More handpicked essays just for you.
Characterization of Chaucer in Canterbury tales
The characters of canterbury tales chaucer
The spirit of Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tale
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales, a medieval collection of stories written mostly in iambic pentameter, becomes philosophical in concern in the Pardoner and Wife of Bath’s tales, each of whom proposes a conception of ethics antithetical to the other’s. The Pardoner and the Wife of Bath both establish their moral schemas upon the Bible, doing away with the rigor of logic for the word of the divine. However, given that their values and methods differ, they arrive at different conclusions. The Wife of Bath focuses on the fulfillment of pleasure and the importance of the self in contrast to the Pardoner’s emphasis on duty and virtue. In these two tales Chaucer contrasts between the Apollonian vision of the Pardoner and the Dionysian vision …show more content…
of the Wife of Bath, deriving arguments for both philosophies from the Bible. The Pardoner and the Wife of Bath use biblical references to justify their conception of how the world ought be.
The Pardoner says to his fellow pilgrims that he “use[s] the same old text (Bible), as bold as brass” to preach “Radix malorum est cupiditas” (243). Translated into English, the Latin means “Greed is the root of evils,” a quote from the Book of Timothy. He uses this first principle to derive the rest of his moral framework, which abhors and condemns all forms of drunkenness, lust, greed, and sloth. Similarly, the Wife of Bath uses the selfsame text to justify her Dionysian philosophy. She explains that one may marry as much as one wants, since “wise King Solomon of long ago…had a thousand wives or so,” arguing that St. Paul’s prohibition against many marriages is “no commandment in [her] view” because it is just “advice” (259, …show more content…
260) The Dionysian, associated with destruction and chaos, shows itself in the Wife of Bath’s tale as a force that wishes to deconstruct the order that the Pardoner’s Apollonian vision desires to defend. The Wife of Bath wishes to end, it seems, superstition’s dominance over human sexuality and women in general. She begins by stating that the Church’s members, who condemn the promiscuous and are supposed to be holy, have “take[n] [the] virtue” of innocent women and murdered the fairies from the days of King Arthur (282). This opening theme demonizes and criticizes the Church, thereby raising an interesting point on its members’ sinfulness and hypocrisy. As well, the norm of the time is that men control women. In her tale, however, it is women who control men. Contrarily, the Pardoner wishes to strengthen the hold of the Church on society by stressing the Church’s moral beliefs on virtue and social hierarchies and stressing penance for those who have transgressed these rules. Throughout his tale the Pardoner warns against the dangers of women by alluding to the biblical Adam, Samson, and Lot and how their lust was their ruin. For the pardoner men must always keep their distance. Likewise, the Pardoner goes through many of the Ten Commandments and prohibitions of the Apostles, declaring their necessity for salvation. Lastly, the Dionysian philosophy of the Wife of Bath emphasizes the feminine while the Apollonian philosophy of the Pardoner emphasizes the masculine, as is historically characteristic of the two antagonistic yet unifying philosophies.
The Wife of Bath’s tale details the events that follow a knight’s raping of a girl, utilizing the classic motif of the loathly lady to state what all women desire. According to the hag, who enslaves the knight via their contract into marriage, every woman desires the “self-same sovereignty [o]ver her husband as over her lover” (286). Here the Wife of Bath is expressing a domination of the feminine, or Dionysian, over the masculine, or the Apollonian. In contrast, the Pardoner’s Apollonian vision is patriarchal in nature. The Pardoner establishes a framework steeped in the traditions of the Catholic Church, an organization typically ruled by men. Furthermore, during this time many did not see women as anything more than a means by which to have children. The Pardoner alludes to Lot and how in his drunkenness he gave himself up to lust and slept with his daughters. He calls lust a vice “bred of wine and lechery” (245). By rejecting Dionysian sexuality and deeming immoral any enjoyment of male-female relations, the Pardoner has denied women the only value society thinks they have. Lastly, the Pardoner exhibits stereotypically homosexual traits for the time. Chaucer says in the General Prologue that the Pardoner just might be “a gelding or a mare”
(21). The Apollonian, because it stresses the masculine so much over the feminine, is connected to homosexuality, especially in the Ancient Greek and Roman traditions. Hence, Chaucer even uses his characterization of the Pardoner to underscore the dichotomy between the two pilgrims. Chaucer in The Canterbury Tales brings the Apollonian and Dionysian philosophies head to head. Embodied in the Pardoner and the Wife of Bath’s tales, the two antagonizing forces create an interplay that expertly enlivens the work as a whole and brilliantly expresses the moral conflicts of the time.
