Canterbury Tales - Geoffrey Chaucer

...plan! Geoffrey Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales were going to rescue me from my tormentors.

I had read the book many times in a version translated into modern English by Professor Neville Coghill and always it had made me laugh out loud and I was certain that one in particular of its wonderful stories would so transfix my audience that they wouldn’t notice how poorly I delivered it to them. So it proved, the gambling was abandoned ...
...supplicants on a journey to Canterbury in the Middle Ages. They are organised by fictional moderator, Harry Bailly. Chaucer (retainer of the royal household, uncle to King Henry IV, and first to be laid to rest in what would come to be known as Poet's Corner in Westminster Abbey) wrote them somewhere between 1387 and 1400 and they represent the lifestyles of every layer of society at the time. His pilgrims are thus from each layer of the social stratum ... more

Chaucer has a special place in my memory for very personal reasons. “Canterbury Tales” changed me, it altered how I thought about myself and let me grow in confidence. That’s pretty high praise so though this is a book opinion, I’ll add into it the manner in which the book affected me.

When I was a schoolboy, we were required to read to the English class a story of our choice, and this aural presentation played a large part in the grades we were given. To me this was as frightening an experience as could be, especially given that I had, and still have, a speech impediment. I stammer. I stutter. I stumble horrifically over some words. When speaking to people this is bad enough, but at least then I can choose my words to mask the problem, when reading from a page the words are chosen for me and I can’t avoid those that for me are the difficult ones.

Children are not the kindest of critics and I knew full well that a book of a different kind would be running when I spoke the words of whatever passage I chose. The other pupils took bets on how many words I would fail over. When this trial was due all around were stunned to see my hand go up into the air and to hear me volunteer to be the first to perform; I had a plan! Geoffrey Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales were going to rescue me from my tormentors.

I had read the book many times in a version translated into modern English by Professor Neville Coghill and always it had made me laugh out loud and I was certain that one in particular of its wonderful stories would so transfix my audience that they wouldn’t notice how poorly I delivered it to them. So it proved, the gambling was abandoned as all about me lost count of my blunders and indeed none cared about them as they so enjoyed the story. I had time to read but one of these aloud and chose the most ribald, thinking that if I were to be castigated for its somewhat earthy content I might as well have fun in the process. It worked better that I could ever have wished as slowly but surely the audience warmed to Chaucer and indeed wept with mirth at his humour, I had half expected to be sent to explain my actions to the headmaster, but he came by the room part way through to find out what was causing all the laughter and stayed for the duration of my reading. By the end one and all had tears of laughter in their eyes, the headmaster and myself most of all. I’m not going to tell you which of these I read just yet; you will have to read the rest of my rambling dissertation to find out.

In its mediaeval original text the book is a demanding read but with each generation a modern text has arisen and that of Professor Coghill serves our age wonderfully well. Inevitably the power and beauty of Chaucer’s poetry does not fully transfer to a modern translation and so once I had begun to grow in understanding of his work I transferred my attentions to a Middle English version; I strongly recommend that my readers follow the same course of action. My commentary below is gleaned from a Middle English version but I do not dismiss the accessibility afforded by the Coghill translation (other translations abound but I believe this one to be the best of the modern variants). Each tale could easily provoke an essay in its own right so I’ll try to be brief in my descriptions. I won’t even cover all the tales as a number of them are of little note in my opinion and thus save room to remark more fully on those I feel are more worthy of attention. Perhaps those I do relate to you will spur you on to read the rest as well.

Taken as a whole this work is far greater than the sum of its parts yet is best dipped into ad hoc rather than read cover to cover. It is a mixture of contradictions and yet a thing of great beauty with a hidden but unifying thread available for the more perceptive reader to deduce. Its poetry is difficult to appreciate in the original form (though well worth the effort required) as the language has changed so much over the centuries but its power has not diminished thanks to well-translated modern versions.

I’m asking for trouble embarking on such an opinion as this book is so complex it is bound to lead me into a long essay that few on this site will have the patience to read and yet it is such an important piece of English literature it seems to me only right to give it coverage here. Doubtless it would be better if one of our band of English Literature graduates had written this essay, yet I will do my best.

The tales are a group of stories told by each member of a party of roughly thirty fictional supplicants on a journey to Canterbury in the Middle Ages. They are organised by fictional moderator, Harry Bailly. Chaucer (retainer of the royal household, uncle to King Henry IV, and first to be laid to rest in what would come to be known as Poet's Corner in Westminster Abbey) wrote them somewhere between 1387 and 1400 and they represent the lifestyles of every layer of society at the time. His pilgrims are thus from each layer of the social stratum and their stories when taken as a whole are a fascinating historical document as well as superb literature. The tales are incomplete, as Chaucer did not live to finish them; the prologue tells us that each pilgrim was to give two tales on the way to Canterbury and a further two on the return journey. Printing had not been invented at the time (Caxton (1422-91) hadn’t even born!), so the tales he completed were passed around in hand-written form and were always in several different versions at once. The order of the tales is a moot point between scholars of Middle English, I subscribe to the view that we will never know who is correct and it simply doesn’t matter anyway.

