The most obvious instance of satire in the Canterbury tales is the rivalry between the Friar and the Summoner. Here, two adults who's professions usually connote a level of dignity resort childish bickering. This was satirical because it humorously criticized the corruption of the church. Another instance of satire, although perhaps offensive now, came up in Chaucer's description of the miller and other members of the lower class as being blunt, stupid and offensive (and in the miller's instance, drunk). This description is satirical because it uses derogatory comedy to insult members of the working class. A third example of satire is found in the general prologue's description of the nun's prioress. This criticism is similar to that found in the Friar and the Summoner's rivalry as it criticizes the corruption of the church, but is different because instead of focusing on character interactions for the comedy component of the satire, it uses contradictions and hypocrisies in her behavior.
There are many examples of satire in The Canterbury Tales. It is in fact a mostly satirical piece. As Aaron said, the Friar and the Summoner who hold respected places in society both resort to strong attacks and vulgar stories to insult the other. Another example is the Prioress who wears lots of jewelry and is vain in spite of her position. The monk is displayed as outdoorsy and not very studious. What makes the tale impressive and gutsy is that it pokes fun at the church at a time when the church was all powerful and not too forgiving with jokes aimed at it.
The Canterbury Tales is a collection of satirical tales designed to subtly make fun of issues in the society during the time it was written, such as the corruption of the church. This corruption is shown through the description of the nun prioress in the general prologue, the monk, the friar's tale, and the summoner's tale. As Aaron and Nick both mentioned, the nun prioress is probably one of the most obvious examples of this satire. The general prologue describes her as having almost all of the qualities a nun shouldn't have; wealth, vanity, and hypocrisy. Another example of satire is in the Pardoner's tale. In his tale, three men die due to their overwhelming greed. This tale directly contradicts the Pardoner's job, which is to collect money to "pardon" people from their sins. The Pardoner admits that he takes some of the money for himself. Chaucer's use of satire in the Canterbury tales is mostly directed at the church.
The Canterbury Tales are absolutely rife with satire and irony, mostly because I think Chaucer's whole point revolved around making fun of the existing order - to do so, he used satire. One example that stands out to me more than the others was the general mocking of the church and it's agents. Almost everyone related to the church was mocked or parodied in some ridiculous way. For example, the Nun Prioress, portrayed as a very meek and polite character, tells the story of a little boy being murdered by Jews. Another example of this satire is the Friar and Summoner, both purportedly members of the Church, end up getting in a huge fight over which one is worse. In the process, they both show that neither of them should be affiliated with the Church at all! He doesn't only mock the church, however. He also mocks the lower class with overly crude stories such as the Miller's and Reeve's tales. In fact, it seems to me that the only people he doesn't really mock or deride in some way are the knight and his affiliates.
in response to scott: i agree that the only thing he doesn't make fun of is the Knight. it's kind of hard to make fun of someone who's entire life is devoted to the chivalric code.... I think it would have discredited Chaucer if he had made fun of the knight. I also agree with Nick that it was very gutsy of Chaucer to poke fun at the church, because back then, he could have gotten in quite a bit of trouble for doing so. I wonder why he didn't at the time though...
In the Canterbury tales, as many people have said before me, satire plays a large role in most of the tales. The satire start right at the beginning of the book, when each character is described and made fun of in a way (except for the Knight, who is portrayed as very chivalric and described seriously). In a way, the prologue foreshadows which characters will be most satirized and how. For example, in the prologue the pardoner is described as being kind of a sleazy character in every way. In fact all of the church related characters are described as questionable characters. In general, I think that when Chaucer describes the character in the book, there is a lot of satire in what he writes as well as what he doesn't write and leaves us to assume. He never said that the Pardoner, for example, did was unholy. He described him in such a way that we understood that Chaucer was telling us this and by not bluntly saying it we understood it even better.
