Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Friday, January 7, 2011
Reader's Theater Assignment
Post your reader's theater piece and be aware that it may take more than one try to post your entire piece. Make sure you read ALL the pieces and comment on at least three.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Question of the Week (9/10/10)
Beowulf is largely a reflection of the Germanic heroic code. This code, or system of beliefs, lays out the rules of conduct for a good man, warrior, and king. The rules involve different specific behaviors for the different classes of people who lived at the time. For example, warriors were expected to show strength, courage, and loyalty; kings, however, must exhibit political wisdom, along with gracious hospitality and generosity. The actions of the characters in Beowulf either conform to this code or deviate from it. What you will learn as you read the poem, however, is that this code is not only contradictory, but also oftentimes useless.
Using MLA format provide textual support as examples of this code. State why you think the character acted the way he/she did, and then state what the character should have done, in your opinion. Post by the end of the school day on Monday, September 13.
Question of the Week (9/3/10) Welcome!
Welcome to Early English Literature!
Greetings and welcome to your EEL blog. The purpose of this blog is to create a community of online writers (and readers) who share their thoughts and ideas about the texts studied in class.
Each week I will post a question(s) on the blog for you to answer. After you have answered the question thoroughly, using complete sentences, choose another classmate's response and comment on their answer. Do you agree or disagree? Have they made a valid point? Did they notice something you did not? What?
Remember: If you are the FIRST to answer the question you need NOT respond to a classmate. Each well written response is worth a total of 20 points. (See EEL course expectations for more information.)
Question of the Week (9/3/10)
What is your definition of the word "hero"? Elaborate on your description in terms of personal and societal beliefs. Your post is due Tuesday, 9/7.
Greetings and welcome to your EEL blog. The purpose of this blog is to create a community of online writers (and readers) who share their thoughts and ideas about the texts studied in class.
Each week I will post a question(s) on the blog for you to answer. After you have answered the question thoroughly, using complete sentences, choose another classmate's response and comment on their answer. Do you agree or disagree? Have they made a valid point? Did they notice something you did not? What?
Remember: If you are the FIRST to answer the question you need NOT respond to a classmate. Each well written response is worth a total of 20 points. (See EEL course expectations for more information.)
Question of the Week (9/3/10)
What is your definition of the word "hero"? Elaborate on your description in terms of personal and societal beliefs. Your post is due Tuesday, 9/7.
Question of the Week (9/17/10)
Prepare for the trial. Read over the following schedule of events for our trial on Monday. See you then.
Remember that the prosecution or plaintiff begins by giving an opening statement followed by the opening statement of the defense. After the opening statements, examination of the witnesses begins. The prosecution/plaintiff calls their witnesses first. An attorney (your team should choose who examines/questions the first witness and in what order) for the prosecution/plaintiff does a direct examination of the witness. Once the direct examination is complete, the opposing team (defense) may cross-examine the witness. After the cross-examination, if the first team chooses, they may redirect the witness and, likewise, the other team may do a re-cross after this. This process is repeated for the remaining plaintiff witnesses. Once the prosecution/plaintiff has finished with their witnesses, the process is repeated with the defense witnesses, having the defense attorneys direct and the plaintiff attorneys cross-examine.Once all of the witnesses have been examined, the trial moves to closing arguments. The prosecutor/plaintiff again goes first. After the defense finishes their closing argument, the plaintiff may give a rebuttal argument if they still have time remaining.
Remember that the prosecution or plaintiff begins by giving an opening statement followed by the opening statement of the defense. After the opening statements, examination of the witnesses begins. The prosecution/plaintiff calls their witnesses first. An attorney (your team should choose who examines/questions the first witness and in what order) for the prosecution/plaintiff does a direct examination of the witness. Once the direct examination is complete, the opposing team (defense) may cross-examine the witness. After the cross-examination, if the first team chooses, they may redirect the witness and, likewise, the other team may do a re-cross after this. This process is repeated for the remaining plaintiff witnesses. Once the prosecution/plaintiff has finished with their witnesses, the process is repeated with the defense witnesses, having the defense attorneys direct and the plaintiff attorneys cross-examine.Once all of the witnesses have been examined, the trial moves to closing arguments. The prosecutor/plaintiff again goes first. After the defense finishes their closing argument, the plaintiff may give a rebuttal argument if they still have time remaining.
Question of the Week (10/1/10)
Post your five-critical thinking questions here. This week you do not have to respond. Work on your papers, and remember they are due by the end of the school day on Monday. Enjoy your weekend.
Question of the Week (9/24/10)
Answer one of the following questions citing evidence from the text.
1. Wealhtheow, Hygd, Hildeburh, Grendel’s mother, the Geat woman wailing at the end—what do the women in Beowulf do? How do they do it? Do they offer alternate perspectives on the heroic world (so seemingly centered around male action) of the poem?
2. Why are there so many stories-within-the-story or “digressions” in the poem? What is the relation between the digressions and the main narrative in Beowulf?
3. In between every story and its audience stands a narrator who tells the story; the narrator has certain attitudes, opinions, interests, and objectives which direct the audience’s understanding of the story. This is one of the most basic, and yet most complex, facts of literature. Describe the relationship between the narrator and the story, and between the narrator and the audience, in Beowulf.
Check out some of the essay topics below and begin to think about your essay for this text. Possible Essay Topics for Beowulf
The following topics may be "refocused" or restated. They are listed here to give you an idea of how you may want to approach your Beowulf essay. Agree or disagree with any of the following statements.
1.Beowulf is steeped in a pagan tradition that depicts nature as hostile and forces of death as uncontrollable. Blind fate picks random victims; man is never reconciled with the world. Beowulf is a failure.
2.Beowulf is the story of a dual ordeal: an external battle with vicious opponents and an internal battle with human tendencies of pride, greed, cowardice, betrayal, and self-concern.
3.Beowulf is the universal story of man’s journey from adolescence to adulthood to old age. It charts the growth in wisdom about self and the world gained through the pain and triumph of experience.
4.Beowulf represents the successful blending of pagan and Christian elements. These elements were often incorporated side-by-side in the epic. Describe and explain the placement of these elements including readers’ acceptance of both.
5.Beowulf is the blending of Christian traditions with a story that extols virtues of loyalty, courage, and faith in the face of extreme dangers and even death. It presents a model of man willing to die to deliver his fellow men from terrifying evil forces.
6.The epic Beowulf often digresses to include other legends or stories. Describe two or three of these and relate the significance and relevance to the epic itself.
7.In Beowulf, the distribution of wealth is an essential part of the social structure, the bond of comitatus. How important is wealth in Beowulf, and how does it relate to other major values of the Germanic code i.e. werguild?
See values below:
Values in Beowulf
Revenge: The death of a kinsman must be avenged by his male relations, in blood or in money.
Wergild: The wergild is the law of vendetta, which specified that a person who had suffered damages through the killing of a relative might exact a sum of money from the murderer as an expiation of the crime. The value of the wergild was set depending on the social status of the person killed. An earl was assessed higher than a freeman, and a freeman higher than a commoner (or churl). Men were assessed higher than women of the same class.
Kinsmen: The Germanic tribe had an enlarged definition of kin, including friends and those to whom one owed favors, even over generations.
Burial Practices: Burial at sea is the most familiar form of Germanic tribal burial, but they also buried warriors and kings in mounds and in a stone barrow. Burials often included the weapons and wealth of the corpse. Sutton Hoo, the remains of a burial ship discovered in Suffolk, England, was discovered in 1939. This find proved that the ostentatious descriptions of the burial of kings at sea were not just descriptive language, but a true description of life during this time period.
Boasting: Boasting was considered an art and the prerogative of a warrior.
Fate: Pagan tradition depicts nature as hostile and the forces of death as uncontrollable. Blind fate picks random victims. It is sometimes referred to “wyrd” which could be pronounced as “word” or “weird.” Fate was out of human control, but man could control the way in which he met his fate.
Women: The female role in Beowulf is twofold. First it involves peacemaking biologically througha woman’s marital ties with foreign kings as a peace-pledge or a mother of sons. Secondly, it involves peacemaking socially and psychologically as a cup-passing and peace-weaving queen within a hall.
Comitatus: Germanic tribes which invaded Britain held strong beliefs in the basic family unit and were industrious and warlike. They chose their kings for birth and their generals for merit. Even poor tribal members could become rich and powerful if they were willing and able to prove themselves brave and adept in battle. The practice of comitatus (a term used by the early historian Tacitus) was an agreement by which a youth would attach himself to a strong leader for the purpose of gaining riches and prestige. This arrangement could have been the precursor of the lord-thane relationship of feudal institutions of the time, which can also be observed in Beowulf.
Christianity: The poet of Beowulf is Christian, but the society he describes is not. Sometimes the narrator’s voice comments from a Christian perspective on pagan values, beliefs, and customs.
Classes: There were two classes of people in Anglo-Saxon society: members of the aristocracy (the privileged ruling few) and the common people, including bondsmen and captives. Only a few exceptions were called “freemen,” a status held as some type of reward or special favor.
Warriors: Warriors kept their armor and weapons at their sides at all times. The Beowulf poet praises the Geats, “They were always prepared for war, whether at home or in the field, as their lord required” (1246-50). The warrior’s kit would include a helmet, shield, spear and chain main, and, if he had high status, a sword. They used crested or combed helmets from the 7th and 8th century, with a very sturdy all-iron construction. Mail shirts consisted of rows of riveted rings alternating with of butt-welded rings. The rings were of gray steel, skillfully formed into an intricate mesh, and they linked and jingled on the move. Shields and spears were part of the basic fighting kit of the war-band. Swords were powerful heirlooms to be prized for their power and might; they may have had names, or carried owner inscriptions and images of the mythic past. They had richly decorated hilts, and with their iron blades were fierce, double-edged weapons, which needed two hands to swing them. The seax, was a single-edged weapon, just as effective as the double-edged sword.
War: For Germanic tribes, war was considered a natural, desirable, and constant part of life.
Wealth: One of the roles of the king was to share wealth. Part of the function of a hall was to provide a setting for the sharing of wealth with the king’s warriors and thanes.
1. Wealhtheow, Hygd, Hildeburh, Grendel’s mother, the Geat woman wailing at the end—what do the women in Beowulf do? How do they do it? Do they offer alternate perspectives on the heroic world (so seemingly centered around male action) of the poem?
2. Why are there so many stories-within-the-story or “digressions” in the poem? What is the relation between the digressions and the main narrative in Beowulf?
3. In between every story and its audience stands a narrator who tells the story; the narrator has certain attitudes, opinions, interests, and objectives which direct the audience’s understanding of the story. This is one of the most basic, and yet most complex, facts of literature. Describe the relationship between the narrator and the story, and between the narrator and the audience, in Beowulf.
Check out some of the essay topics below and begin to think about your essay for this text. Possible Essay Topics for Beowulf
The following topics may be "refocused" or restated. They are listed here to give you an idea of how you may want to approach your Beowulf essay. Agree or disagree with any of the following statements.
1.Beowulf is steeped in a pagan tradition that depicts nature as hostile and forces of death as uncontrollable. Blind fate picks random victims; man is never reconciled with the world. Beowulf is a failure.
2.Beowulf is the story of a dual ordeal: an external battle with vicious opponents and an internal battle with human tendencies of pride, greed, cowardice, betrayal, and self-concern.
