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?
PLOWMAN:
ReplyDeleteThe plowman is an honest worker and earns his money completely fairly. He uses his money on new belongings and on his taxes ("He paid his tithes in full when they were due On what he owned, and on his earnings too.") This reveals that he is very honest and does not want to get in any trouble with the government. The plowman wears a tabard smock. This does not really fit his job – I would think of this as something a cook or other indoor worker would wear. He loves "God best with all his heart and mind, and then his neighbour as himself..." This reveals that he is religious and it is in no way a corruption of his spirit. These details cause me to understand that he is very honest and has almost no flaws. Chaucer uses irony when describing some of the other characters – for example, when describing the Friar, he discreetly shows that the friar is dishonest and cheats people out of their money, something a friar should not do. I take my character very seriously because he does not have any observable flaws, which will be important if any flaws are eventually revealed – it will make me more accepting of these flaws.
PARSON:
ReplyDelete1. The Parson is not affected by money. Though he is not rich and lives in poverty, he is not driven by greed and does not seem to be in need or want of wealth. He is rich through religious deeds.
2. The Parson doesn't really have any money to spend, but he would probably give his money to charity or use it for his sheep if he did have money.
3. He doesn't have any money as he has no paying job. He is dedicated to the parish and does not wish to do anything else with his life.
4. The Parson's attitude towards life and money reveals that he is a very moral character and is the most devout individual on the pilgrimage.
5. The Parson no doubt dresses simply, though Chaucer does not describe him physically as he is a stereotype of the perfect priest.
6. The Parson loves his religion and God--he lives to preach the Gospel and live by example. In my opinion I'd say his spirit is wholesome and good because of this, unless someone wants to argue that having such a strong love of God and religion could/may corrupt the spirit.
7. The details provided by Chaucer about the Parson all illustrate that he is a gentle, devout, understanding and conscious character. Chaucer depicts him as the perfect priest, and is everything that the other religious men (the Friar, Monk and Pardoner) are not. I understand the Parson to be very dedicated to spreading the word of God and is happy to have this be his life's work.
8. In the prologue, Chaucer uses lots of irony through the use of the characters and their titles. For example, though the Monk is a religious man, he is undeniably shady and is essentially a money grubbing pimp. Chaucer depicts almost all the characters as ironic contradictions, other than the Parson, who seems to be the sole character meant to be taken seriously on the pilgrimage.
9. The use of irony in the character's depictions is important in setting the tone of the tales because it shows that the character's are all human--that everyone has flaws.
COOK:
ReplyDelete1-2. The author doesn't discuss these aspects of the Cook's character.
3. The cook loves food and is a very skilled at cooking. Chaucer writes that he "stood alone for boiling chicken." The author writes "He could distinguish London ale by flavor." This shows he probably consumes a lot of alcohol, and has a good tongue for flavor.
4. Chaucer uses irony for the cook by saying, "But what a pity-so it seemed to me, That he should have an ulcer on his knee;" This is ironic because he is preparing food and an ulcer is an open, gushing wound. It makes the reader question the previous statement that the cook is so skilled because he has a disgusting ulcer which we don't associate with someone who prepares food.
The Yeoman main use of money that can be seen so far would possibly be on his cloths and gear which are mentioned to be in good condiction. As a yeoman or bounty hunter, it can probbaly be assumed he gets his money from hunting down chriminals. Also he has all his gear with him on a pilgrimige, which seems slightly odd.
ReplyDeleteHe seems to have no obviously visable loves, and any immediate contradictions. The only iron is that the bounty hunter is more honerable then the priests.
The summoner gets paid to summon sinners before a court. He's really not qualified for this position, so it's mostly just a way for him to make money. The Summoner spends his money on drinking. This shows that the Summoner isn't a great person because all he likes to do is get drunk.
ReplyDeleteChaucer doesn't really talk about the Summoner's clothes, but he does mention the Summoner's appearance, which includes narrow eyes, black scabby brows, a thin beard, and pimples. Basically, the Summoner is hideous, and Chaucer mentions that children are afraid of him because he's so ugly.
My character loves to drink. This is a corruption of the spirit.
The details that Chaucer present about each character portray them in a certain light. The way he talks about them influence the way the reader sees them. These details show if they're good people or if they only care about themselves. They also show their social status. For example, the disgusting appearance of the Summoner shows that he's not well respected and has very little social standing.
Apparently, the Summoner was wearing a garland, which was a symbol of honor. This is ironic because, in reality, the Summoner has no honor and is a disgusting person.