In most modern versions, including that of Coghill, the order I shall use in this essay seems to be prevalent; it does give a rather satisfying juxtaposition of the bawdy with the more straight-laced so I see no reason to depart from it. Furthermore, it is chosen with a view to each tale leading on from the one before and though I feel that the pinnacle of the text lies within a tale well before the final one, this is but my own viewpoint.

Onward to the tales themselves:

The Prologue

The journey begins in April and Chaucer gives us a description of the month as seen in Kent, the garden of England is well described and brought to mind vividly by the writer. I know Kent well enough having been born there and it still has the same feel to it as in Chaucer’s era when viewed in its more rural areas. Chaucer gives us brief descriptions of each of his characters and sets the scene for the rest of the tales. The whole book is in an ancient verse form but don’t be put off by this as it soon wraps you up in its masterful poetry and you can but marvel at Chaucer’s ability to write in such a potentially difficult form.

The Knight’s Tale

Here we are told a tale of a Lord of Athens, a duke no less, and his chivalry. The drama in this tale is not as good as in many of the others yet the symbolism and structure of the poetry redeem it in my view. Palman and Arcite, knights from Thebes fall in love with the kinswomen of Duke Thesus and enter into rivalry. Arcite wins a tournament and is awarded the hand of Emilye. Arcite falls from his horse at the moment of his victory and dies. Palamon marries Emilye. The two Knights represent allegorical forms. They are respectively Active Life and Contemplative Life. The piece makes its more attentive readers answer the following riddle: Which knight is the more "contemplative" or the more admirable: if Palamon, the ending is poetic justice, if Arcite, it is irony. There is no correct answer to this riddle, but the choice of each reader says much about the person concerned. The inspiration for this tale is clearly taken from Boccaccio in the Teseida. The tale is wholesome, morally above reproach, and, most readers will agree, somewhat tedious. It is worthy of consideration due to its allegory alone.

The Miller’s Tale

I chose this one as my tale when reading to my old English class, it is bawdy and irreverent but I love it dearly. In form it is a typical love-triangle from the tradition of the fabliau, the medieval vulgar anecdote.

A carpenter named John is married to a hot-blooded 18-year-old girl named Alisoun. John is old and Alisoun is young (18) and very lusty. She is described as a wily weasel; a vixen; a young calf; each with animalistic imagery so he draws his readers attention to her youthful sensuality. This girl is “hot”. Chaucer adds a border Nicholas to this couple, whose lechery is matched only by his intellectual arrogance, founded on his study of astrology. Chaucer tells us that Nicholas says to her “For if you’ll have my wille, then love for you I’ll spille”. This tale is not for those who are easily embarrassed and was frequently bowdlerised in Victorian times.

Alisoun makes a pact to “accommodate” Nicholas whereby the miller, a medieval misogynist, entices her to swear her compliance to pilgrim's own patron, Thomas of Kent. This whole tale picks at the story told by the Knight and mocks it. The Knight makes much of courtly love and the miller transfers this to his barnyard antics so as to bring ridicule on his social superior the Knight. In the Middle Ages, an arrangement then termed courtly love existed. This was the arrangement by which a gentleman could seek and eventually obtain the physical love of a married woman by following certain traditional structures based on genteel behaviour. The miller reduces this to his ribald lechery and the dalliance of his protagonists.

The parish clerk Absolon is fully committed to this form of arrangement. When he sees Alisoun at Mass, where she has gone immediately after making her adulterous pact, he is so smitten by her that "If she had been a mouse and she a cat,/ He wolde hir hente anoon." While no less passionate in his attraction for Alisoun, the parish clerk will follow the dictates of polite entreaty. The main comedy concerns a misplaced kiss and the breaking of wind. I put this much more delicately than Chaucer though so you have been warned. Absolon, on bended knee, begs to kiss Alisoun one dark night but realises she has tricked him and his kiss has been misplaced when it springs to his mind that his intended’s face does not have a beard, need I say more?

Nicholas spies what has happened and remarks “A beard, a beard! God’s body that was something like a joke!” He tries to replicate the trick but substitutes his own buttocks for Alisoun’s delights; Nicholas lets fly a fart of violent power but the cleric has learnt his lesson. Absolon somehow manages to keep his eyes open though his nose rebels and strikes Nicholas on the behind with a heated branding iron.