3.Beowulf is the universal story of man’s journey from adolescence to adulthood to old age. It charts the growth in wisdom about self and the world gained through the pain and triumph of experience.
4.Beowulf represents the successful blending of pagan and Christian elements. These elements were often incorporated side-by-side in the epic. Describe and explain the placement of these elements including readers’ acceptance of both.
5.Beowulf is the blending of Christian traditions with a story that extols virtues of loyalty, courage, and faith in the face of extreme dangers and even death. It presents a model of man willing to die to deliver his fellow men from terrifying evil forces.
6.The epic Beowulf often digresses to include other legends or stories. Describe two or three of these and relate the significance and relevance to the epic itself.
7.In Beowulf, the distribution of wealth is an essential part of the social structure, the bond of comitatus. How important is wealth in Beowulf, and how does it relate to other major values of the Germanic code i.e. werguild?
See values below:
Values in Beowulf
Revenge: The death of a kinsman must be avenged by his male relations, in blood or in money.
Wergild: The wergild is the law of vendetta, which specified that a person who had suffered damages through the killing of a relative might exact a sum of money from the murderer as an expiation of the crime. The value of the wergild was set depending on the social status of the person killed. An earl was assessed higher than a freeman, and a freeman higher than a commoner (or churl). Men were assessed higher than women of the same class.
Kinsmen: The Germanic tribe had an enlarged definition of kin, including friends and those to whom one owed favors, even over generations.
Burial Practices: Burial at sea is the most familiar form of Germanic tribal burial, but they also buried warriors and kings in mounds and in a stone barrow. Burials often included the weapons and wealth of the corpse. Sutton Hoo, the remains of a burial ship discovered in Suffolk, England, was discovered in 1939. This find proved that the ostentatious descriptions of the burial of kings at sea were not just descriptive language, but a true description of life during this time period.
Boasting: Boasting was considered an art and the prerogative of a warrior.
Fate: Pagan tradition depicts nature as hostile and the forces of death as uncontrollable. Blind fate picks random victims. It is sometimes referred to “wyrd” which could be pronounced as “word” or “weird.” Fate was out of human control, but man could control the way in which he met his fate.
Women: The female role in Beowulf is twofold. First it involves peacemaking biologically througha woman’s marital ties with foreign kings as a peace-pledge or a mother of sons. Secondly, it involves peacemaking socially and psychologically as a cup-passing and peace-weaving queen within a hall.
Comitatus: Germanic tribes which invaded Britain held strong beliefs in the basic family unit and were industrious and warlike. They chose their kings for birth and their generals for merit. Even poor tribal members could become rich and powerful if they were willing and able to prove themselves brave and adept in battle. The practice of comitatus (a term used by the early historian Tacitus) was an agreement by which a youth would attach himself to a strong leader for the purpose of gaining riches and prestige. This arrangement could have been the precursor of the lord-thane relationship of feudal institutions of the time, which can also be observed in Beowulf.
Christianity: The poet of Beowulf is Christian, but the society he describes is not. Sometimes the narrator’s voice comments from a Christian perspective on pagan values, beliefs, and customs.
Classes: There were two classes of people in Anglo-Saxon society: members of the aristocracy (the privileged ruling few) and the common people, including bondsmen and captives. Only a few exceptions were called “freemen,” a status held as some type of reward or special favor.
Warriors: Warriors kept their armor and weapons at their sides at all times. The Beowulf poet praises the Geats, “They were always prepared for war, whether at home or in the field, as their lord required” (1246-50). The warrior’s kit would include a helmet, shield, spear and chain main, and, if he had high status, a sword. They used crested or combed helmets from the 7th and 8th century, with a very sturdy all-iron construction. Mail shirts consisted of rows of riveted rings alternating with of butt-welded rings. The rings were of gray steel, skillfully formed into an intricate mesh, and they linked and jingled on the move. Shields and spears were part of the basic fighting kit of the war-band. Swords were powerful heirlooms to be prized for their power and might; they may have had names, or carried owner inscriptions and images of the mythic past. They had richly decorated hilts, and with their iron blades were fierce, double-edged weapons, which needed two hands to swing them. The seax, was a single-edged weapon, just as effective as the double-edged sword.
War: For Germanic tribes, war was considered a natural, desirable, and constant part of life.
Wealth: One of the roles of the king was to share wealth. Part of the function of a hall was to provide a setting for the sharing of wealth with the king’s warriors and thanes.
Question of the Week (10/15/10)
In studying the prologue and preparing your presentation on your selected character -- answer the following questions and post them on the blog.
What is your character's attitude to or how do they use money? On what do they spend their money? How do these people get their money?
What does this reveal about your chosen character?
Pay particular attention to their clothes. Are the clothes for your character appropriate? Describe your character in detail. What are they wearing? What do they look like?
What does your character love? Is this love a corruption of the spirit?
How do the details Chaucer presents about each character shape your understanding of them?
How does Chaucer use irony in the prologue? Can you take your character seriously? Why would this be important in setting the tone of the tales?
What is your character's attitude to or how do they use money? On what do they spend their money? How do these people get their money?
What does this reveal about your chosen character?
Pay particular attention to their clothes. Are the clothes for your character appropriate? Describe your character in detail. What are they wearing? What do they look like?
What does your character love? Is this love a corruption of the spirit?
How do the details Chaucer presents about each character shape your understanding of them?
How does Chaucer use irony in the prologue? Can you take your character seriously? Why would this be important in setting the tone of the tales?
Question of the Week (10/8/10)
Okay -- let's try this again. Answer two questions and then the next person on the blog will answer the next two and so on...So, if you are the first person on the blog, you answer 1 &2, second person answers 3&4, and so on .... yes.
The Canterbury Tales Prologue Questions
1. Why did everyone “especially” pilgrimage to Canterbury? (Who is the “martyr?”)
2. Including the narrator, how many pilgrims were at the Tabard that night?
3. What three pieces of information does the narrator plan to give for each pilgrim?
4. What (other than his military prowess) made him such a great knight?
5. Compare and contrast the Squire to his father, the Knight.
6. What does the fact that the Yeoman’s arrow feathers “never drooped” suggest?
7. What is a “Christopher?”
8. How does the Yeoman’s character seem to fit with his employer’s?
9. How well does Madame Eglantine really speak French?
10. Why does the narrator focus so much on how the Prioress eats? What does this suggest about her?
11. At a time when most people couldn’t afford fine food, what does the Prioress’s treatment of her dogs tell you about her?
12. Why would a religious woman be so concerned about imitating “court behavior?”
13. What would you most likely find the Monk doing on a beautiful fall day?
14. What is the Monk’s attitude toward traditional religious texts about proper “monkish” behavior?
15. The Monk had “found husbands for many young women at his own expense.” Why?
16. When did the Monk give easy penance to those who confessed their sins to him?
17. Why does the Monk avoid poor people and the sick if he’s a religious man?
18. How does the Monk “protect” his territory from other monks?
19. What is the Merchant’s favorite topic of conversation, generally?
20. Why do you suppose the Merchant is “so closemouthed” about his dealings?
21. On a beautiful fall afternoon, what would the Cleric most likely be doing?
22. The Lawyer “was discreet and well thought of –at least he seemed so, his words were so wise.” What is the narrator implying about the Lawyer?
23. “No man was as busy as [the Lawyer], and yet he seemed busier than he was.” Speculate about what the narrator is suggesting about the Lawyer.
24. How does the Lawyer acquire so much land?
25. What clues in the description of the guildsmen suggest that they are “newly rich?”
26. What do the guildmen’s wives enjoy about their prosperity?
27. What does the Sailor do while his client, the wine-merchant, sleeps?
28. Is the Physician a good doctor? What are his “best” qualifications?
29. What scheme does the Physician have going with the apothecaries?
30. How did the Physician make most of his money, and what is his attitude towards money?
31. Describe the Wife of Bath’s romantic history, both explicit and implicit.
32. The narrator says that the Priest “practiced good deeds, and afterward he preached them.” What details in the description support this statement?
33. Name one negative trait of the Priest.
34. Who is the Priest’s brother?
35. What is a plowman? Compare the Plowman to the Priest.
36. What is the irony of the intelligence of the lawyers that the Manciple works for?
37. What evidence suggests that the Reeve might be taking advantage of his lord?
38. Why are children frightened by the Summoner’s face?
39. Is the Summoner truly intelligent? What evidence does the narrator provide?
40. How does the Pardoner make most of his money?
41. What is so ironic about the Pardoner’s abilities in light of his money-making schemes?
42. What competition does the Host propose? What is the prize for the winner?
43. What standards will the Host use to judge the tales?
44. What if someone refuses to accept the Host’s judgment along the way?
45. Who tells the first tale, and why?
The Canterbury Tales Prologue Questions
1. Why did everyone “especially” pilgrimage to Canterbury? (Who is the “martyr?”)
2. Including the narrator, how many pilgrims were at the Tabard that night?
3. What three pieces of information does the narrator plan to give for each pilgrim?
4. What (other than his military prowess) made him such a great knight?
5. Compare and contrast the Squire to his father, the Knight.
6. What does the fact that the Yeoman’s arrow feathers “never drooped” suggest?
7. What is a “Christopher?”
8. How does the Yeoman’s character seem to fit with his employer’s?
9. How well does Madame Eglantine really speak French?
10. Why does the narrator focus so much on how the Prioress eats? What does this suggest about her?
11. At a time when most people couldn’t afford fine food, what does the Prioress’s treatment of her dogs tell you about her?
12. Why would a religious woman be so concerned about imitating “court behavior?”
13. What would you most likely find the Monk doing on a beautiful fall day?
14. What is the Monk’s attitude toward traditional religious texts about proper “monkish” behavior?
15. The Monk had “found husbands for many young women at his own expense.” Why?
16. When did the Monk give easy penance to those who confessed their sins to him?
17. Why does the Monk avoid poor people and the sick if he’s a religious man?
18. How does the Monk “protect” his territory from other monks?
19. What is the Merchant’s favorite topic of conversation, generally?
20. Why do you suppose the Merchant is “so closemouthed” about his dealings?
21. On a beautiful fall afternoon, what would the Cleric most likely be doing?
22. The Lawyer “was discreet and well thought of –at least he seemed so, his words were so wise.” What is the narrator implying about the Lawyer?
23. “No man was as busy as [the Lawyer], and yet he seemed busier than he was.” Speculate about what the narrator is suggesting about the Lawyer.
24. How does the Lawyer acquire so much land?
25. What clues in the description of the guildsmen suggest that they are “newly rich?”
26. What do the guildmen’s wives enjoy about their prosperity?
27. What does the Sailor do while his client, the wine-merchant, sleeps?
28. Is the Physician a good doctor? What are his “best” qualifications?
29. What scheme does the Physician have going with the apothecaries?
30. How did the Physician make most of his money, and what is his attitude towards money?
31. Describe the Wife of Bath’s romantic history, both explicit and implicit.
32. The narrator says that the Priest “practiced good deeds, and afterward he preached them.” What details in the description support this statement?