In response to Scott: I don't know if I agree that Chaucer doesn't mock the Knight. I think that Chaucer does mock the knight, but in a much more subtle way than he does with the other characters. Like Sasha said, if Chaucer had openly mocked the knight, there most likely would have been consequences. The way Chaucer describes the Knight in the prologue and then Arcite and Palamon in the Knight's tale is almost too perfect, it borders on ridiculous. Also the Knight's tale is definitely not an example of a classic Knight's tale where in the end the knight wins his battle, the monster is defeated, and everyone lives happily thanks to the brave knights. In the knight's tale the ending is quite the opposite: everyone is discontent and one of the knights is even dead! If Chaucer had wanted to depict a perfect knight and the perfections of chivalry, I think he would have picked another story for the Knight to tell.
What I remember from studying the Canterbury Tales is that Chaucer used satirical irony throughout the whole book to demonstrate what he thought of the characters' lifestyles. I think that for some characters Chaucer used more irony than others, but each character definitely was satirized; even if if was infinitesmal. The pardoner is satirized by telling a tale of extremely greedy men. Like Sasha said, this contradicts to the Pardoner's job, who must collects money from people so they can be "pardoned" from their sins (and he even keeps the money he gets for himself.) Certainly, satirical irony is exhibited substantially in the Friar and Summoner's tales, for reasons people have already talked about. I also think that the Wife of Bath is satirized because she admits that she uses her body to get her what she wants from her husbands. Chaucer satitrizes this in the tale by saying what women want most is to be in charge of their husbands/ lovers. This is slightly satirical, because Chaucer is basically saying the only way women can be in charge is if they use their sexuality to get what they want.
In response to Gaia, I think that the issue of the knight's satire is ambiguous. I can see where you are coming from by saying that Chaucer satirizes the knight by having him describe things in immense detail that it is almost ridiculous. This can certainly be an explanation. One argue this point by saying that Chaucer has the Knight say so much because he is the most intelligent. Also, the Host says in the beginning that the winner will be the one who has the tale with "the best sentences and the most solaas." But Chaucer certainly loves ridiculing people, so you never know...
The Canterbury Tales are filled with satirical irony. The Nun Prioress is portrayed as a sweet, polite, innocent girl. Then she proceeds to tell a story about a small child getting killed by jews - not exactly the kind of story you would expect from a innocent girl. As Scotty said, the most prominent satire irony is the way Chaucer mocks the church. Almost all, if not every character connected to the church is mocked through out the tales. Another example of satire irony is the Pardoner's Tale. He tells a tale about three men who die due to their greed for money and after his tale is told he asked all of his companions to buy his pardons. A third example is the Wife of Bath. The Wife of Bath is a feminist who believes strongly in woman power. However, as Clark said, she uses her body - which goes against her wish for women to be respected and powerful.
In response to Scotty and Sasha:
I agree that the only character Chaucer does not make fun of is the knight. As Sasha said, it would be wrong, and difficult to make fun of someone who's entire life is devoted to good and chivalry. (Although he could have made the knight a foolish knight or something along those lines.
Also, in response to Gaia, I do not think that having the knight describe his tale in great detail was meant to mock the knight. As Clark said, this could be to show his intelligence. Chaucer never says anything bad about the knight in his prologue, even though his derides everyone else.
Throughout the Canterbury tales, Chaucer uses satirical irony to poke fun at the different classes in medieval feudal society. For example, the Pardonner tells of how he can pardon people of their sins, but only if they pay him money. He also tells him a tale about three men who die of their greed, a sin he is obviously guilty of. Also, the Nun Prioress is described as sweet and innocent, and then proceeds to tell a story about a young boy murdered by jews and thrown down a well. Come to think of it, most of the religious figures are mocked, as the Friar and Summoner both tell insulting tales clearly directed at each other.
In response to Scott: I don't think I agree with your point that the only character Chaucer doesn't make fun of is the Knight. The knight's tale is satirical, just not ironic, that is it still pokes fun at the knight by having him tell an over-the-top tale of abstract romance and misguided chivalry, in which knights fall head over heals in love with a woman just by seeing her, and these two fight to the death over the love of a woman who doesn't even know them.
