Canterbury Tales: Two Character Exegesis The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer are a collection of Middle English short stories written about a group of pilgrims telling tales as they journey to the shrine of St Thomas Becket. In this collection of tales, Chaucer introduces a slew of interesting characters representing all walks of life who present intriguing stories of their lives. The character of Chaucer serves as our guide throughout this story. Chaucer’s narration is unique in that we see him both as someone who could be there in the tavern with the group but at other times, Chaucer is a narrator who seems to know far more than he should. With this type of narration, we gain different perspectives on the pilgrims and …show more content…
In this paper I will compare two of Chaucer’s characters using both the interpretation of the characters as written and how those same characters would be interpreted today. The two roles I will be discussing are the Wife of Bath and the Summoner. I will attempt to show that although the Wife of Bath was supported as a good woman in part because of her sexual prowess as the character was written, the same sort of character - were she to tell her tale today - would be shamed and looked down upon as promiscuous and unworthy. The Summoner, on the other hand, would not be reinterpreted very differently and would be as reviled today as he was at the time of writing. His corruption, lechery and drunkenness would still be condemned. In the Wife of Bath’s portrait she is described as heavy, bluff woman that is industrious, a talented weaver, her five husbands and her pilgrimages to Jerusalem. There is some reference to her potential promiscuity in youth but it is glossed over. Withouten oother compaignye in youthe, …show more content…
Again, we see a reference to her sexual prowess but nothing of humiliation to be found in the portrayal. Of the thirty one lines devoted to the portrait of the Wife of Bath only those four are committed to that portion of her character. By today’s standards that is an infinitesimal amount to be dedicated to the salacious parts of a character portrait. The mere fact that this woman had been married five times and that there was a possibility of a scandal in her youth would be enough to wipe out any discussion of her piousness, her travels and most especially her good work. In todays world it would be more likely that her possible promiscuity would be used specifically to undermine any skill she might have to promote herself. In the Portrait of the Summoner his physical appearance is described as red, scabby and covered in pustules. It refers to his drunkenness and mentions when he is inebriated he speaks only Latin but not as though he were educated in the language but only able to parrot two or three phrases. And for to drynken strong wyn, reed as blood; Thanne wolde he speke and crie as he were wood. And whan that he wel dronken hadde the
The Wife of Bath is portrayed as a strong-willed, alpha female. The Wife of Bath upholds the misogynistic ideas of Chaucer's time because she is a controlling, manipulative, know-it-all woman. Her personality and behavior both reflect the negative attributes that women were shamed for during that time. She is opinionated, dominate, and diabolical; all qualities that were not accepted easily in a woman. She defied the norm of that time.
The use of euphemism and crudeness in “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue” is simultaneously unnerving and amusing, and begs the question of how a “wicked” woman like The Wife could ever actually progress in medieval society. Chaucer incorporates subtle allusions to female sexual organs and it is this bluntness (that would raise eyebrows even today) which establishes the Wife as such a powerfully outspoken character. Because courtship in Chaucer’s time was considered worthy of complete submission, the fact that the Wife places such emphasis on domination and even psychological power hints at her being an object of irony (and not a feminist figure “before her time”). It is for this reason that Chaucer’s delicate use of “queynte”- a term from which
The dominance of men in the Middle Ages is unethical, irrational, and dangerous; women are given few rights and the opportunity to earn rights is non-existent. The dictates to the dominance is formed by the internal combination of man’s personal desire and religious interference. In Geoffrey Chaucer’s, The Canterbury Tales, the combined perspectives’ on a haughty Pardoner and non-subservient wife is the stronghold of separation in moral roles. The moral roles between men and women are exemplified in the rankings of religious hierarchy for men are at the top and women towards the bottom. Even prestigious women, ones with noble connections, are subservient to men, but contradictorily have religious affiliations. The “Wife of Bath’s Tale” is a perfect example of defying man’s dominance and the “Pardoner’s Tale”, a problematic reasoning of why selfishness connects moreover to the manipulation. The frailties of religious reasoning however, will cause The Pardoner and the Wife of Bath to be separated from society’s morals.
Lambdin, Laura C. and Robert T. Lambdin, ed. Chaucer's Pilgrims: An Historical Guide to the Pilgrims in the Canterbury Tales. London: Greenwood Press, 1996.
Pride and Lust are the two sins closely associated with the Wife of Bath. The Wife of Bath is a woman who is too proud of herself as shown by her style of clothing. Chaucer begins by describing her familiar Sunday clothing as “Her kerchiefs were of finely woven ground; I dared have sworn they weighed a good ten pound” (463-464). This type of clothing is atypical for a person attending a church service. Moreover, “Her hose were of the finest scarlet red and gartered tight; her shoes were soft and new. Bold her face, handsome, and red in hue” (466-468). All these things exemplifies her self-...
