We learn more about the Wife of Bath from her prologue (which is to be expected) than we do from the tale she tells. However, the tale and it's subject matter, gives us clear insight into what the Wife of Bath herself is looking for. Sovereignty. That is what all women want from their husbands and their lives. It is what the old women receives from the Knight to become beautiful. But with that sovereignty she chooses to love and honor her husband always. Now this is interesting that the Wife of Bath would tell a tale about women and sovereignty (something she does possess) but have her woman at the end give the one thing that would be desired (and expected) of her-sole allegiance to her husband.

I know I've rambled a bit with this but I wanted to get my thoughts out there before class discussion to see if I am following a justified thought. And I know I have not in anyway answered my questions thoroughly or completely but I think the is some merit in discussing that maybe the Wife of bath is NOT the great feminist hero of Chaucer's tale.

The Illustrated Canterbury Tales

I have to start off this post by admitting I'm using a different edition of the text then the majority of the class. I'll be discussing the illustrations that appear in my version of the text, and as such can not speak to any illustrations that may or may not appear in the other versions and for that, I apologize.

My edition of The Canterbury Tales contains wood-engraved illustrations by Edward Coley Burne-Jones (man of too many names) whose artwork originally appeared in The Works of Geoffery Chaucer, published in 1896. These illustrations are eye catching and beautiful, but ultimately a little distracting, especially as they appear in my edition at random. Illustrations of Emelye at the Temple of Diana appear pages after the action occurs in the narrative. I can only hope that the images were more appropriately used in the edition in which they first appeared.

Burne-Jones said The Works of Geoffery Chaucer, the book containing his illustrations and Chaucer's work without preface or any biographical introduction to to the man himself, would "be a little like a pocket cathedral." Upon second glance at the wood carvings, one can perhaps see how they would resemble a stained glass window, especially when paired with the ornate lettering of the prose. You can see an example of the Burne-Jones wood cuttings here. While it's obvious the respect Burne-Jones had for Chaucer's work, there's something a little heeby about how freely he goes about reposessing it, in a way, and repackaging it in a way he likes better. I doubt anything malicious was intended, and truthfully, I may be reading a bit too much into Burne-Jones's actions, here.

Personally, I feel conflicted about illustrating works of literature. On the one hand, pretty pretty pictures. On the other hand, I have a brain and an imagination, I can create my own mental pretty pretty pictures. There's something frustrating about being denied the intimacy of imaging the visuals of the story for yourself. It's part of what infuriates so many people, I think, when literature is made into film.

According to a website constructed by the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, "Early printed editions of Chaucer borrowed heavily from the elaborate illustrations found in manuscript copies. This tradition has continued throughout the history of Chaucer editions, until the twentieth century when production costs and larger press runs made illustrations prohibitively expensive." However conflicted I may feel about the illustrations, they were evidently present in the early manuscripts and reproduced in early editions until it was no longer cost effective to do so. Whether it was ever Chaucer's intention to add illustrations, I can't say, but early readers and producers of the manuscripts evidently wanted them. The UWM website on the early editions of Chaucer is worth glancing over, if you're interested at all in the changes that were made over the years and many different editions of The Canterbury Tales.

The UWM site has many examples of those early illustrated editions, but if you're looking for more, ArtStor is a great resource. I plugged in The Canterbury Tales and got back a ton of results of scanned original illustrated manuscripts from the 1400s. I put up a few examples of the results I got from ArtStor on flickr, here, but you should check it out yourself on ArtStor if you want a closer look.

So: to illustrate, or not to illustrate? The originals are interesting, from a historical perspective, but I'm not sure what is gained by copying them for modern editions. Not sure anything is lost, either, they're just sort of there. Likewise, it's interesting how the illustrations were removed from later editions, then added back in, and removed again from edition to edition. You can take them or leave them, perhaps? I'd be interested in hearing what everyone else thinks. I find the art compelling, but don't feel as if I necessarily need it sitting side by side with the prose in order to enjoy the story.

As an end note, I apologize if this initial blog entry is clunky, language or topic wise, I promise my next nine won't be as torturous.

But never mind my self deprecating tendencies, Chaucer and illustrations, what do you think?

Protocols for Posting

Ideally, an entry posted to this blog should both record an interesting thought on the part of its author and strive to provoke further thought on the part of its readers. An entry should be clear and concise, and when appropriate it should make use of the Web-based resources available to blogs (for example, links to specific other pages under discussion or to sites hosting texts or forums of interest, and images that illustrate relevant points of interest).

Posts can vary in length. A paragraph can suffice, provided it offers a complete idea or raises an interesting problem in a fully intelligible way. But a post may also constitute a brief essay in itself, if you are moved to pursue the thread of a particularly interesting topic. Given the screen-based interface, however, you should avoid posting lengthy entries that would require scrolling down for more than a few screens. If you want to sustain an argument that's longer than that, you should really break it down into a series of separate posts. That will both ease readability and help to ensure that comments are focused on discrete points of interest.

As for the topics of your posts, all I ask is that they relate to the subject of our course. How they relate is up to you! You may choose to write a response to a current text under discussion, or you may prefer to continue an argument about a broader theoretical approach. You may also use this space to solicit feedback on your own research interests, or to explore other aspects of our topic that couldn't fit into our syllabus or in-class discussion. Reviews and recommendations of other texts (including articles and books of criticism) are also appropriate, but make sure to avoid mere plot summary or paraphrase—give your readers a sense of the work's value and tackle its claims.

The main purpose of these blog entries is to facilitate the exchange of ideas and information among participants in our class. The exchange can be as lively and as wide-ranging as you want it to be, as focused and as deeply-considered as you can make it. I expect that we'll all learn what posts work best by simply continuing to post, read, and comment regularly. I look forward to following the progress of our blog!