The Canterybury tales are full of satirical iorny from the begining of the book in the prologue, and through many of the tales. One good example of this satirical iorny is the Pardonner, who is suppose to be a good, religious man, pardoning people for their sins, but instead, he himself is extremely greedy. This in turn is ironic because his second tale is about three men who die because of their greediness, clearly implying a moral against greediness. Another excellent example of satire is the Nun Prioress. Firstly, The general prologue describes her as having nice things, expressing her vanity and wealth, both of which or qualities that nun's are not suppose to have. Also, she is porayed as meek, and sweet, yet her tale is of the boy who his is killed by Jews. The Friar and the Summoner is also satirical iorny because, as members of the church they shouldn't be so mean and rude to each other, each's tale directly insulting the other.
In response to Gaia('s response to scott): I agree that the poor ending of the knight's tale is a subtle mockery of the knight's supposed perfection. I think his goal was really to mock every single figure in society, from the low class all the way up the knights. He did this, like other people have said, because he was making fun of the issues of the social order and society of the time. It seems very out of place for someone of that time to think of things this way. It is my impression that most people saw knights as amazing people, who were truely better than everyone else, and wouldn't dream of making fun of them. Much less, I would imagine that almost no one of that time period would make fun the of the church and it's corruption, for fear of being sent to hell, and of the church in general, as the church controled basically everything at the time. I think that this, Chaucer's breaking away from the widely accepted veiws of time, is one of the reasons why the Canterbury Tales has become so famous and highly praised.
I agree with you about Chaucer making a point of criticizing the church openly. I wonder how he got away with it in his time period? The church would execute people in the medieval period for far less then mocking it. Is it possible that irony was used less at this time, and so the people working for the church didn't realize Chaucer was insulting them?
I think everyone would agree that the general target was the church. Chaucer wove in his views on the corruption of the church in his tales (and the prologue). Sometimes he used satire subtly, sometimes blatantly. I think it was daring of Chaucer to do this, because I get the sense that the potential consequences of mocking the church would be severe. Chaucer mocks the Pardoner, who told a tale of greedy men, when he himself took money that wasn't rightfully his. The Friar and the Summoner are portrayed as childish and crude when they argue, and not as they are supposed to be in society. in response to gaia: I agree that although chaucer is more cautious about mocking the knight and uses satire in moderation, he doesn't abandon the notes of sarcasm and mockery in his description because his style was to deliver satire, no matter how noble or revered the character was - he was consistent.
The Miller’s Tale is was clearly seen as a farcical tale that is cohesive with all the others in using the likes of Satire. Unlike many of the tales, however, it humorously destroys the view of courtly love. It does not merely exploit the corruption of the Church. The knight longs for Emelye from afar and she is compared to beautiful things such as a rose, a lily, the spring, and an angel. Where as, in the Miller’s Tale, Alison is compared to less elegant objects like that of a weasel. Nicholas and Allison abruptly fall into a graphic and somewhat crude relationship. Compared to that of the knights tale, which is graceful and the term “courting” is actually seen. The very way in which the Miller’s Tale follows the Knights tale is satirical in itself. In response to Aaron, it is a wonder that Chaucer was not, as far as I know, punished for writing such “scandalous” material. However, looking back at the Knights tale, there are some discrepancies between tales. Its almost as if the elegance and melodramatic humor of the knight’s tale distracts from the more church criticizing tales.
The Canterbury tales are full of satirical irony, mostly directed at the church. The Nun Prioress, depicted as a sweet, innocent woman, told a horribly violent story about a little boy being killed for being Christian, which is usually not how a Christian story goes. Many characters tell stories that are ironic compared to their characters, such as the Pardoner, who told a story about greed after taking money from people to pardon them for their sins. This tale especially shows the corruption of the church, which according to Chaucer was once a noble institution ruined by greed. There are also several tales that mock courtly love and how love has changed.
In response to Brittany: I agree with you, I am surprised that Chaucer wasn't punished for writing like this. Maybe people understand that it was just for humor and it wasn't serious, or maybe it was only read by people who wouldn't take offense to it. I don't think people of the church would read it.
I believe that my favorite example of satire in the Canterbury Tales is the Miller. He is so perfectly stereotypical because of how he is a poor crude man from the Dark Ages (ish) and is assumed to be extremely rude and always drunk. Even though I am sure there were many hard working lower class citizens during this time period (more than not I would hope), Chaucer shows this class by supporting everyones stereotype of them. I also think that the Knights Tale was almost satirical because of how perfect he was. There were most likely plenty of Knights that were not good and abused their power as Knights but this Knight in the Canterbury Tales was absolutely perfect.