33. Name one negative trait of the Priest.
34. Who is the Priest’s brother?
35. What is a plowman? Compare the Plowman to the Priest.
36. What is the irony of the intelligence of the lawyers that the Manciple works for?
37. What evidence suggests that the Reeve might be taking advantage of his lord?
38. Why are children frightened by the Summoner’s face?
39. Is the Summoner truly intelligent? What evidence does the narrator provide?
40. How does the Pardoner make most of his money?
41. What is so ironic about the Pardoner’s abilities in light of his money-making schemes?
42. What competition does the Host propose? What is the prize for the winner?
43. What standards will the Host use to judge the tales?
44. What if someone refuses to accept the Host’s judgment along the way?
45. Who tells the first tale, and why?
Question of the Week (11/5/10)
In the following essay, R. T. Lenaghan examines the “General Prologue” as a historical document, asserting that it offers “a richer sense of a civil servant’s values than the usual documents afford.” State whether you agree or disagree with Lenaghan's viewpoint and support your argument with evidence from the text. Don't forget to critically (and constructively) comment on another classmates' post. Enjoy your weekend.
The “General Prologue” is often called a picture of its age and, frequently in the next breath, a satire. In English Lit. this usually draws a stern lecture about confusing the distinction between literature and history, but in this essay, unobserved by my sophomores, I propose to talk about the “General Prologue” as a picture of its age and then, tentatively, about some uses such history might be put to by historians and literary students.
The “General Prologue” has an obvious historical interest as a series of discrete bits of information about dress, customs, etc.; but if it is to be considered as a more general historical formulation, there is a question of coherence. Is Chaucer’s fictional society sufficiently coherent to warrant taking it seriously as fourteenth-century sociology? The best reason for an affirmative answer is rather vague. It is simply the strong sense most readers have that Chaucer is sampling, that his pilgrims are representatives. There are certainly omissions from his roll, but he does give good coverage to the middle segment of society. The nature he is imitating is social in a sense that is worthy of a sociologist’s regard. To put it rather grandly, Chaucer’s imitation has the same general ontological status as the sociologist’s model; both are representative fictions. This analogy serves my purpose by temporarily converting the literary fiction into a series of hypothetical propositions which may be examined and defined before they are verified. What are the hypothetical patterns of social organization? Then, were they truly descriptive?
The “General Prologue” suggests at least three different ways of pinning down my general sense of coherence to a more specific pattern of social organization. One would be to invoke the widely familiar theory of the three estates. Chaucer’s Knight, Parson, and Plowman do seem to exist as governing ideals, but the effort to classify the pilgrims in one or another of the estates makes it clear that this pattern has the same trouble with the world of the “General Prologue” as it has with the real one. It doesn’t account for the complexities of commerce. The second way would be to follow up Chaucer’s expressed intention to discuss each pilgrim’s degree, but once again Chaucer’s society is too complex for clear hierarchical classifications, as he himself suggests. The third, and I think the best, way of establishing a pattern of organization is to infer it from Chaucer’s practice and say the obvious: he presents his pilgrims by occupational labels, he is concerned with what men do. In the “General Prologue,” as elsewhere, what men do falls largely into the category of economics. There is certainly a generous provision of economic information in the description of the pilgrims, and although there is a good deal of other information as well, the economic information is sufficiently cohesive to justify taking it as the basic matter of my argument. This focus certainly places the discussion within the historian’s purview, but it may seem rather less useful for literary study. However, the study of history can illuminate the norms that govern the irony of the “General Prologue,” and defining that irony is very much a literary question.
Taking the economic information as basic, then, I shall consider the sources of livelihood for the pilgrims and ask how they lived, according to the information Chaucer gives. These sources fall into three large classes: land, the Church, and trade (understood to include everything not in the other two, manufacture, commerce, and services). My intention is not to treat the pilgrims as representatives of classified occupations but rather to regard them collectively and to infer patterns of life from their descriptions. I am not concerned to place the Miller either in land or in trade or to justify placing the Physician with the others in trade. I want to infer from the various descriptions information about the kind of life provided by land, the Church, and trade. For example, the Man of Law lives by his professional services and so I would classify him in trade, but I am mainly interested in some information his description gives about life based on land.
The descriptions of the Plowman, the Reeve, and the Franklin should provide detailed information about the economics of land, but except for the description of the Reeve the yield is slight. There is much detail about the Franklin but it has very little to do with economics. It shows more about spending than getting, a difference I shall come back to. The Reeve’s description, however, tells a good deal more. The first point is obvious enough, his expertise is managerial. It is founded on practical agricultural knowledge in that he can calculate exactly the effect of the weather on yield, and it is founded on a practical knowledge of human nature in that he knows the tricks of all the bailiffs and herdsmen. The two kinds of practical knowledge add up to efficient operation of his lord’s establishment, but not necessarily to his lord’s profit. The tight control he maintains over his operations stops with him; no one above him checks up on him as he checks up on those below him. As a result, “ful riche was he astored prively.” This leads to a second and less obvious point, a role change. He uses his personal gains as a landholder’s agent to establish himself as a landholder in his own right. That, I take it, is the meaning context indicates for the word purchase: “His wonyng was ful faire upon an heeth; / With grene trees yshadwed was his place. / He koude bettre than his lord purchase.” What is interesting about this role change is the change in the Reeve’s activities that it brings about. From hard-nosed managing, which causes him to be feared, he switches to giving and lending, which his lord mistakenly, or at least uncomprehendingly, regards as generous. From sharp practice to the image of generosity, the calculating agent has become a comfortably situated landholder.
This division of activities is significant in the world of the “General Prologue.” It shows the social implication of the economic pattern for prosperity: the profits from efficient operation go into the purchase of land, that is, into capital expansion; profits are earned by “operators,” the landholder is economically passive. This division of activity also brings into focus some pilgrims like the Franklin who are associated with land by their occupational designations but whose descriptions contain very little practical economic information. Pilgrims deriving their livelihood from land fall into two Chaucerian sub-classes: agents, who see to the operation and expansion of agricultural enterprises; and principals, the landholders. The agents are described by the work they do, the principals by less clearly economic or non-economic activities, by their social activities, their life style.
In addition to the Reeve’s work there is another level of agency and another kind of agent’s work. This is the legal work of control and capital expansion. In the Manciple’s temple there are a dozen lawyers so expert that they are “Worthy to be stywardes of rente and lond. / Of any lord that is in Engelond.” The agent’s expertise is still managerial but now the basic knowledge is legal. Even on the Reeve’s level the emphasis can be shifted from words like bynne, yeldynge, and dayerye, to words like covenant, rekenynge, and arrerage in order to show the lawyer’s concern in stewardship of rent. Legal draughtsmanship is the crucial skill here. The Man of Law “koude endite, and make a thyng, / Ther koude no wight pynche at his writyng.” The Man of Law was also expert in the second category of stewardship, land: “So greet a purchasour was nowher noon / Al was fee symple to hym in effect; / His purchasyng myghte nat been infect.” Because of the contextual emphasis on legal skill I read purchasour as implying agency; the lawyer buys land for his client by removing the legal restrictions to make it as available as if it had been held in fee simple. Chaucer has given more information about farm management than about dirt farming, and as a consequence his agriculture seems rather bureaucratic. Different kinds of agents work at different levels of removal from the land, but socially the important point is that they all work.
The other class of pilgrims deriving their livelihood from land do not work, at least not directly for their own monetary gain. The Franklin’s description dwells on the quantity and quality of his table with mention of its sources of supply in his pond and mew. Less noticed, because Chaucer emphasizes them less, are his public offices, which indicate significant service and a somewhat higher social station than he is often credited with. We have a landholder, then, who is defined not by the operation of his holdings but by his hospitality and public offices. The Knight and the Squire divide these tendencies, the Knight being defined by his service and the Squire by his style. The Monk, though not indicated as a landholder, enjoys the position of one. Hunting is expensive sport and he is a great hunter, presumably because he can command some of his monastery’s wealth. The Prioress is a ladylike equivalent.
In the “General Prologue” landed wealth supports a variety of social activities. There are sports and entertainment, like the Monk’s hunting and the Franklin’s table. There are the Franklin’s political service and the Knight’s military service against the heathen. Somewhere between sport and service come the Squire’s activities, ostensibly directed to entertainment but carrying enough suggestion of probationary regimen to indicate a gentil imperative. These activities, taken all together, do much to define the life style of gentlemen and ladies. The supporting wealth comes obviously from agricultural operations and less obviously from capital expansion, and it is earned by the agents who work for the landholders. The two groups are defined by different activities; the agents get and the principals spend, the agents work and the principals amuse themselves and render public service. This is the central pattern of Chaucer’s social structure.
This distinction between principals and agents disappears in the loosely assembled activities of commerce, manufacturing, and service that I have grouped together in trade. There, despite the wide social range from the Cook to the Merchant, each of these pilgrims shares a common necessity to face the rigors of economic competition on his own. The Merchant buys and sells and dabbles in currency exchange. The Wife of Bath is a cloth maker. The Cook puts his culinary skill to hire. Yet somewhat surprisingly the yield of economic particulars is not great. Although we are not definitely told what the commerce of the merchant is, we are given an informal audit of his position, something none of his fellows could get. In other words, the thing that interests the narrator about the Merchant is his balance sheet. It is not perfectly clear whether or not the “dette” is ordinary commercial credit, “chevyssaunce.” It is clear, however, that the Merchant thinks his interest requires secrecy, implying an apprehension of vulnerability, insecurity. On a lower level, the Shipman’s pilferage, the Miller’s gold thumb and the Manciple’s percentage show more directly predatory activities and indicate the rule of precarious individual interest. A more indirect suggestion of such a pattern of life occurs in the description of the guildsmen where the narrator’s emphasis falls on their appearance, which is consonant with ceremonial dignity. Each of them was “a fair burgeys / To sitten in a yeldehall on a deys.” That status is a reward is not especially illuminating, but the intensity of the competition for it does suggest sharp need and insecurity.
Everich, for the wisdom that he kan,
Was shaply for to been an alderman.
For catel hadde they ynogh and rente,
And eek hir wyves wolde it wel assente;
And elles certeyn were they to blame.
It is ful fair to been ycleped “madame,”
And goon to vigilies al bifore,
And have a mantel roialliche ybore.
Likewise the Wife of Bath:
In al the parisshe wif ne was ther noon
That to the offrynge bifore hire sholde goon;
And if ther dide, certeyn so wrooth was she,
That she was out of alle charitee.
In various ways, then, the descriptions of the pilgrims in trade betray an apprehensiveness. Their positions may deteriorate, and even those of high degree seem vulnerable to a greater extent than more or less equivalently placed pilgrims in the other categories.
Granting the fact of predatory competition and the implicit insecurity, one might still pause before characterizing Dame Alice as a neurotic status seeker. She may be sensitive about the due formalities of the offertory, but it is also true that “In felaweshipe wel koude she laugh and carpe.” Her Rome and Jerusalem probably had quite a bit of Miami about them. Since the Miller is a “jangler and a goliardeys,” the social life of at least some of the pilgrims in trade seems vigorous and uninhibited. The best sense of this tavern gemütlichkeit is conveyed by the narrator’s description of the Friar’s social style.
His typet was ay farsed ful of knyves
And pynnes, for to yeven faire wyves.
And certeinly he hadde a murye note;
Wel koude he synge and pleyen on a rote;
Of yeddynges he baar outrely the pris.