Professor Coghill gives this rowdy humour full vent in his version of the tale. The miller makes the whole group understand that the host had called upon him to yield to a more socially acceptable speaker. By implication he mocks their social pretensions. The ensuing laughter of the entourage assures us that the lesson was well taken. If you read this tale in Coghill’s Modern English translation I assure you it will make you laugh out loud.

The Reeve

In some ways this is a stunningly modern tale in that it features anti-clericalism and proto-feminism. This is a tale from the Middle Ages and shows us that few things are really as new as we imagine. In the tale Chaucer questions the rights of the church and the right of women to control their fate and their rights over their own bodies. Never tell me Chaucer has a lack of relevance to modern society! This tale is another fabliau. In this tale the narrator tries to get back at the miller for claiming a social standing to which he is not entitled. Chaucer has one of his characters claim that when he rapes a woman he so understands her needs that she responds with gratitude.

It is of a similar nature to the tale told by the miller but is without the love of life there shown. The reeve is of a darker nature and cynical in his views. This interpretation of rape is particularly chilling when one considers the accusation Cecily of Chaumpaigne brought against the poet himself.

The Cook

This is a very minor tale and often thought to be but a fragment of a longer piece. It is an ironic study that ends abruptly. It may be complete though as it does follow its narrative threads to a conclusion. The narrator notes a “mormal” or ulcer, on the shin of the Cook. Let us say that this lesion is not a simple skin infection but a sign of a serious underlying disease such as leprosy or even a venereal affliction. This would account for the narrator's great unease. One would hardly want such a cook handling one's food!

The cook is a rascal, who sells stale food and drains the blood (or gravy, it is difficult to distinguish what such ancient texts meant) from pies to use later. He is a cheerful and hearty person whose shop is surrounded by flies attracted by his decaying food. Pilgrims complain of eating the “parsley” in his geese, a likely reference not to parsley itself but to maggots and dead flies.

The cook claims to be telling the tale of a friend he knows but it is clearly autobiographical in nature. He tries to top the tales of the Knight and the miller and recounts that the wife of his “friend” is a prostitute. His tale is centred on his youth when he was but a “‘prentice”. I believe the tale to be complete and its seemingly abrupt end to be a punch line based around the following revelations that dawn on the cook’s audience:
(1) The tale was autobiographical;
(2) The 'prentice/Cook had several amorous encounters with his friend's sluttish wife;
(3) The “mormal” with its underlying pathology is a souvenir of these encounters.

The Man of Law

This tale marks a departure from the ribaldry of the preceding tales and seems a much more high-brow literary form. The Man of Law rallies the faithful by presenting them the narrative of Custance's spiritual journey to emulate in their own travel to Canterbury.

This is also a unique piece in another respect; it marks the first and only Chaucerian reference to mediaeval Christianity's strongest religious rival, Islam, and it contains his only reference to the prophet Muhammad and to the Qur'an (Koran). The narrative is perhaps a call for unity in Christian circles and thus serves to heal the tensions in the group of pilgrims after their earlier banter. I’m treading on dangerous ground in this assertion but I believe that other views of this piece are in error. I don’t think it is generous to Islam, rather I see it as openly hostile. One thing is certain, this tale lacks the entertainment value of the earlier stories though it has interest as social commentary.

The Wife of Bath

The wife is not a weaver but a purveyor of cloth and thus of the upper middle classes at the time. She is of the burgesses, a group of married women retaining the ownership and control of their property, and who could enter into contracts in their own names, and whose husbands had neither legal liability nor power of consent in such matters. Once more we see that feminism did not begin in the latter half of the 20th century at all.

The wife, Alisun, tells us that she would not consent to her late husband’s desires until he signed his estate to her in his will, he was but one of five husbands she had outlived and she treated all of them in similar fashion. By the time she recounts her tale she is wealthy and owns much property. The practical bourgeois wife as Alisun shows herself to be clearly contradicting the idealised image of the subservient wife held up as a model by "gentility" and by the church. She recounts that her parents married her off when she was but twelve, thus hinting at their greed without actually saying so.

Chaucer carries off this tale with aplomb principally because he gives Alisun a measure of romances in her relationships that are conveniently in direct proportion to her avarice. Unlike the pardoner whose tale is later in the book Alisun is not a hypocrite but is entirely heretical in her views.

The Friar

Chaucer’s clergy tend to be either corrupt or pious, and the Friar is no exception, he is corrupt. He is a snob and his corruption is caused by greed according to the narrator. He will not accept the poor and the lepers but fraternises with the wealthy instead. It is not his wish to minister to the poor and needy. The narrator tells us that the Friar deems himself able to tell if a penitent is truly contrite, given that the Friar receives monetary compensation for hearing confessions, it becomes clear that the more money that is passed his way the more contrite he considers the supplicant. This is not a particularly interesting tale but it does give Chaucer the chance to compare reality against image when he considers the clergy of his time so as a historical piece it has worth.