And in response to Aaron I completely agree with what he said about the Miller (obviously cause that was my favorite satirical part as shown above) and even everything about the Friar and the Summoner. The Friar and the Summoner are actually better examples than the ones I gave but of course I didnt think of those when I was writing. Aaron you are truly good at this stuff.
My favorite example of satirical irony in the Cantebury Tales is the Prioress's tale. When I read it I thought that the irony was weak and not well expressed, but the more I think about it now the more ironic it seems. The Nun Prioress is a frail old woman who appears dainty and well mannered, but her story is full of gore and hate and anti semitism. At first I took it to be just a religious story with the taint of the medieval catholic church mixed in. But as I thought about it I realized how funny and disturbing it would be to hear an old woman like my grandmother recounting in such terrible detail the grissly death of a young boy. I think what really helped me relate to this story was thinking of the Prioress as my Grandmother, who is also a very religious kindly woman.
In response to Sasha: I don't necessarily agree that the Nun Prioress is the most obvious example of Satire in the book. She is described relatively well during the prologue, and the traits that cast her in an "ironic light" only do so because she is "supposed" to be poor and downtrodden. Her wealth is only a sign that she has been wise and lucky with her money, and that is no sin. She can still be kind and charitable without being dirt poor.
The most obvious example of Satirical Irony in The Canterbury Tales is the pardoners tale. In the pardoners prologue it is explained that the pardoner is greedy and that he often coerces people into giving him money. The irony in this is that the tale he tells is about three men who die because of their greed. They see a bag of gold underneath a tree and are told not to take it, yet all three of then try to take the money and they all die. This is ironic because he is a greedy person yet he tells a story about how men die because of thier greed.
In response to Megan: I agree that the Nuns Prioress's tale is full of satircal irony. Here is this docile and warm women, yet she tells a brutal story of murder and anti semitism.
The most obvious instance of satire in the Canterbury tales is the rivalry between the Friar and the Summoner. Here, two adults who's professions usually connote a level of dignity resort childish bickering. This was satirical because it humorously criticized the corruption of the church. Another instance of satire, although perhaps offensive now, came up in Chaucer's description of the miller and other members of the lower class as being blunt, stupid and offensive (and in the miller's instance, drunk). This description is satirical because it uses derogatory comedy to insult members of the working class. A third example of satire is found in the general prologue's description of the nun's prioress. This criticism is similar to that found in the Friar and the Summoner's rivalry as it criticizes the corruption of the church, but is different because instead of focusing on character interactions for the comedy component of the satire, it uses contradictions and hypocrisies in her behavior.
ReplyDeleteThere are many examples of satire in The Canterbury Tales. It is in fact a mostly satirical piece. As Aaron said, the Friar and the Summoner who hold respected places in society both resort to strong attacks and vulgar stories to insult the other. Another example is the Prioress who wears lots of jewelry and is vain in spite of her position. The monk is displayed as outdoorsy and not very studious. What makes the tale impressive and gutsy is that it pokes fun at the church at a time when the church was all powerful and not too forgiving with jokes aimed at it.
ReplyDeleteThe Canterbury Tales is a collection of satirical tales designed to subtly make fun of issues in the society during the time it was written, such as the corruption of the church. This corruption is shown through the description of the nun prioress in the general prologue, the monk, the friar's tale, and the summoner's tale. As Aaron and Nick both mentioned, the nun prioress is probably one of the most obvious examples of this satire. The general prologue describes her as having almost all of the qualities a nun shouldn't have; wealth, vanity, and hypocrisy. Another example of satire is in the Pardoner's tale. In his tale, three men die due to their overwhelming greed. This tale directly contradicts the Pardoner's job, which is to collect money to "pardon" people from their sins. The Pardoner admits that he takes some of the money for himself. Chaucer's use of satire in the Canterbury tales is mostly directed at the church.