His nekke whit was as the flour-de-lys;
Therto he strong was as a champioun.
He knew the tavernes wel in every toun
And everich hostiler and tappestere
Bet than a lazar or a beggestere;
The Host’s primary qualification is that he is “myrie.” The Merchant, the guildsmen, the Man of Law, and the Physician may be too far up the social ladder for this kind of fun; at any rate they are more sedate. Among the pilgrims who make their living in trade, at least for those on the lower social levels, the reward of their struggle is a free, sometimes boisterous conviviality.
Such blatantly materialistic self-interest would ideally set the churchmen on the pilgrimage apart from the rest, but it is perfectly clear from their descriptions that they are more of the world than they ought to be. The Parson, of course, is an ideal, and though he does move in the world, his sanctity sets him apart. However, even in the Parson’s description two of the negative particulars indicate something of the practical economic operations of less saintly parsons who readily cursed for their tithes and would leave their parishes with curates to become chantry-priests or chaplains in London. There are churchmen who want to make money. In the descriptions of the Friar, the Summoner, and the Pardoner this materialistic drive is given sharp focus because, with allowance for institutional differences, they are all selling a service—the remission of sins. The Pardoner also sells fake relics as a sideline. The Friar had to pay for his begging territory, which, presumably, would also have been his confessional territory. The Summoner is an agent, working for the archdeacon’s court. As a practical matter he took bribes, and so his remission of sins was simply escape from the archdeacon’s jurisdiction. The Pardoner sold papal pardons, a practical short circuit of the sacrament of penance. Such churchmen seem to live lives like those of the Shipman, the Miller, and the Manciple. That is to say, they live by their wits under economic pressure, and furthermore the descriptions of the Friar and the Summoner indicate that the tavern is the scene of their social pleasures.
The Monk and the Prioress are hardly in this class but neither are they as saintly as the Parson. We learn a great deal about the style of their lives but nothing of the economic bases for such lives. The Monk is a great hunter and the Prioress is a refined and delicate lady, so their style is unmistakably gentil. Though the narrator says nothing of their economic arrangements, both are associated with landed establishments and presumably base their style of life on that kind of wealth. The social pattern discernible among the pilgrims with a livelihood from land seems applicable among the churchmen also. Landed wealth exempts the beneficiaries from the economic struggle that governs the lives of the others, lesser, churchmen. The churchmen divide socially into those who live on the income from a landed establishment and those who earn their living directly. Of the latter group, the obvious generalization is that the remission of sins has become a commercial transaction. A less obvious but more interesting one follows: this commerce was highly competitive, the competitors representing different ecclesiastical institutions. It seems that Chaucer does not separate his churchmen into a special category. In other words, except for the saintly, ideal Parson, clerical occupations are social and economic indicators in the same way as lay occupations.
The basic fact of life in the society of the “General Prologue” is economic struggle. The pilgrims’ occupational labels are obvious keys to their individual struggles or exemption from struggle and thus to their social position. But there is little value in learning that the Knight does not have to struggle like the Cook and that his degree is higher. The pilgrims’ descriptions, however, do more; they imply a sharper general pattern for life in the world of the “General Prologue.” This pattern is clearest among the pilgrims whose living comes from land. There the distinction between principals and agents marks a man as above the economic struggle or in the middle of it and consequently sets a gentil style of life apart from the others. Among the pilgrims making a living in trade the distinction does not appear because each one must struggle in his own interest. These pilgrims seem less secure and there is no gentilesse. Since the churchmen are not landholders, their case would seem to be similar; yet there is gentilesse among their number. The social implications of the distinction between principals and agents reappears, and once again access to landed wealth is determinative.
Pilgrims are what they do, and what most of them do primarily is work. They work competitively within the rules like the Man of Law or outside them like the Pardoner. This stress on hustle and competition creates a society quite different from that implicit in the pattern of the three estates with its stress on complementary self-subordination in a system of cooperation. To be sure, some of the pilgrims do transcend the common struggle. The exemplars of the three estates, the Knight, the Parson, and the Plowman, do so by a moral force unique to them; the Monk, the Prioress, and the Franklin do so because of economic advantage; their wealth is secure. If one can judge by the Merchant’s position on Chaucer’s roster of pilgrims, his degree is fairly high, but he does not transcend the struggle, perhaps because in the world of the “General Prologue” his wealth is not secure. At any rate his style of life is different from those who are above competition because he has to compete, as do most of his fellow pilgrims. This difference between landed wealth and other wealth can be clarified by another comparison. The Reeve’s peculation links him with the Manciple and the Friar, and so my threefold division does not seem helpful here. If we move upward within the several groups, however, things look different in that the Merchant’s description sets his position apart from that of the Knight or the Monk, who both have the use of landed wealth. The Reeve’s switch in economic role and social style would seem to be possible only in land, because when the Reeve becomes a landholder in his own right he is more secure than the Merchant. Chaucer seems to hold with Fitzgerald against Hemingway; the rich, at least the landed rich, are different from the rest.
Just how different they are can be seen in what we learn of their sexual habits. They transcend sexual as well as economic competition. Though there is much less about sex than money in the “General Prologue,” there is a pattern to the relatively little we are told. We know nothing about the sex lives of the Knight and the Franklin, and we have only the slightest and most ambiguous hints about the Monk and the Prioress. In contrast, we do know something of the sexual activities and outlook of the Wife of Bath, the Friar and the Summoner. The Squire is the crucial case; he is a lover and he draws his living from the land. But his love seems more a matter of regimen than of sex. There is only one reference to a girl, and the focus is much more on his chivalry than on any practical consequences of his lady’s favor. In the “General Prologue,” sex, like money, seems to be lower class.
So far I have been talking about fiction and hypotheses, Chaucer’s imitation or model. There are still questions of fact. Historian’s questions deserve historian’s answers, which I shall not try seriously to provide. But one does not have to be a serious historian to question the general proposition that the landed classes were economically and sexually inactive, that there was a categorical distinction between most men who struggled to live and a smaller group of landholders who were above the struggle. Division of society into hustlers and gentlemen sounds questionable, and the Paston letters, to cite the most convenient text, clearly indicate that gentlemen were often effective hustlers. In short, historians are more likely to hold with Hemingway on the subject of difference from the rich. Granting that the most general rule for life in the world of the “General Prologue” does not hold true outside it, and deferring the question of how a shrewd observer like Chaucer went wrong, the historian might still be interested in some of the less general rules for life. For example, was “agency” an avenue of social mobility? If it was, was it equally accessible at all points? Could the Reeve make the change from agent to landholder that he did? Could he move upward as easily at his level as the Man of Law at his? Could either one of them move upward as easily as the Pastons, smaller landholders serving as the agents of larger landholders? Another focus of interest might be the status distinctions in “public service.” Military and political offices went more or less naturally to the landed families, and in the cities a more limited range of offices also went naturally to the chief citizens, presumably because they represented important and separately identifiable interests. What were the status implications of public office? What were the status relations between men in public office because of an independent social and economic identification and those men who worked as career officials, the civil servants? Professor Thrupp has shown that at least some career civil servants were gentlemen ex officio. It does seem clear that the civil service was an avenue of social mobility and that it provided a range of acquaintance, but acquaintanceship with landed families might simply underscore differences in social and economic security and in the practical possibility of providing for the future of a family. These questions should give some idea of the historical uses of the “General Prologue.” It is a credible fourteenth-century model of the middle range of English society; it sets questions for historical verification.
The major literary use of this model is to fill out or elaborate a connection between Chaucer the man and Chaucer the pilgrim-narrator. The poetic manifestation of a writer’s values is certainly an important literary question. Chaucer has been well served by Professor Donaldson, who has nicely described the narrative sympathies and ironies of the “General Prologue” in such a way as to clarify the fine combination of amiability and criticism that emanates from the narrator. The structure and descriptions of the “General Prologue” define the narrator’s position; he is diffident but central. They also define his values. His representatives of the three estates are moral and social exemplars; the Knight, the Parson, and the Plowman all strive but they do it selflessly rather than competitively. Less clearly, the two probationers, the Squire and the Clerk, are also selfless. The Monk, the Prioress, and the Franklin are hardly selfless but neither are they vigorously assertive of an economic or sexual interest. Although they fall short of true gentilesse, their manners and their life style are gentil in a lesser but still valuable sense because they show none of the antagonism inherent in competition. This pattern of approbation implies precepts of orthodox charity and social conservatism. But there is nothing rigid or insensitive about this espousal of establishment values because it is winningly mollified by the suffused amiability of the narration. The pilgrim’s tone is eminently charitable. No matter how antiseptic our critical practice is about separating narrator and author, the art work and life, we do look to an ultimate point of contact. Though Shakespeare’s sonnets do not tell us anything conclusive about his sex life, the proliferation of their metaphors does tell us about his mental and emotional life. The practical charity, orthodoxy, and social conservatism evident in Chaucer’s poetic narrative can likewise be referred to the poet.
The narrator-pilgrim’s amiability and clarity of criticism are the poet’s, but this connection is more interestingly elaborated by working in the opposite direction, from writer to narrator, to supply a deficiency in the scheme of the “General Prologue.” Chaucer the pilgrim failed to provide for himself what he gave for all the other pilgrims—an occupational designation. If we give the poet’s to the pilgrim and call him a civil servant, we have a supplementary and external definition of the narrator’s position.
This embellishment is attractive because it sets the values of the “General Prologue” in precise historical relief. It refers them to a historically identifiable perspective. I deferred the puzzling question of how a shrewd observer like Chaucer could have been so wrong about his basic distinction between landholders and the rest of society. Landholders were economically and, presumably, sexually competitive, as anyone with a career like Chaucer’s must have known. But to a civil servant their social position may well have looked far more secure than his own and their style far more negligent of practical economics than the evidence indicates. The civil servant’s perspective would certainly be affected by the mobility aspirations associated with that social role and by the limits on the possibilities for fulfillment of those aspirations. In short, both the distortion and the accuracy of Chaucer’s social description are plausible for a civil servant.
The details of Chaucer’s observation vivify his use of the commonplace scheme of the three estates by giving the charity of its exemplars a fuller and more realistic setting. In other words, he has asserted orthodox values, spliced them with mobility aspirations, and adjusted them to reality. The same social perspective can be fixed in the literary work and in the real world of the fourteenth century. Chaucer the pilgrim talks like a civil servant and Chaucer the poet is a civil servant. The historian gains a richer sense of a civil servant’s values than the usual documents afford, and the literary student gains a fuller sense of the social grounding of the norms that govern the irony of the “General Prologue.”
Source: R. T. Lenaghan, “Chaucer’s ‘General Prologue’ as History and Literature,” in Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 12, No. 1, January 1970, pp. 73–82.
http://www.privatehand.com/flash/elements.html (Check this out just for fun!)
The “General Prologue” is often called a picture of its age and, frequently in the next breath, a satire. In English Lit. this usually draws a stern lecture about confusing the distinction between literature and history, but in this essay, unobserved by my sophomores, I propose to talk about the “General Prologue” as a picture of its age and then, tentatively, about some uses such history might be put to by historians and literary students.