The moral compass of mankind has always piqued the interest of authors. The Middle Ages was a time of immoral behavior, corrupt religious officials, and disregard of marital vows. Geoffrey Chaucer used The Canterbury Tales to explore his personal views of this dark time. In particular, he crafted “The Wife of Bath’s Tale,” “The Prioress’s Tale,” and “The Shipman’s Tale” to portray the tainted society, using women in all of them to bring forth his views. In The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer depicts women as immodest and conniving beings to suggest the moral corruption of the Middle Ages.
Regularly characterized as monsters, women were ridiculed for being sexually unappeasable, lustful, and shrewish, and they were regarded with condescension by the church authorities. Similarly, people in the medieval era regarded multiple marriages as highly questionable, and it is for this reason that the Wife of Bath carefully examines the words of God as revealed in scripture (revealing her to be more than a simple-minded woman: a knowledge of religious texts proves she is definitely educated and well-read). She confesses that nowhere can she find a stricture against her having more than one marriage, and her five husbands are therefore her choice and hers only. “He seith to be wedded is no synne:/ Bet is to be wedded than to brynne”, she remarks humorously, drawing on the fact that by God’s permission, finding a partner through marriage is a pastime with little consequences, for it is better than engaging in sin and burning for it (50-53. 301). This begins her analysis of the bible and the often “sinful” breakdown of a sexual relationship between man and woman, and introduces her repetitive idea of the
The Pardoner is the best representation of an allegorical character in “The Prologue” of Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales. The Pardoner is the perfect personification of fraudulence. He shows this in three basic ways: his appearance, speech, and actions. If one just glances through the reading of the Pardoner than one will think that he is a good religious man, but if one look further into it than he will find the small double meanings that he is the exact opposite. Chaucer likes to use an allegorical style to add some comedy and sophistication to his writings.
The image of the woman in the Wife of Bath’s Prologue is depicted by Chaucer to be “barley wheat” in a town and civilization lusting for whole white wheat or virginity (Chaucer 1711). The woman has married many men and in doing so forgotten the true value of the Christian faith and now believes worldly influence can overpower the scriptures of the Bible, “can you show in plain words that Almighty God forbade us marriage? Or where did he command virginity?” (Chaucer 1709). Jackie Shead analyzes the prologue and states, “it begins by manipulating authoritative texts--a pre-emptive strike to justify the Wife's marital history and her single-minded pursuit of self-gratification” (Shead). The possibility of the Wife of B...
In The Wife of Bath Prologue, Dame Alison discusses how a successful relationship between a man and woman is one where the woman is in control. She uses her experiences to defend her views. A woman who has been married five times, Alison clearly endorses herself as being a woman of sexual desires, and in doing this she also makes a defense for women like herself. She disputes the notion that marriage is inferior to chastity by giving examples from the Bible. She cites King Solomon who had numerous wives and was not condemned for his behavior so why should she. She also quotes St. Paul’s statement that it is better to have passion while married, “It’s no sin to be married, he said, / For if you’re burning, better to be wed” (50-51). She does not throw out virginity, but rather argues, “A woman may be counseled to be pure, / But to counsel and commandment aren’...
However, after hearing his tale it is quite shocking about his frankness about his own hypocrisy. We know that he bluntly accuses himself of fraud, avarice, and gluttony, all things that he preaches against throughout this tale. It is in lines, 432-433 that the Pardoner states, “But that is not my principal intent; I preach nothing but for convenience.” It is here that we truly begin to learn that The Pardoner’s Tale is merely an example of a story that is often used by preachers to emphasize a moral point to their audience. That is why, this tale in particular helps to comprehend Chaucer’s own opinions, and how he used satire to display them.