ReplyDeleteThe Canterbury Tales are absolutely rife with satire and irony, mostly because I think Chaucer's whole point revolved around making fun of the existing order - to do so, he used satire. One example that stands out to me more than the others was the general mocking of the church and it's agents. Almost everyone related to the church was mocked or parodied in some ridiculous way. For example, the Nun Prioress, portrayed as a very meek and polite character, tells the story of a little boy being murdered by Jews. Another example of this satire is the Friar and Summoner, both purportedly members of the Church, end up getting in a huge fight over which one is worse. In the process, they both show that neither of them should be affiliated with the Church at all! He doesn't only mock the church, however. He also mocks the lower class with overly crude stories such as the Miller's and Reeve's tales. In fact, it seems to me that the only people he doesn't really mock or deride in some way are the knight and his affiliates.
ReplyDeletein response to scott:
ReplyDeletei agree that the only thing he doesn't make fun of is the Knight. it's kind of hard to make fun of someone who's entire life is devoted to the chivalric code.... I think it would have discredited Chaucer if he had made fun of the knight. I also agree with Nick that it was very gutsy of Chaucer to poke fun at the church, because back then, he could have gotten in quite a bit of trouble for doing so. I wonder why he didn't at the time though...
In the Canterbury tales, as many people have said before me, satire plays a large role in most of the tales. The satire start right at the beginning of the book, when each character is described and made fun of in a way (except for the Knight, who is portrayed as very chivalric and described seriously). In a way, the prologue foreshadows which characters will be most satirized and how. For example, in the prologue the pardoner is described as being kind of a sleazy character in every way. In fact all of the church related characters are described as questionable characters. In general, I think that when Chaucer describes the character in the book, there is a lot of satire in what he writes as well as what he doesn't write and leaves us to assume. He never said that the Pardoner, for example, did was unholy. He described him in such a way that we understood that Chaucer was telling us this and by not bluntly saying it we understood it even better.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Scott:
I don't know if I agree that Chaucer doesn't mock the Knight. I think that Chaucer does mock the knight, but in a much more subtle way than he does with the other characters. Like Sasha said, if Chaucer had openly mocked the knight, there most likely would have been consequences. The way Chaucer describes the Knight in the prologue and then Arcite and Palamon in the Knight's tale is almost too perfect, it borders on ridiculous. Also the Knight's tale is definitely not an example of a classic Knight's tale where in the end the knight wins his battle, the monster is defeated, and everyone lives happily thanks to the brave knights. In the knight's tale the ending is quite the opposite: everyone is discontent and one of the knights is even dead! If Chaucer had wanted to depict a perfect knight and the perfections of chivalry, I think he would have picked another story for the Knight to tell.
What I remember from studying the Canterbury Tales is that Chaucer used satirical irony throughout the whole book to demonstrate what he thought of the characters' lifestyles. I think that for some characters Chaucer used more irony than others, but each character definitely was satirized; even if if was infinitesmal. The pardoner is satirized by telling a tale of extremely greedy men. Like Sasha said, this contradicts to the Pardoner's job, who must collects money from people so they can be "pardoned" from their sins (and he even keeps the money he gets for himself.) Certainly, satirical irony is exhibited substantially in the Friar and Summoner's tales, for reasons people have already talked about. I also think that the Wife of Bath is satirized because she admits that she uses her body to get her what she wants from her husbands. Chaucer satitrizes this in the tale by saying what women want most is to be in charge of their husbands/ lovers. This is slightly satirical, because Chaucer is basically saying the only way women can be in charge is if they use their sexuality to get what they want.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gaia,
I think that the issue of the knight's satire is ambiguous. I can see where you are coming from by saying that Chaucer satirizes the knight by having him describe things in immense detail that it is almost ridiculous. This can certainly be an explanation. One argue this point by saying that Chaucer has the Knight say so much because he is the most intelligent. Also, the Host says in the beginning that the winner will be the one who has the tale with "the best sentences and the most solaas." But Chaucer certainly loves ridiculing people, so you never know...