The Clerk

This is a difficult tale to relate as it is rather dull but has significance in the historical and socio-political spheres. It also has relevance when considering the merchant’s tale and thus I include it here.

One technology of the self for early Christians was exomologesis, which means "full acknowledgement" or "confession." It was, first and foremost, a confession of faith, but exomologesis was also used to name the public ritual manifestation of repentance. This concept is central to the tale of the clerk; he relates the life of Griselda and her husband Walter.
Walter, a very high born noble, tests the honour and belief of his wife to destruction to see if she will give him total obedience. Initially she is a peasant who he raises to a higher station in life. She gains great respect and is well liked but his love turns in on itself and he seeks to find the limits of her loyalty, honour and obedience.

The tale lacks credibility as in it she allows him to take their child from her, allows him to deny her access and then meekly accepts that her low birth means that he must end their marriage and choose another. She wishes them well for the future. Finally Walter recognises her virtue and restores her to the palace.

I’m not enamoured of this particular tale and feel it is best ignored save for the development of it in the merchant’s tale. The role of Walter is not a reasonable one; indeed it is sadistic. This muddies any point Chaucer is attempting to make about asceticism in relation to Grizelda.

The Merchant

I have been somehow dreading writing a précis of this tale as it is perhaps the most difficult conceptually and the key to the entire volume. It is Chaucer’s admission that the tales are his own confessional. He hinted as much in the Reeve’s Tale where the references to his own life were plain to see but in this tale the confessional aspects of the entire cycle come to their fulfilment. The tale shows poetic brilliance, comedy and wit, but these mask mind-numbing complexity.

Chaucer hides his sources but I would claim that the Decameron (by Giovanni Boccaccio) is one of these. Chaucer explores the concept of nihilism in this tale and his use of allegory is possibly unsurpassed in its eloquence.

I assume the merchant to be a usurer, one who charges extortionate interest on loans as Chaucer himself did. Usury is contrary to the beliefs of the time especially with reference to Thomas Aquinas who himself cites Aristotle in his belief that interest charging is immoral. The protagonist in this tale is January, perhaps the month of Chaucer’s birth, and he mirrors Dante’s Master Adam in that he is a narcissist, a counterfeiter, a falsifier and a most perverse manufacturer of mental images in his readers minds.
The secondary character, May, echoes back to Grizelda in the clerk’s tale. January’s garden is famed in English literature, it has references to Eden but the greater significance in this tale is its self-flagellation of Chaucer, he spreads his life out before us; and he judges himself very harshly indeed.

We may indeed die of imagination, if we are not careful of the impression we take. For Chaucer means to take out on his audience his bleak disappointment with his wife and his marriage, and he means to take out of his audience some compensation. Be warned this is no tale of mirth and its depths are those of a yawning chasm beneath the reader’s feet. I have often read the academic notables commenting on the beauty of this poetry in relation to January’s garden but rarely the dark and frightening depths of Chaucer’s confessional are discussed.

The Pardoner

This character has little or no morality yet tells a moral tale. He calls himself a holy vicious man in self-condemnation. He sells fake Papal pardons, relics of Saints and the like and is so stupid that he admits his cheating ways to the company. He is regarded as a “gelding or a mare”. This implies that he either did not gain normal male genitalia or is homosexual. Both these alternatives were distasteful in his time. He tells of a cuckolded husband and his wife in a form of mock sermonising. Chaucer shows his contempt for the pardoners of his time in this tale.

The pardoner tells a tale of death personified; Chaucer lived in the time of the Black Death and so mention is made of the plague taking a scythe through the inhabitants of a village. The tale goes on to relate the story of an ancient man who longs for death but cannot die. He must attract a youth that will swap his mortality for the aged ones curse of decrepitude. The aged one directs a group of gamblers in their search for death personified with whom they intend to remonstrate. Instead they find a pile of money and rather predictably connive and fall out over this lucre. The result is indeed their deaths though I won’t spoil the plot by revealing the contrivance by which this is accomplished.

This opinion is long as it is and yet I have only scratched the surface of the Canterbury Tales. There isn’t space to review each one so I have selected a few for your consideration and tried to give a glimpse of the overall structure of the work. If you love literature, you will surely wish to read this ancient masterpiece for yourselves, but I do recommend that you begin with Coghill’s translation rather than the source text, as it is so difficult to understand and struggling with the archaic terms used prevents any casual reader from enjoying the tales. This version is available as a Penguin paperback in their Classics series, ISBN: 0140440224, and for the most acceptable price of £3.99. The Middle English version is ably served by Everyman's Library: ISBN: 1857150740, listed at £10.99 but available from Amazon at £9.34. 

...less