Chaucer identifies a pardoner as his main character for the story and utilizes the situational and verbal irony found in the pardoner’s interactions and deplorable personality to demonstrate his belief in the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church during this time. Chaucer first begins his sly jab at the Church’s motives through the description of the Pardoner’s physical appearance and attitude in his “Canterbury Tales.” Chaucer uses the Pardoner as a representation of the Church as a whole, and by describing the Pardoner and his defects, is able to show what he thinks of the Roman Catholic Church. All people present in the “Canterbury Tales” must tell a tale as a part of a story-telling contest, and the pilgrim Chaucer, the character in the story Chaucer uses to portray himself, writes down the tales as they are told, as well as the story teller. The description of the Pardoner hints at the relationship and similarity between the Pardoner and the Church as a whole, as well as marks the beginning of the irony to be observed throughout the “Pardoner’s Prologue and Tale.”
In the Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, Chaucer illustrates the different perspective between men and women on the concept of marriage and love. In The Wife of Bath’s tale, it is shown the woman appreciating marriage and wanting to be able to love a man unconditionally as where in The Miller’s Tale, love isn’t anything, but sex with the man in the story. In accordance with Chaucer, the complication with marriage is that men are consumed by sexual desire and are easily abused by women like The Wife of Bath. As noticed, The Miller’s Tale is all about adultery. “Just like men, the wives have secrets, as does God”, says the Miller. Both have information that the other do not know about that are sacred and better left unsaid.
The structure Geoffrey Chaucer chose for his masterpiece, The Canterbury Tales, of utilizing a melange of narrative voices to tell separate tales allows him to explore and comment on subjects in a multitude of ways. Because of this structure of separate tales, the reader must regard as extremely significant when tales structurally overlap, for while the reader may find it difficult to render an accurate interpretation through one tale, comparing tales enables him to lessen the ambiguity of Chaucer’s meaning. The Clerk’s Tale and The Merchant’s Tale both take on the institution of marriage, but comment on it in entirely different manner, but both contain an indictment of patriarchal narcissism and conceit.
One of the most interesting and widely interpreted characters in The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer is the Wife of Bath. She has had five different husbands and openly admits to marrying the majority of them for their money. The wife appears to be more outspoken and independent than most women of medieval times, and has therefore been thought to symbolize the cause of feminism; some even refer to her as the first actual feminist character in literature. Readers and scholars probably argue in favor of this idea because in The Canterbury Tales, she uniquely gives her own insight and opinions on how relations between men and women should be carried out. Also, the meaning of her tale is that virtually all women want to be granted control over themselves and their relationship with their husbands, which seems to convince people that the Wife of Bath should be viewed as some sort of revolutionary feminist of her time. This idea, however, is incorrect. The truth is that the Wife of Bath, or Alisoun, merely confirms negative stereotypes of women; she is deceitful, promiscuous, and clandestine. She does very little that is actually empowering or revolutionary for women, but instead tries to empower herself by using her body to gain control over her various husbands. The Wife of Bath is insecure, cynical towards men in general, and ultimately, a confirmation of misogynistic stereotypes of women.
Of all the numerous females depicted in literature throughout the centuries, Geoffrey Chaucer’s Wife of Bath has inspired more in-depth discussion and gender-oriented analysis than the majority. She is in turn praised and criticized for her behavior and her worldview; critics can’t seem to decide whether she is a strong portrayal of 14th century feminism or a cutting mockery of the female sex. Both her tale and its prologue are riddled with themes of conflict and power struggle between the sexes, and the victor of this battle is not made explicit. Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales being a parody of various societal conceptions and literary conventions, it is likely that this ambiguity was entirely intentional. By comparing the Wife of Bath and her husbands to the characters presented in the tale, Chaucer makes the subtle but sharp implication that there is no true winner in the battle of the sexes; the essential qualities of men and women are equally unsavory, and harmony between the two can only be achieved when an illusion of triumph has been constructed separately for both parties.