The Canterbury Tales are filled with satirical irony. The Nun Prioress is portrayed as a sweet, polite, innocent girl. Then she proceeds to tell a story about a small child getting killed by jews - not exactly the kind of story you would expect from a innocent girl. As Scotty said, the most prominent satire irony is the way Chaucer mocks the church. Almost all, if not every character connected to the church is mocked through out the tales. Another example of satire irony is the Pardoner's Tale. He tells a tale about three men who die due to their greed for money and after his tale is told he asked all of his companions to buy his pardons. A third example is the Wife of Bath. The Wife of Bath is a feminist who believes strongly in woman power. However, as Clark said, she uses her body - which goes against her wish for women to be respected and powerful.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Scotty and Sasha:
I agree that the only character Chaucer does not make fun of is the knight. As Sasha said, it would be wrong, and difficult to make fun of someone who's entire life is devoted to good and chivalry. (Although he could have made the knight a foolish knight or something along those lines.
Also, in response to Gaia, I do not think that having the knight describe his tale in great detail was meant to mock the knight. As Clark said, this could be to show his intelligence. Chaucer never says anything bad about the knight in his prologue, even though his derides everyone else.
Throughout the Canterbury tales, Chaucer uses satirical irony to poke fun at the different classes in medieval feudal society. For example, the Pardonner tells of how he can pardon people of their sins, but only if they pay him money. He also tells him a tale about three men who die of their greed, a sin he is obviously guilty of. Also, the Nun Prioress is described as sweet and innocent, and then proceeds to tell a story about a young boy murdered by jews and thrown down a well. Come to think of it, most of the religious figures are mocked, as the Friar and Summoner both tell insulting tales clearly directed at each other.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Scott:
I don't think I agree with your point that the only character Chaucer doesn't make fun of is the Knight. The knight's tale is satirical, just not ironic, that is it still pokes fun at the knight by having him tell an over-the-top tale of abstract romance and misguided chivalry, in which knights fall head over heals in love with a woman just by seeing her, and these two fight to the death over the love of a woman who doesn't even know them.
The Canterybury tales are full of satirical iorny from the begining of the book in the prologue, and through many of the tales. One good example of this satirical iorny is the Pardonner, who is suppose to be a good, religious man, pardoning people for their sins, but instead, he himself is extremely greedy. This in turn is ironic because his second tale is about three men who die because of their greediness, clearly implying a moral against greediness. Another excellent example of satire is the Nun Prioress. Firstly, The general prologue describes her as having nice things, expressing her vanity and wealth, both of which or qualities that nun's are not suppose to have. Also, she is porayed as meek, and sweet, yet her tale is of the boy who his is killed by Jews. The Friar and the Summoner is also satirical iorny because, as members of the church they shouldn't be so mean and rude to each other, each's tale directly insulting the other.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gaia('s response to scott):
ReplyDeleteI agree that the poor ending of the knight's tale is a subtle mockery of the knight's supposed perfection. I think his goal was really to mock every single figure in society, from the low class all the way up the knights. He did this, like other people have said, because he was making fun of the issues of the social order and society of the time. It seems very out of place for someone of that time to think of things this way. It is my impression that most people saw knights as amazing people, who were truely better than everyone else, and wouldn't dream of making fun of them. Much less, I would imagine that almost no one of that time period would make fun the of the church and it's corruption, for fear of being sent to hell, and of the church in general, as the church controled basically everything at the time. I think that this, Chaucer's breaking away from the widely accepted veiws of time, is one of the reasons why the Canterbury Tales has become so famous and highly praised.
In Response to Scott,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about Chaucer making a point of criticizing the church openly. I wonder how he got away with it in his time period? The church would execute people in the medieval period for far less then mocking it. Is it possible that irony was used less at this time, and so the people working for the church didn't realize Chaucer was insulting them?
I think everyone would agree that the general target was the church. Chaucer wove in his views on the corruption of the church in his tales (and the prologue). Sometimes he used satire subtly, sometimes blatantly. I think it was daring of Chaucer to do this, because I get the sense that the potential consequences of mocking the church would be severe. Chaucer mocks the Pardoner, who told a tale of greedy men, when he himself took money that wasn't rightfully his. The Friar and the Summoner are portrayed as childish and crude when they argue, and not as they are supposed to be in society.
ReplyDeletein response to gaia: I agree that although chaucer is more cautious about mocking the knight and uses satire in moderation, he doesn't abandon the notes of sarcasm and mockery in his description because his style was to deliver satire, no matter how noble or revered the character was - he was consistent.