The “General Prologue” has an obvious historical interest as a series of discrete bits of information about dress, customs, etc.; but if it is to be considered as a more general historical formulation, there is a question of coherence. Is Chaucer’s fictional society sufficiently coherent to warrant taking it seriously as fourteenth-century sociology? The best reason for an affirmative answer is rather vague. It is simply the strong sense most readers have that Chaucer is sampling, that his pilgrims are representatives. There are certainly omissions from his roll, but he does give good coverage to the middle segment of society. The nature he is imitating is social in a sense that is worthy of a sociologist’s regard. To put it rather grandly, Chaucer’s imitation has the same general ontological status as the sociologist’s model; both are representative fictions. This analogy serves my purpose by temporarily converting the literary fiction into a series of hypothetical propositions which may be examined and defined before they are verified. What are the hypothetical patterns of social organization? Then, were they truly descriptive?
The “General Prologue” suggests at least three different ways of pinning down my general sense of coherence to a more specific pattern of social organization. One would be to invoke the widely familiar theory of the three estates. Chaucer’s Knight, Parson, and Plowman do seem to exist as governing ideals, but the effort to classify the pilgrims in one or another of the estates makes it clear that this pattern has the same trouble with the world of the “General Prologue” as it has with the real one. It doesn’t account for the complexities of commerce. The second way would be to follow up Chaucer’s expressed intention to discuss each pilgrim’s degree, but once again Chaucer’s society is too complex for clear hierarchical classifications, as he himself suggests. The third, and I think the best, way of establishing a pattern of organization is to infer it from Chaucer’s practice and say the obvious: he presents his pilgrims by occupational labels, he is concerned with what men do. In the “General Prologue,” as elsewhere, what men do falls largely into the category of economics. There is certainly a generous provision of economic information in the description of the pilgrims, and although there is a good deal of other information as well, the economic information is sufficiently cohesive to justify taking it as the basic matter of my argument. This focus certainly places the discussion within the historian’s purview, but it may seem rather less useful for literary study. However, the study of history can illuminate the norms that govern the irony of the “General Prologue,” and defining that irony is very much a literary question.
Taking the economic information as basic, then, I shall consider the sources of livelihood for the pilgrims and ask how they lived, according to the information Chaucer gives. These sources fall into three large classes: land, the Church, and trade (understood to include everything not in the other two, manufacture, commerce, and services). My intention is not to treat the pilgrims as representatives of classified occupations but rather to regard them collectively and to infer patterns of life from their descriptions. I am not concerned to place the Miller either in land or in trade or to justify placing the Physician with the others in trade. I want to infer from the various descriptions information about the kind of life provided by land, the Church, and trade. For example, the Man of Law lives by his professional services and so I would classify him in trade, but I am mainly interested in some information his description gives about life based on land.
The descriptions of the Plowman, the Reeve, and the Franklin should provide detailed information about the economics of land, but except for the description of the Reeve the yield is slight. There is much detail about the Franklin but it has very little to do with economics. It shows more about spending than getting, a difference I shall come back to. The Reeve’s description, however, tells a good deal more. The first point is obvious enough, his expertise is managerial. It is founded on practical agricultural knowledge in that he can calculate exactly the effect of the weather on yield, and it is founded on a practical knowledge of human nature in that he knows the tricks of all the bailiffs and herdsmen. The two kinds of practical knowledge add up to efficient operation of his lord’s establishment, but not necessarily to his lord’s profit. The tight control he maintains over his operations stops with him; no one above him checks up on him as he checks up on those below him. As a result, “ful riche was he astored prively.” This leads to a second and less obvious point, a role change. He uses his personal gains as a landholder’s agent to establish himself as a landholder in his own right. That, I take it, is the meaning context indicates for the word purchase: “His wonyng was ful faire upon an heeth; / With grene trees yshadwed was his place. / He koude bettre than his lord purchase.” What is interesting about this role change is the change in the Reeve’s activities that it brings about. From hard-nosed managing, which causes him to be feared, he switches to giving and lending, which his lord mistakenly, or at least uncomprehendingly, regards as generous. From sharp practice to the image of generosity, the calculating agent has become a comfortably situated landholder.
This division of activities is significant in the world of the “General Prologue.” It shows the social implication of the economic pattern for prosperity: the profits from efficient operation go into the purchase of land, that is, into capital expansion; profits are earned by “operators,” the landholder is economically passive. This division of activity also brings into focus some pilgrims like the Franklin who are associated with land by their occupational designations but whose descriptions contain very little practical economic information. Pilgrims deriving their livelihood from land fall into two Chaucerian sub-classes: agents, who see to the operation and expansion of agricultural enterprises; and principals, the landholders. The agents are described by the work they do, the principals by less clearly economic or non-economic activities, by their social activities, their life style.
In addition to the Reeve’s work there is another level of agency and another kind of agent’s work. This is the legal work of control and capital expansion. In the Manciple’s temple there are a dozen lawyers so expert that they are “Worthy to be stywardes of rente and lond. / Of any lord that is in Engelond.” The agent’s expertise is still managerial but now the basic knowledge is legal. Even on the Reeve’s level the emphasis can be shifted from words like bynne, yeldynge, and dayerye, to words like covenant, rekenynge, and arrerage in order to show the lawyer’s concern in stewardship of rent. Legal draughtsmanship is the crucial skill here. The Man of Law “koude endite, and make a thyng, / Ther koude no wight pynche at his writyng.” The Man of Law was also expert in the second category of stewardship, land: “So greet a purchasour was nowher noon / Al was fee symple to hym in effect; / His purchasyng myghte nat been infect.” Because of the contextual emphasis on legal skill I read purchasour as implying agency; the lawyer buys land for his client by removing the legal restrictions to make it as available as if it had been held in fee simple. Chaucer has given more information about farm management than about dirt farming, and as a consequence his agriculture seems rather bureaucratic. Different kinds of agents work at different levels of removal from the land, but socially the important point is that they all work.
The other class of pilgrims deriving their livelihood from land do not work, at least not directly for their own monetary gain. The Franklin’s description dwells on the quantity and quality of his table with mention of its sources of supply in his pond and mew. Less noticed, because Chaucer emphasizes them less, are his public offices, which indicate significant service and a somewhat higher social station than he is often credited with. We have a landholder, then, who is defined not by the operation of his holdings but by his hospitality and public offices. The Knight and the Squire divide these tendencies, the Knight being defined by his service and the Squire by his style. The Monk, though not indicated as a landholder, enjoys the position of one. Hunting is expensive sport and he is a great hunter, presumably because he can command some of his monastery’s wealth. The Prioress is a ladylike equivalent.
In the “General Prologue” landed wealth supports a variety of social activities. There are sports and entertainment, like the Monk’s hunting and the Franklin’s table. There are the Franklin’s political service and the Knight’s military service against the heathen. Somewhere between sport and service come the Squire’s activities, ostensibly directed to entertainment but carrying enough suggestion of probationary regimen to indicate a gentil imperative. These activities, taken all together, do much to define the life style of gentlemen and ladies. The supporting wealth comes obviously from agricultural operations and less obviously from capital expansion, and it is earned by the agents who work for the landholders. The two groups are defined by different activities; the agents get and the principals spend, the agents work and the principals amuse themselves and render public service. This is the central pattern of Chaucer’s social structure.
This distinction between principals and agents disappears in the loosely assembled activities of commerce, manufacturing, and service that I have grouped together in trade. There, despite the wide social range from the Cook to the Merchant, each of these pilgrims shares a common necessity to face the rigors of economic competition on his own. The Merchant buys and sells and dabbles in currency exchange. The Wife of Bath is a cloth maker. The Cook puts his culinary skill to hire. Yet somewhat surprisingly the yield of economic particulars is not great. Although we are not definitely told what the commerce of the merchant is, we are given an informal audit of his position, something none of his fellows could get. In other words, the thing that interests the narrator about the Merchant is his balance sheet. It is not perfectly clear whether or not the “dette” is ordinary commercial credit, “chevyssaunce.” It is clear, however, that the Merchant thinks his interest requires secrecy, implying an apprehension of vulnerability, insecurity. On a lower level, the Shipman’s pilferage, the Miller’s gold thumb and the Manciple’s percentage show more directly predatory activities and indicate the rule of precarious individual interest. A more indirect suggestion of such a pattern of life occurs in the description of the guildsmen where the narrator’s emphasis falls on their appearance, which is consonant with ceremonial dignity. Each of them was “a fair burgeys / To sitten in a yeldehall on a deys.” That status is a reward is not especially illuminating, but the intensity of the competition for it does suggest sharp need and insecurity.
Everich, for the wisdom that he kan,
Was shaply for to been an alderman.
For catel hadde they ynogh and rente,
And eek hir wyves wolde it wel assente;
And elles certeyn were they to blame.
It is ful fair to been ycleped “madame,”
And goon to vigilies al bifore,
And have a mantel roialliche ybore.
Likewise the Wife of Bath:
In al the parisshe wif ne was ther noon
That to the offrynge bifore hire sholde goon;
And if ther dide, certeyn so wrooth was she,
That she was out of alle charitee.
In various ways, then, the descriptions of the pilgrims in trade betray an apprehensiveness. Their positions may deteriorate, and even those of high degree seem vulnerable to a greater extent than more or less equivalently placed pilgrims in the other categories.
Granting the fact of predatory competition and the implicit insecurity, one might still pause before characterizing Dame Alice as a neurotic status seeker. She may be sensitive about the due formalities of the offertory, but it is also true that “In felaweshipe wel koude she laugh and carpe.” Her Rome and Jerusalem probably had quite a bit of Miami about them. Since the Miller is a “jangler and a goliardeys,” the social life of at least some of the pilgrims in trade seems vigorous and uninhibited. The best sense of this tavern gemütlichkeit is conveyed by the narrator’s description of the Friar’s social style.
His typet was ay farsed ful of knyves
And pynnes, for to yeven faire wyves.
And certeinly he hadde a murye note;
Wel koude he synge and pleyen on a rote;
Of yeddynges he baar outrely the pris.
His nekke whit was as the flour-de-lys;
Therto he strong was as a champioun.
He knew the tavernes wel in every toun
And everich hostiler and tappestere
Bet than a lazar or a beggestere;
The Host’s primary qualification is that he is “myrie.” The Merchant, the guildsmen, the Man of Law, and the Physician may be too far up the social ladder for this kind of fun; at any rate they are more sedate. Among the pilgrims who make their living in trade, at least for those on the lower social levels, the reward of their struggle is a free, sometimes boisterous conviviality.
Such blatantly materialistic self-interest would ideally set the churchmen on the pilgrimage apart from the rest, but it is perfectly clear from their descriptions that they are more of the world than they ought to be. The Parson, of course, is an ideal, and though he does move in the world, his sanctity sets him apart. However, even in the Parson’s description two of the negative particulars indicate something of the practical economic operations of less saintly parsons who readily cursed for their tithes and would leave their parishes with curates to become chantry-priests or chaplains in London. There are churchmen who want to make money. In the descriptions of the Friar, the Summoner, and the Pardoner this materialistic drive is given sharp focus because, with allowance for institutional differences, they are all selling a service—the remission of sins. The Pardoner also sells fake relics as a sideline. The Friar had to pay for his begging territory, which, presumably, would also have been his confessional territory. The Summoner is an agent, working for the archdeacon’s court. As a practical matter he took bribes, and so his remission of sins was simply escape from the archdeacon’s jurisdiction. The Pardoner sold papal pardons, a practical short circuit of the sacrament of penance. Such churchmen seem to live lives like those of the Shipman, the Miller, and the Manciple. That is to say, they live by their wits under economic pressure, and furthermore the descriptions of the Friar and the Summoner indicate that the tavern is the scene of their social pleasures.