The Canterbury Tales, written by Geoffrey Chaucer, has gone through many adaptations. Some authors decided to translate the story into verse, while others chose to write the as a narrative in prose. Although all adaptations are based off the same story, they are vastly different and can be the result of opposing interpretations of the original work. After reading a text translated by Nevill Coghill (referred to as Version I) and a text translated into a narrative by a different author (referred to as Version II), it is obvious that for each similarity they share, there are many more differences in language, syntax, and imagery as well.
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.
In The Canterbury tales, Chaucer uses The Wife of Bath as a representation of what it was like for Women in the Middle Ages to be striped of equality and bow to the otherwise male dominated society. For the representation of women Chaucer uses the Tales of “The Scholar”, “The Second Nun “The Reeve’s”, and “The Franklin” and many others in a very dry, pretentious manner to steer readers into the view of how a women of the Middle Ages should be as a so called “virtuous” wife or woman. The concept of marriage plays a major part in manifesting the idea of the issues of inferiority of women. The perception rendered as women having to be obedient and inferior figure to their husbands or male counter parts. Chaucer gives give the audience much to think about in terms of The Wife of Baths being she is the total opposite to women of her time. The wife of Baths can be seen maternal figure that possess as a threat of breaking in the societal system by empowering the status of women.
The Wife of Bath, with the energy of her vernacular and the voraciousness of her sexual appetite, is one of the most vividly developed characters of 'The Canterbury Tales'. At 856 lines her prologue, or 'preambulacioun' as the Summoner calls it, is the longest of any of the pilgrims, and matches the General Prologue but for a few lines. Evidently Chaucer is infatuated with Alisoun, as he plays satirically with both gender and class issues through the Wife's robust rhetoric. Scholars and students alike have continued this obsession with her, and as a consequence Chaucer's larger than life widow has been subject to centuries of scrutiny. Indeed, she is in the vast minority amongst the Canterbury bound pilgrims; apart from the in-vogue Prioress she is the only female - though she appears in no way daunted by the apparent inequality in numbers. It seems almost a crime to examine masculinity in her prologue and tale, but as I hope to show, there is much to learn both about the Wife and about Chaucer from this male presence.
The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, (written c. 1387), is a richly varied compilation of fictional stories as told by a group of twenty-nine persons involved in a religious pilgrimage to Canterbury, England during the fourteenth century. This journey is to take those travelers who desire religious catharsis to the shrine of the holy martyr St. Thomas a Becket of Canterbury. The device of a springtime pilgrimage provided Chaucer with a diverse range of characters and experiences, with him being both a narrator and an observer. Written in Middle English, each tale depicts parables from each traveler.
Virtually everything the Wife of Bath does or says regarding different aspects of her life demonstrates that she is very insecure about herself. She begins her prologue by informing the travelers that she has the authority to argue about and discuss marriage because of her experiences: “Experience, though noon auctori...
In his Canterbury Tales, Geoffrey Chaucer assembles a band of pilgrims who, at the behest of their host, engage in a story-telling contest along their route. The stories told along the way serve a number of purposes, among them to entertain, to instruct, and to enlighten. In addition to the intrinsic value of the tales taken individually, the tales in their telling reveal much about the tellers. The pitting of tales one against another provides a third level of complexity, revealing the interpersonal dynamics of the societal microcosm comprising the diverse group of pilgrims.
The Wife of Bath had a strong argument in favour of marriage but is easy to fault. Her argument that marriage grows more virgins, while correct makes us wonder why she bore no children. And she also mentions the fact that “in wyfhood I wol use myn instrument” but her marriage did not seem to have stopped her from restraining her “Chamber of Venus from a good felawe.” The Wife of Bath confuses bigamy with remarriage and manipulates the arguments for remarriage to suit her purpose. Chaucer gives the Wife of Bath’s arguments less credibility
An interesting aspect of the famous literary work, "The Canterbury Tales," is the contrast of realistic and exaggerated qualities that Chaucer entitles to each of his characters. When viewed more closely, one can determine whether each of the characters is convincing or questionable based on their personalities. This essay will analyze the characteristics and personalities of the Knight, Squire, Monk, Plowman, Miller, and Parson of Chaucer's tale.
The world-renowned Canterbury Tales by the great Geoffrey Chaucer aims to magnify the controversial social injustices of gender roles in the medieval time period that consequently flow into today’s current modern society. One of the greatest social standing issues addressed throughout the poem includes the institution of marriage, and the particular viewpoint held by the character named the Wife of Bath. The Wife of Bath is notably shamed by her potential suitors and moralist peers, for her devious actions of taking advantage of her former husbands throughout her lengthy five marriages. However, Chaucer actually invites the audience to give a closer look at the overall flawed instuition of marriage