The Canterbury Tales is a literary masterpiece in which the brilliant author Geoffrey Chaucer sought out to accomplish various goals. Chaucer wrote his tales during the late 1300’s. This puts him right at the beginning of the decline of the Middle Ages. Historically, we know that a middle class was just starting to take shape at this time, due to the emerging commerce industry. Chaucer was able to see the importance and future success of the middle class, and wrote his work with them in mind. Knowing that the middle class was not interested in lofty philosophical literature, Chaucer wrote his work as an extremely comical and entertaining piece that would be more interesting to his audience. Also, Chaucer tried to reach the middle class by writing The Canterbury Tales in English, the language of the middle class rather than French, the language of the educated upper class. The most impressive aspect of Chaucer’s writing is how he incorporated into his piece some of his own controversial views of society, but yet kept it very entertaining and light on the surface level. One of the most prevalent of these ideas was his view that certain aspects of the church had become corrupt. This idea sharply contrasted previous Middle Age thought, which excepted the church’s absolute power and goodness unquestionably. He used corrupt church officials in his tales to illustrate to his audience that certain aspects of the church needed to be reformed. The most intriguing of these characters was the Pardoner. Chaucer’s satirical account of the Pardoner is written in a very matter-of-fact manner that made it even more unsettling with his audience. Chaucer uses his straightforwardness regarding the hypocrisy of the Pardoner, suggestive physiognomy of the character, and an interesting scene at the conclusion of the Pardoner’s Tale to inculcate his views of the church to his audience. The way that Chaucer used these literary devices to subtly make his views known to an audience while hooking them with entertainment, shows that Chaucer was truly a literary genius.
The Canterbury Tales is more than an amusing assortment of stories; it is an illustration of the society in which Geoffrey Chaucer lived. It portrays the culture and class system of the medieval ages in microcosm. Every strata of human life at the time were represented by the many characters whose tales are told. Each character’s basic human nature also plays a role in their stories, and each one has within them the strengths and weaknesses that make up all of humanity. Each character exemplifies their life and reputation through the stories they tell. The Pardoner uses his tale as a ploy to garner money. His tale embodies each deadly sin, and every reader can relate to his story and feel the guilt of his characters. The Wife of Bath’s tale expresses her own ideals in the way her character is given a second chance after committing a crime. The Franklin’s tale, because of its straightforwardness and honesty is a direct representation of the Franklin’s simple and joyful life. Each character tells a tale that is a suitable match to their personality. These characters’ tales represent prevalent themes of the middle ages, including greed, corruption of religious clergymen, violence, revenge, and social status. In Chaucer’s society, the traditional feudal system was losing its importance and the middle class began to emerge. The middle class characters within the Canterbury Tales, with their personal lives and interactions with members of differing social classes, gave an understanding of the growth of society, especially the rising middle class, during medieval times.
The Wife of Bath is a complex character-she is different from the way she represents herself. Maybe not even what she herself thinks she is. On the surface, it seems as though she is a feminist, defending the rights and power of women over men. She also describes how she dominates her husband, playing on a fear that was common to men. From a point of view of a man during that time period, she seemed to illustrate all of the wrongs that men found in women. Such as a weak parody of what men, then saw as feminists. The Wife of Bath constantly emphasizes the negative implications of women throughout the ages. She describes women as greedy, controlling, and dishonest.
While in reflection of the readings this semester, I could not deny that Chaucer’s collection should be preserved as the author succeeded in what his stories were meant to accomplish: to “delight and instruct”. With the alluring variety of characters and entertaining situations which are described in well-chosen detail, each story is provided by the pilgrims. Additionally, as each of the chosen tales (as stated in the course reading syllabus) provides a lesson that is still relevant after five centuries, the “instruction” comes from these universal morals. Therefore, in the course of this essay, I wish to provide reason as to why The Canterbury Tales should be preserved by looking further into the selected tales (“The Miller’s Tale”, “The Nun’s Priest’s Tale”, and “The Wife of Bath’s Tale) in reference to the following: the literary variety expressed in the stories, the morals given in the selected tales, and its references to English society at Chaucer’s time. 1).