The Monk and the Prioress are hardly in this class but neither are they as saintly as the Parson. We learn a great deal about the style of their lives but nothing of the economic bases for such lives. The Monk is a great hunter and the Prioress is a refined and delicate lady, so their style is unmistakably gentil. Though the narrator says nothing of their economic arrangements, both are associated with landed establishments and presumably base their style of life on that kind of wealth. The social pattern discernible among the pilgrims with a livelihood from land seems applicable among the churchmen also. Landed wealth exempts the beneficiaries from the economic struggle that governs the lives of the others, lesser, churchmen. The churchmen divide socially into those who live on the income from a landed establishment and those who earn their living directly. Of the latter group, the obvious generalization is that the remission of sins has become a commercial transaction. A less obvious but more interesting one follows: this commerce was highly competitive, the competitors representing different ecclesiastical institutions. It seems that Chaucer does not separate his churchmen into a special category. In other words, except for the saintly, ideal Parson, clerical occupations are social and economic indicators in the same way as lay occupations.
The basic fact of life in the society of the “General Prologue” is economic struggle. The pilgrims’ occupational labels are obvious keys to their individual struggles or exemption from struggle and thus to their social position. But there is little value in learning that the Knight does not have to struggle like the Cook and that his degree is higher. The pilgrims’ descriptions, however, do more; they imply a sharper general pattern for life in the world of the “General Prologue.” This pattern is clearest among the pilgrims whose living comes from land. There the distinction between principals and agents marks a man as above the economic struggle or in the middle of it and consequently sets a gentil style of life apart from the others. Among the pilgrims making a living in trade the distinction does not appear because each one must struggle in his own interest. These pilgrims seem less secure and there is no gentilesse. Since the churchmen are not landholders, their case would seem to be similar; yet there is gentilesse among their number. The social implications of the distinction between principals and agents reappears, and once again access to landed wealth is determinative.
Pilgrims are what they do, and what most of them do primarily is work. They work competitively within the rules like the Man of Law or outside them like the Pardoner. This stress on hustle and competition creates a society quite different from that implicit in the pattern of the three estates with its stress on complementary self-subordination in a system of cooperation. To be sure, some of the pilgrims do transcend the common struggle. The exemplars of the three estates, the Knight, the Parson, and the Plowman, do so by a moral force unique to them; the Monk, the Prioress, and the Franklin do so because of economic advantage; their wealth is secure. If one can judge by the Merchant’s position on Chaucer’s roster of pilgrims, his degree is fairly high, but he does not transcend the struggle, perhaps because in the world of the “General Prologue” his wealth is not secure. At any rate his style of life is different from those who are above competition because he has to compete, as do most of his fellow pilgrims. This difference between landed wealth and other wealth can be clarified by another comparison. The Reeve’s peculation links him with the Manciple and the Friar, and so my threefold division does not seem helpful here. If we move upward within the several groups, however, things look different in that the Merchant’s description sets his position apart from that of the Knight or the Monk, who both have the use of landed wealth. The Reeve’s switch in economic role and social style would seem to be possible only in land, because when the Reeve becomes a landholder in his own right he is more secure than the Merchant. Chaucer seems to hold with Fitzgerald against Hemingway; the rich, at least the landed rich, are different from the rest.
Just how different they are can be seen in what we learn of their sexual habits. They transcend sexual as well as economic competition. Though there is much less about sex than money in the “General Prologue,” there is a pattern to the relatively little we are told. We know nothing about the sex lives of the Knight and the Franklin, and we have only the slightest and most ambiguous hints about the Monk and the Prioress. In contrast, we do know something of the sexual activities and outlook of the Wife of Bath, the Friar and the Summoner. The Squire is the crucial case; he is a lover and he draws his living from the land. But his love seems more a matter of regimen than of sex. There is only one reference to a girl, and the focus is much more on his chivalry than on any practical consequences of his lady’s favor. In the “General Prologue,” sex, like money, seems to be lower class.
So far I have been talking about fiction and hypotheses, Chaucer’s imitation or model. There are still questions of fact. Historian’s questions deserve historian’s answers, which I shall not try seriously to provide. But one does not have to be a serious historian to question the general proposition that the landed classes were economically and sexually inactive, that there was a categorical distinction between most men who struggled to live and a smaller group of landholders who were above the struggle. Division of society into hustlers and gentlemen sounds questionable, and the Paston letters, to cite the most convenient text, clearly indicate that gentlemen were often effective hustlers. In short, historians are more likely to hold with Hemingway on the subject of difference from the rich. Granting that the most general rule for life in the world of the “General Prologue” does not hold true outside it, and deferring the question of how a shrewd observer like Chaucer went wrong, the historian might still be interested in some of the less general rules for life. For example, was “agency” an avenue of social mobility? If it was, was it equally accessible at all points? Could the Reeve make the change from agent to landholder that he did? Could he move upward as easily at his level as the Man of Law at his? Could either one of them move upward as easily as the Pastons, smaller landholders serving as the agents of larger landholders? Another focus of interest might be the status distinctions in “public service.” Military and political offices went more or less naturally to the landed families, and in the cities a more limited range of offices also went naturally to the chief citizens, presumably because they represented important and separately identifiable interests. What were the status implications of public office? What were the status relations between men in public office because of an independent social and economic identification and those men who worked as career officials, the civil servants? Professor Thrupp has shown that at least some career civil servants were gentlemen ex officio. It does seem clear that the civil service was an avenue of social mobility and that it provided a range of acquaintance, but acquaintanceship with landed families might simply underscore differences in social and economic security and in the practical possibility of providing for the future of a family. These questions should give some idea of the historical uses of the “General Prologue.” It is a credible fourteenth-century model of the middle range of English society; it sets questions for historical verification.
The major literary use of this model is to fill out or elaborate a connection between Chaucer the man and Chaucer the pilgrim-narrator. The poetic manifestation of a writer’s values is certainly an important literary question. Chaucer has been well served by Professor Donaldson, who has nicely described the narrative sympathies and ironies of the “General Prologue” in such a way as to clarify the fine combination of amiability and criticism that emanates from the narrator. The structure and descriptions of the “General Prologue” define the narrator’s position; he is diffident but central. They also define his values. His representatives of the three estates are moral and social exemplars; the Knight, the Parson, and the Plowman all strive but they do it selflessly rather than competitively. Less clearly, the two probationers, the Squire and the Clerk, are also selfless. The Monk, the Prioress, and the Franklin are hardly selfless but neither are they vigorously assertive of an economic or sexual interest. Although they fall short of true gentilesse, their manners and their life style are gentil in a lesser but still valuable sense because they show none of the antagonism inherent in competition. This pattern of approbation implies precepts of orthodox charity and social conservatism. But there is nothing rigid or insensitive about this espousal of establishment values because it is winningly mollified by the suffused amiability of the narration. The pilgrim’s tone is eminently charitable. No matter how antiseptic our critical practice is about separating narrator and author, the art work and life, we do look to an ultimate point of contact. Though Shakespeare’s sonnets do not tell us anything conclusive about his sex life, the proliferation of their metaphors does tell us about his mental and emotional life. The practical charity, orthodoxy, and social conservatism evident in Chaucer’s poetic narrative can likewise be referred to the poet.
The narrator-pilgrim’s amiability and clarity of criticism are the poet’s, but this connection is more interestingly elaborated by working in the opposite direction, from writer to narrator, to supply a deficiency in the scheme of the “General Prologue.” Chaucer the pilgrim failed to provide for himself what he gave for all the other pilgrims—an occupational designation. If we give the poet’s to the pilgrim and call him a civil servant, we have a supplementary and external definition of the narrator’s position.
This embellishment is attractive because it sets the values of the “General Prologue” in precise historical relief. It refers them to a historically identifiable perspective. I deferred the puzzling question of how a shrewd observer like Chaucer could have been so wrong about his basic distinction between landholders and the rest of society. Landholders were economically and, presumably, sexually competitive, as anyone with a career like Chaucer’s must have known. But to a civil servant their social position may well have looked far more secure than his own and their style far more negligent of practical economics than the evidence indicates. The civil servant’s perspective would certainly be affected by the mobility aspirations associated with that social role and by the limits on the possibilities for fulfillment of those aspirations. In short, both the distortion and the accuracy of Chaucer’s social description are plausible for a civil servant.
The details of Chaucer’s observation vivify his use of the commonplace scheme of the three estates by giving the charity of its exemplars a fuller and more realistic setting. In other words, he has asserted orthodox values, spliced them with mobility aspirations, and adjusted them to reality. The same social perspective can be fixed in the literary work and in the real world of the fourteenth century. Chaucer the pilgrim talks like a civil servant and Chaucer the poet is a civil servant. The historian gains a richer sense of a civil servant’s values than the usual documents afford, and the literary student gains a fuller sense of the social grounding of the norms that govern the irony of the “General Prologue.”
Source: R. T. Lenaghan, “Chaucer’s ‘General Prologue’ as History and Literature,” in Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 12, No. 1, January 1970, pp. 73–82.
http://www.privatehand.com/flash/elements.html (Check this out just for fun!)
Question of the Week (10/29/10)
Canterbury Tales Re-Mix
Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales is about a group of 14th century pilgrims from all walks of life who travel together for several days on their way to a shrine in Canterbury. They entertain each other on this journey by telling stories. The person who tells the most entertaining story wins dinner at the local tavern, courtesy of the other story-telling pilgrims
Your task for this project is to create (as a class) a contemporary version of The Canterbury Tales. This means thinking of a fictional scenario in which a group of diverse people find themselves traveling together for several days toward a common destination. It also means deciding on a theme for the competitive story-telling element, and creating your own character and rhyming story. As in the original contest, whoever tells the most entertaining story wins dinner.
Here is my example. Let's vote on which setting we want before Monday, so that we may begin this project. You must cast your vote by class time on Monday -- if you don't we'll take the majority of those who voted at that time. Be detailed and specific in your proposal and make sure it is very clear. Include the destination, mode of transport (horses, Segways, vespas, foot, etc.), narrator (host), story-telling theme (*this is most important*), and a sampling of characters.
Destination: Chuck and Cindy’s wedding, San Diego, California.
Mode of transport: A Greyhound bus departing from West Virginia
Narrator: The bus driver (Hank)
Story-telling Theme: Each person on the bus will be giving a toast at the reception. These toasts will serve as our “stories”. They will, 1) explain how your character knows either the bride or groom, and 2) be written in rhyme (like the original tales). They should also aim to be clever and entertaining, as those are among the criteria the judges will use to determine who wins the free dinner. **Please see notes on appropriate content.
Additional Project Details:
1.We decided we will dress in character on the judging day. How well your costume captures the personality of your character will be one of the judging categories as well as a grading component.
2.We will read our toasts aloud to a small audience. The judges, of course, will be in the audience. Whether other students will be welcome to attend will be up to you. As a class, we will decide on the best venue for the toasts. The atrium, caf, the stage, or room 202 are all options.