The Miller’s Tale is was clearly seen as a farcical tale that is cohesive with all the others in using the likes of Satire. Unlike many of the tales, however, it humorously destroys the view of courtly love. It does not merely exploit the corruption of the Church. The knight longs for Emelye from afar and she is compared to beautiful things such as a rose, a lily, the spring, and an angel. Where as, in the Miller’s Tale, Alison is compared to less elegant objects like that of a weasel. Nicholas and Allison abruptly fall into a graphic and somewhat crude relationship. Compared to that of the knights tale, which is graceful and the term “courting” is actually seen. The very way in which the Miller’s Tale follows the Knights tale is satirical in itself. In response to Aaron, it is a wonder that Chaucer was not, as far as I know, punished for writing such “scandalous” material. However, looking back at the Knights tale, there are some discrepancies between tales. Its almost as if the elegance and melodramatic humor of the knight’s tale distracts from the more church criticizing tales.
ReplyDeleteThe Canterbury tales are full of satirical irony, mostly directed at the church. The Nun Prioress, depicted as a sweet, innocent woman, told a horribly violent story about a little boy being killed for being Christian, which is usually not how a Christian story goes. Many characters tell stories that are ironic compared to their characters, such as the Pardoner, who told a story about greed after taking money from people to pardon them for their sins. This tale especially shows the corruption of the church, which according to Chaucer was once a noble institution ruined by greed. There are also several tales that mock courtly love and how love has changed.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Brittany:
I agree with you, I am surprised that Chaucer wasn't punished for writing like this. Maybe people understand that it was just for humor and it wasn't serious, or maybe it was only read by people who wouldn't take offense to it. I don't think people of the church would read it.
I believe that my favorite example of satire in the Canterbury Tales is the Miller. He is so perfectly stereotypical because of how he is a poor crude man from the Dark Ages (ish) and is assumed to be extremely rude and always drunk. Even though I am sure there were many hard working lower class citizens during this time period (more than not I would hope), Chaucer shows this class by supporting everyones stereotype of them. I also think that the Knights Tale was almost satirical because of how perfect he was. There were most likely plenty of Knights that were not good and abused their power as Knights but this Knight in the Canterbury Tales was absolutely perfect.
ReplyDeleteAnd in response to Aaron I completely agree with what he said about the Miller (obviously cause that was my favorite satirical part as shown above) and even everything about the Friar and the Summoner. The Friar and the Summoner are actually better examples than the ones I gave but of course I didnt think of those when I was writing. Aaron you are truly good at this stuff.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite example of satirical irony in the Cantebury Tales is the Prioress's tale. When I read it I thought that the irony was weak and not well expressed, but the more I think about it now the more ironic it seems. The Nun Prioress is a frail old woman who appears dainty and well mannered, but her story is full of gore and hate and anti semitism. At first I took it to be just a religious story with the taint of the medieval catholic church mixed in. But as I thought about it I realized how funny and disturbing it would be to hear an old woman like my grandmother recounting in such terrible detail the grissly death of a young boy. I think what really helped me relate to this story was thinking of the Prioress as my Grandmother, who is also a very religious kindly woman.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Sasha:
ReplyDeleteI don't necessarily agree that the Nun Prioress is the most obvious example of Satire in the book. She is described relatively well during the prologue, and the traits that cast her in an "ironic light" only do so because she is "supposed" to be poor and downtrodden. Her wealth is only a sign that she has been wise and lucky with her money, and that is no sin. She can still be kind and charitable without being dirt poor.
The most obvious example of Satirical Irony in The Canterbury Tales is the pardoners tale. In the pardoners prologue it is explained that the pardoner is greedy and that he often coerces people into giving him money. The irony in this is that the tale he tells is about three men who die because of their greed. They see a bag of gold underneath a tree and are told not to take it, yet all three of then try to take the money and they all die. This is ironic because he is a greedy person yet he tells a story about how men die because of thier greed.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Megan: I agree that the Nuns Prioress's tale is full of satircal irony. Here is this docile and warm women, yet she tells a brutal story of murder and anti semitism.