3.Each of us will choose one judge for the panel. The judges need to be teachers or trusted students, and should be familiar with the original Canterbury Tales. The judges will receive typed anonymous copies of each toast ahead of time, and will attend the live performance.
4.In case of a tie, the winner will be decided by a rap battle between characters. (I’m only half serious about this one, but as a group, we should think about how to handle a tie.)
5.Let's decide on a prize
Points, Due Dates, etc:
Nominate Judges: Monday, November, 1
Confirm Judges: Tuesday, November 2
Rough Draft of Tale: DUE Thursday, November 4 (40 pts)
Final Draft of Tale: DUE Tuesday, November 9 (50 pts)
Dress Rehearsal: Monday, November 8 (10 points)
Performance: Thursday, November 11 (100)
Total Points for Project: 200
Judging and Grading Criteria:
Your tale must include the following:
Creation of a Vivid and Interesting (original) Character: 5
Rhyme, Rhythm, Meter: 5
Must be iambic pentameter and rhyming couplets or rhyme royal
Explanation of Relationship to host: 5
Format (for basic tale—see attached): 5
Grammar, Mechanics, must be 50 lines (prologue and tale): 10
Costume: 5
Performance, Delivery: 5
Must perform in the voice of your character and maintain your persona
Time limit: 5
Must be 3 minutes, but under 4 minutes. For every 10 seconds after 4 minutes points will be deducted.
Judges’ Average Score: 5
Total Points for Final Draft: 50
Notes on Taste and Appropriateness:
While humor, wit, and social satire are encouraged in this project, it is important to respect the boundaries of appropriate and tasteful content. We want to entertain our audience, not offend them. Good social satire is delicate: we want to illuminate the quirks and flaws of our characters, but we also want to avoid stereotyping or culturally insensitive humor.
Not appropriate:
1. excessive alcohol references
2. drug references
3. sexual references
4. swearing
5. any comments that are derogatory or could be offensive to members of racial, cultural, religious, sexual orientation, or gender groups.
** If you are having a hard time determining whether something is appropriate, ask yourself whether you would say it in front of your grandmother.
Just as an example: This would be how your would write your toast.
Before You Begin
Start off by writing down thoughts freely about the bride and groom and your relationship to them.
1.How do you know them?
2.Why did they choose you to make this toast?
3.How would you describe each of them? What are the first five adjectives that come to mind?
4.What was the groom like before he met the bride? How has he changed knowing her? (Reverse this, obviously, if you are acquainted with the bride)
5.How did they meet? How did the groom tell you about her? (Or how did the bride tell you about him?)
6.If you are married, you may wish to think about marriage advice you've received or have learned.
7.Are there any particularly amusing anecdotes that illustrate who the bride and/or groom is?
Beginning
Start off by introducing yourself, as not everyone in the room will know who you are. You might say "Excuse me everyone, if I could have your attention for a moment. I'd like to take a few moments to say a few words about our bride and groom. I'm_______, _______'s longtime good friend (or brother, cousin, etc.)" *This might also be an opportunity for you to say something about your journey.
Middle
Tell a funny story about the bride and/or groom, give your thoughts on love and marriage, tell the story of how they met, or talk about how you've seen them change through their relationship. Give interesting details. At all costs, avoid ex-girlfriend/boyfriend stories and keep it rated PG for kids and grandmothers in the room.
Closing
It's often good to wrap up your toast with a wish, traditional toast, or blessing for the bride and groom. Raise your glass with a resounding congratulations, cheers, l'chaim, prost, or salud, and don't forget to drink to your own toast.
Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales is about a group of 14th century pilgrims from all walks of life who travel together for several days on their way to a shrine in Canterbury. They entertain each other on this journey by telling stories. The person who tells the most entertaining story wins dinner at the local tavern, courtesy of the other story-telling pilgrims
Your task for this project is to create (as a class) a contemporary version of The Canterbury Tales. This means thinking of a fictional scenario in which a group of diverse people find themselves traveling together for several days toward a common destination. It also means deciding on a theme for the competitive story-telling element, and creating your own character and rhyming story. As in the original contest, whoever tells the most entertaining story wins dinner.
Here is my example. Let's vote on which setting we want before Monday, so that we may begin this project. You must cast your vote by class time on Monday -- if you don't we'll take the majority of those who voted at that time. Be detailed and specific in your proposal and make sure it is very clear. Include the destination, mode of transport (horses, Segways, vespas, foot, etc.), narrator (host), story-telling theme (*this is most important*), and a sampling of characters.
Destination: Chuck and Cindy’s wedding, San Diego, California.
Mode of transport: A Greyhound bus departing from West Virginia
Narrator: The bus driver (Hank)
Story-telling Theme: Each person on the bus will be giving a toast at the reception. These toasts will serve as our “stories”. They will, 1) explain how your character knows either the bride or groom, and 2) be written in rhyme (like the original tales). They should also aim to be clever and entertaining, as those are among the criteria the judges will use to determine who wins the free dinner. **Please see notes on appropriate content.
Additional Project Details:
1.We decided we will dress in character on the judging day. How well your costume captures the personality of your character will be one of the judging categories as well as a grading component.
2.We will read our toasts aloud to a small audience. The judges, of course, will be in the audience. Whether other students will be welcome to attend will be up to you. As a class, we will decide on the best venue for the toasts. The atrium, caf, the stage, or room 202 are all options.
3.Each of us will choose one judge for the panel. The judges need to be teachers or trusted students, and should be familiar with the original Canterbury Tales. The judges will receive typed anonymous copies of each toast ahead of time, and will attend the live performance.
4.In case of a tie, the winner will be decided by a rap battle between characters. (I’m only half serious about this one, but as a group, we should think about how to handle a tie.)
5.Let's decide on a prize
Points, Due Dates, etc:
Nominate Judges: Monday, November, 1
Confirm Judges: Tuesday, November 2
Rough Draft of Tale: DUE Thursday, November 4 (40 pts)
Final Draft of Tale: DUE Tuesday, November 9 (50 pts)
Dress Rehearsal: Monday, November 8 (10 points)
Performance: Thursday, November 11 (100)
Total Points for Project: 200
Judging and Grading Criteria:
Your tale must include the following:
Creation of a Vivid and Interesting (original) Character: 5
Rhyme, Rhythm, Meter: 5
Must be iambic pentameter and rhyming couplets or rhyme royal
Explanation of Relationship to host: 5
Format (for basic tale—see attached): 5
Grammar, Mechanics, must be 50 lines (prologue and tale): 10
Costume: 5
Performance, Delivery: 5
Must perform in the voice of your character and maintain your persona
Time limit: 5
Must be 3 minutes, but under 4 minutes. For every 10 seconds after 4 minutes points will be deducted.
Judges’ Average Score: 5
Total Points for Final Draft: 50
Notes on Taste and Appropriateness:
While humor, wit, and social satire are encouraged in this project, it is important to respect the boundaries of appropriate and tasteful content. We want to entertain our audience, not offend them. Good social satire is delicate: we want to illuminate the quirks and flaws of our characters, but we also want to avoid stereotyping or culturally insensitive humor.
Not appropriate:
1. excessive alcohol references
2. drug references
3. sexual references
4. swearing
5. any comments that are derogatory or could be offensive to members of racial, cultural, religious, sexual orientation, or gender groups.
** If you are having a hard time determining whether something is appropriate, ask yourself whether you would say it in front of your grandmother.
Just as an example: This would be how your would write your toast.
Before You Begin
Start off by writing down thoughts freely about the bride and groom and your relationship to them.
1.How do you know them?
2.Why did they choose you to make this toast?
3.How would you describe each of them? What are the first five adjectives that come to mind?
4.What was the groom like before he met the bride? How has he changed knowing her? (Reverse this, obviously, if you are acquainted with the bride)
5.How did they meet? How did the groom tell you about her? (Or how did the bride tell you about him?)
6.If you are married, you may wish to think about marriage advice you've received or have learned.
7.Are there any particularly amusing anecdotes that illustrate who the bride and/or groom is?
Beginning
Start off by introducing yourself, as not everyone in the room will know who you are. You might say "Excuse me everyone, if I could have your attention for a moment. I'd like to take a few moments to say a few words about our bride and groom. I'm_______, _______'s longtime good friend (or brother, cousin, etc.)" *This might also be an opportunity for you to say something about your journey.
Middle
Tell a funny story about the bride and/or groom, give your thoughts on love and marriage, tell the story of how they met, or talk about how you've seen them change through their relationship. Give interesting details. At all costs, avoid ex-girlfriend/boyfriend stories and keep it rated PG for kids and grandmothers in the room.
Closing
It's often good to wrap up your toast with a wish, traditional toast, or blessing for the bride and groom. Raise your glass with a resounding congratulations, cheers, l'chaim, prost, or salud, and don't forget to drink to your own toast.
Question of the Week (11/19/10)
Cite (in MLA format) your favorite quote from the tales we read in class. Why is this your favorite quote? Don't say that you like it just because... actually support your reasoning with sound arguments. Also be sure to comment on another classmate's post. Enjoy your weekend and study hard!
Question of the Week (11/12/10)
Post your original tale to the blog by the end of the school day on Tuesday. Make sure to respond to a fellow classmate's tale as well. Enjoy your weekend.
Question of the Week (12/17/10)
Discuss in writing Malory's narrative method, commenting on his apparent lack of interest in chronology of the sort usually found in the modern novel; his juxtaposition of plots and situations which serve to comment upon one another; his fondness for presenting crucial events offstage, etc. How does it compare with White's treatment of the Arthur legend. Post by Monday at the end of the school and don't forget to respond CRITICALLY to a classmate's response. Enjoy your weekend.
Question of the Week (12/10/10)
Compare and contrast Sir Gawain with either Beowulf or the Knight from The Canterbury Tales. What makes them heroic in a traditional or an nontraditional way?
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight Character Analysis Paper
As you were reading your assigned work, you had probably been engaging in an informal character analysis without even knowing it, whether from your own opinions, text you selected to highlight, or notes that you wrote. With a little guidance on what to do with those various notations, writing a character analysis should not be a problem!
Choose a character from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and conduct an in depth analysis of that character using evidence from the text. Use a minimum of 5 quotes using proper MLA format and the quote sandwich technique. Keep the analysis to a maximum of 1,200 words.
Things to pay attention to in your character analysis:
1. Pay attention to the character’s ethics
2. Decide whether the character’s actions are wise or unwise
3. What is the character’s motivation?
4. Consider the effects of the character’s behavior on other characters
5. Look for repeatedly used words that describe the character
6. Be aware of items associated with the character
7. Read between the lines
8. Is the character “flat” or “round”
9. Consider the historical time period of the character
10. Finally, what does the author think? Look for the author’s own judgments about the characters they have created.
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight Character Analysis Paper
As you were reading your assigned work, you had probably been engaging in an informal character analysis without even knowing it, whether from your own opinions, text you selected to highlight, or notes that you wrote. With a little guidance on what to do with those various notations, writing a character analysis should not be a problem!
Choose a character from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and conduct an in depth analysis of that character using evidence from the text. Use a minimum of 5 quotes using proper MLA format and the quote sandwich technique. Keep the analysis to a maximum of 1,200 words.
Things to pay attention to in your character analysis:
1. Pay attention to the character’s ethics
2. Decide whether the character’s actions are wise or unwise
3. What is the character’s motivation?
4. Consider the effects of the character’s behavior on other characters
5. Look for repeatedly used words that describe the character
6. Be aware of items associated with the character
7. Read between the lines
8. Is the character “flat” or “round”
9. Consider the historical time period of the character
10. Finally, what does the author think? Look for the author’s own judgments about the characters they have created.
Question of the Week (12/3/10)
Read the excerpt below.
Comment on how chivalry is present in today's society. Is it, or have the rules of common decency been recycled into something different or entirely discarded? Explain and support your point using evidence from personal experience. Don't forget to comment on a classmate's response and post by the end of the school day on Monday.
The study of modern literature consists largely in the collection and interpretation of information about the authors. It is almost impossible, for example, to appreciate Byron without thinking of the author and his mystique. We do not, however, even know who the author of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (known as “the Gawain poet”) was.
We may view this as a restriction, but, in fact, it does not have to hinder our appreciation very much. We also know nothing substantial of Homer or Dante yet that does not prevent us from numbering them among the finest poets in history. Looked at from one perspective, our comparative ignorance of them and the Gawain poet could even be an advantage. It means there is more room for the imagination.
We should certainly take advantage of the knowledge that is available. Many people find they can enjoy Sir Gawain and the Green Knight with little or no knowledge of the author’s times. A more sophisticated appreciation, however, will require some understanding of the historical context. Above all, this will help us to respond to the poem not merely as a delightful fantasy but as part of a great tradition.
Only a single copy of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has been preserved from the Middle Ages. The manuscript also contains three other poems, Pearl, Patience, and Purity. They are written in the dialect of the northwest Midlands, the area of England known today as Lancaster and Yorkshire. Similarities of language, imagery and theme, together with a high level of artistry, have convinced most scholars that they are the work of a single author. Pearl is a lament for the death of the author’s daughter, while Patience retells the Biblical story of Jonah and the whale. Purity is a religious meditation in which the author retells many stories from the Old Testament. All are considered to be among the foremost works of medieval literature. A fifth poem, St. Erkenwald, is sometimes attributed to the same writer. He was obviously educated in both religious lore and courtly ways, but virtually all our knowledge of him comes from his works.
The Middle Ages has been alternately praised as a period of romance or simple faith and vilified as a time of superstition and ignorance. Perhaps more than any other period of history, it arouses strong emotions. This is because it is a period of strong contrasts: splendid pageantry and squalor, gaiety and despair, compassion and cruelty, asceticism and extravagant sensuality. All of the popular images contain elements of truth, but none of them is complete.
The ethic of the nobility in the Middle Ages is known as chivalry. This is a set of customs that attempted to reconcile the virtues of a warrior society with Christianity. The ethos of the pagan warriors had emphasized physical courage and loyalty to one’s tribe and lord. It placed great stress on fierceness in battle and usually regarded restraining influences including pity with disdain. Christianity, on the other hand, upheld an ideal universal love.
Chivalry retained the martial virtues of the pagan warriors but in the service of other ideals. It continued to place great value upon loyalty and courage, but it scorned blood-lust, egotism and unrestrained sexuality. The Knight, the Christian warrior, was expected to be gentle and refined in his domestic life.
Central to the culture of chivalry was the cult of “courtly love.” Prior to the Middle Ages, there were only a few literary accounts of idealized lovers in Western culture. Love between the sexes had been regarded as a highly questionable passion, far less worthy of a hero than love of his companions or his country. This changed abruptly around the start of the eleventh century, as the Provencal poets of Southern France began to celebrate erotic love. This new preoccupation quickly spread to Germany and then to the rest of Europe. It became not only the major theme of lyric poetry but also a foundation of the chivalric epics.
Notions of love varied widely, just as they do today. Often a knight would elect to fight in jousting tournaments or on the battlefield in the name of a lady whose favor he wished to win. He was not supposed to expect either physical intimacy or expensive gifts in return, but he might be given a token of the lady such as a sash or a detachable sleeve from her dress. He would then take this with him into battle, sometimes using it as a banner to decorate his lance.
Often a knight might choose to serve the wife of another man. Since marriages among the aristocracy were largely political, love was usually outside of marriage. As long as the love remained only spiritual, the husband was not very likely to object. In practice, however, this sort of service could easily slide into adultery. In Mallory’s Mort D’Arthur, the downfall of the celebrated Round Table comes when Lancelot, once the greatest of the knights, has a love affair with Queen Guinevere, the wife of King Arthur.
The chivalric ideal of love depended on a very delicate emotional balance. Courtly love may have been an important civilizing force, but it could easily become an occasion for violence as well. It was surrounded by all sorts of elaborate conventions designed to keep erotic passions under reasonable control.
When the Gawain poet wrote at the end of the fourteenth century, the age of chivalry was nearly at an end. An especially virulent outbreak of bubonic plague in 1347-50 had destroyed about a third of the population of Europe and shaken confidence in traditional ways. New weapons including longbows, cannons and muskets were rendering the traditional warfare, together with most of the knightly traditions, obsolete.
Comment on how chivalry is present in today's society. Is it, or have the rules of common decency been recycled into something different or entirely discarded? Explain and support your point using evidence from personal experience. Don't forget to comment on a classmate's response and post by the end of the school day on Monday.
The study of modern literature consists largely in the collection and interpretation of information about the authors. It is almost impossible, for example, to appreciate Byron without thinking of the author and his mystique. We do not, however, even know who the author of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (known as “the Gawain poet”) was.
We may view this as a restriction, but, in fact, it does not have to hinder our appreciation very much. We also know nothing substantial of Homer or Dante yet that does not prevent us from numbering them among the finest poets in history. Looked at from one perspective, our comparative ignorance of them and the Gawain poet could even be an advantage. It means there is more room for the imagination.
We should certainly take advantage of the knowledge that is available. Many people find they can enjoy Sir Gawain and the Green Knight with little or no knowledge of the author’s times. A more sophisticated appreciation, however, will require some understanding of the historical context. Above all, this will help us to respond to the poem not merely as a delightful fantasy but as part of a great tradition.
Only a single copy of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has been preserved from the Middle Ages. The manuscript also contains three other poems, Pearl, Patience, and Purity. They are written in the dialect of the northwest Midlands, the area of England known today as Lancaster and Yorkshire. Similarities of language, imagery and theme, together with a high level of artistry, have convinced most scholars that they are the work of a single author. Pearl is a lament for the death of the author’s daughter, while Patience retells the Biblical story of Jonah and the whale. Purity is a religious meditation in which the author retells many stories from the Old Testament. All are considered to be among the foremost works of medieval literature. A fifth poem, St. Erkenwald, is sometimes attributed to the same writer. He was obviously educated in both religious lore and courtly ways, but virtually all our knowledge of him comes from his works.
The Middle Ages has been alternately praised as a period of romance or simple faith and vilified as a time of superstition and ignorance. Perhaps more than any other period of history, it arouses strong emotions. This is because it is a period of strong contrasts: splendid pageantry and squalor, gaiety and despair, compassion and cruelty, asceticism and extravagant sensuality. All of the popular images contain elements of truth, but none of them is complete.
The ethic of the nobility in the Middle Ages is known as chivalry. This is a set of customs that attempted to reconcile the virtues of a warrior society with Christianity. The ethos of the pagan warriors had emphasized physical courage and loyalty to one’s tribe and lord. It placed great stress on fierceness in battle and usually regarded restraining influences including pity with disdain. Christianity, on the other hand, upheld an ideal universal love.
Chivalry retained the martial virtues of the pagan warriors but in the service of other ideals. It continued to place great value upon loyalty and courage, but it scorned blood-lust, egotism and unrestrained sexuality. The Knight, the Christian warrior, was expected to be gentle and refined in his domestic life.
Central to the culture of chivalry was the cult of “courtly love.” Prior to the Middle Ages, there were only a few literary accounts of idealized lovers in Western culture. Love between the sexes had been regarded as a highly questionable passion, far less worthy of a hero than love of his companions or his country. This changed abruptly around the start of the eleventh century, as the Provencal poets of Southern France began to celebrate erotic love. This new preoccupation quickly spread to Germany and then to the rest of Europe. It became not only the major theme of lyric poetry but also a foundation of the chivalric epics.
Notions of love varied widely, just as they do today. Often a knight would elect to fight in jousting tournaments or on the battlefield in the name of a lady whose favor he wished to win. He was not supposed to expect either physical intimacy or expensive gifts in return, but he might be given a token of the lady such as a sash or a detachable sleeve from her dress. He would then take this with him into battle, sometimes using it as a banner to decorate his lance.
Often a knight might choose to serve the wife of another man. Since marriages among the aristocracy were largely political, love was usually outside of marriage. As long as the love remained only spiritual, the husband was not very likely to object. In practice, however, this sort of service could easily slide into adultery. In Mallory’s Mort D’Arthur, the downfall of the celebrated Round Table comes when Lancelot, once the greatest of the knights, has a love affair with Queen Guinevere, the wife of King Arthur.
The chivalric ideal of love depended on a very delicate emotional balance. Courtly love may have been an important civilizing force, but it could easily become an occasion for violence as well. It was surrounded by all sorts of elaborate conventions designed to keep erotic passions under reasonable control.
When the Gawain poet wrote at the end of the fourteenth century, the age of chivalry was nearly at an end. An especially virulent outbreak of bubonic plague in 1347-50 had destroyed about a third of the population of Europe and shaken confidence in traditional ways. New weapons including longbows, cannons and muskets were rendering the traditional warfare, together with most of the knightly traditions, obsolete.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Question of the Week (1/8/10)
How is satirical irony used in The Canterbury Tales? Use the internet for specific examples. Post and respond to a classmates' response by Sunday.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Question of the Week (12/11/09)
Using evidence from the text discuss the interrelationship of two of the following motifs in Malory's work: courtly love, married love, the knightly vow of friendship, fealty, revenge, the ravishing of maidens, the murder of knights, Christian devotion, diabolism. Post and respond to a classmates' response by Sunday. Don't forget your adaptations are due Monday. Enjoy your weekend.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Question of the Week (12/4/09)
Choose one of the following and comment by Sunday. Don't forget to respond to a classmate's response.
Point out specific instances of Malory's comic treatment of King Mark, Dynadin, and others, and comment on how humor modifies Malory's overall tone.
Discuss Malory's narrative method, commenting on his apparent lack of interest in chronology of the sort usually found in the modern novel; his juxtaposition of plots and situations which serve to comment upon one another; his fondness for presenting crucial events offstage (such as the murders of Lot, Pellanor, Tristram, and Lamerok).
Point out specific instances of Malory's comic treatment of King Mark, Dynadin, and others, and comment on how humor modifies Malory's overall tone.
Discuss Malory's narrative method, commenting on his apparent lack of interest in chronology of the sort usually found in the modern novel; his juxtaposition of plots and situations which serve to comment upon one another; his fondness for presenting crucial events offstage (such as the murders of Lot, Pellanor, Tristram, and Lamerok).
Friday, November 20, 2009
Question of the Week (11/20/09)
It has sometimes been argued that Le Morte d'Arthur was not originally intended as a unified legend, but was merely a sequence of unrelated tales. What arguments can be advanced for and against an interpretation of Malory's tales as coherent legend? Post and respond by Sunday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)