I can't take my character seriously since he gets drunk a lot and starts yelling out random words in Latin to sound smart. This sets the tone for his tale. Because the Summoner himself can't be taken seriously, neither can anything he says (so his tale isn't taken seriously either).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTHE KNIGHT:
ReplyDeleteThe knight through Chaucer's eyes seemed flawless in character. The knights attitude is to follow the code of chivalry in every way. He followed "Truth honor, generousness, and courtesy" (Chaucer 4). He followed everything a knight was supposed to and had the attitude of the ideal knight. He gets his money through warfare. The knight spent his money mostly on fine horses. To him these were the most important things in his life because of what he had these were what cost the most. At the time war was a great way to make money especially if you are well defined in society and have a lot of success in the wars you fight. "Speaking of his equipment, he possessed fine horses, but he was not gaily dressed" (Chaucer 5). meaning his clothes were not expensive and he did not try to stand out as someone with a lot of money through the clothes he wore. The knight to Chaucer looks majestic and really just the ideal of a knight at the time. He carries himself with the air of someone who has traveled a lot and fought often, and like one who "always killed his man" (Chaucer 5). The knight loves his horses. He spends the most money on them and is the only really fine thing he has. The love of horses the knight has is not a corruption of his spirit yet, in fact they seem to add to the greatness of the knight.
The Author presents each character really focusing on their wealth, how they obtain it, how they spend it, how they flaunt it etc. Chaucer right away lets the reader know either if he likes a character or not. As Chaucer judges a character so does the reader. We understand just as much as Chaucer does about any one character and tend to take the same views as he does.
Chaucer uses a lot of irony in his story through his characters. Most of the pilgrims have jobs that come with certain societal expectations, but instead the character do the opposite. Like the nun who loves, the monk who hunts, the friar who slept around and tricked money out of people etc. There may have been four or five characters that Chaucer excluded irony with, but everyone else was doing something opposite of what they were supposed to be doing. I can take my character seriously because he was given such a good wrap in the beginning. He was honorable and truthful and chivalrous. He is a good guy and therefore easy to believe in and take seriously. It's important to the setting of the tone to take your character seriously because it decides whether or not a character is believable and if their story is even important. It also determines whether a character is good or bad.
The Merchant is unique amongst the characters of the Canterbury Tales in that money doesn't merely play a role in his life; rather, it defines it. As a merchant, The Merchant's work consists of bargaining, loaning, and negotiating. He also spends his money freely, splurging on such items as "a Flemish beaver hat" and boots which he "daintily [buckles]." Nothing else is mentioned about his clothes or garments, but judging from what is known about his hat and boots, we can assume he dresses well. The prologue's section on The Merchant reveals that he is in debt, which is, for obvious reasons, quite ironic. This might suggest that he has problems managing his wealth or that he can't restrain himself from spending money on things. The Merchant's indebtedness represents his primary character flaw. However, the narrator certainly esteems him, as made clear by his comments on page 10: "He was an excellent fellow."
ReplyDeleteThe host is of lower class, and a freeman who runs an inn. He uses his money to take care of the inn and provide fine food for the guests. He gets his money by people staying at his inn. This reveals that the Host the a generous man who appears to make an honest living, yet he was "fit to be a marshal in a hall" (Chaucer 23), meaning he was fit to be a master of ceremonies. The book does not describe the clothes of the character, but the author does describe his look. He is a "striking man" (chaucer 23), has bright eyes, and a little fat. The Host loves being social, and obviously loves games since he created one for the characters. This love isn't a corruption of the spirit, but in the prologue the majority of the other characters have loves that corrupt them. For example, the monk hunts rather than performing monk-ly actions, such as "poring over books in cloisters" (Chaucer 8). So instead of deepening his understanding of the world by reading, he chooses instead to experience the world with riches and hunting. The author describes the character of the Host as "bold in speech, yet wise and full of tact" (chaucer 22). He was very manly, merry-hearted, social, a jokester, welcoming, yet quick to anger. I understand the Host as a good leader, a peacemaker, and a man of the world who knows how to treat a diverse number of people.
ReplyDeleteChaucer uses irony in the prologue by introducing the jobs of characters and describing them in general polite ways, but then showing contradictions that makes it ironic. For example, the friar is supposed to beg and help people, yet he only helps people who pay him. He even avoids the poor and sick, because they can't pay him; the normal friar though should help all people. This is an important setting in the tone of the tales because we look at the characters in a humorous way, and know that they are imperfect humans.
It doesn't say specifically how he uses his money. But I imagine he spends it on fine things like clothing or flowers to impress women.
ReplyDeleteHe might get his money from his father?
A squire is a knight in training so it would seem that a squire would wear armory stuff. The squire however wears very fine clothing. He is described as embroidered, which gives the impressions of bright colors. It is appropriate for his character as he has a very flamboyant, loving personally, however his clothing is appropriate as a squire because a squire should wear knight type of clothes.
The squire has curly hair almost like ringlets. He was relatively tall, but he was very strong and agile. He sang or played the flute all the time. He wore a short tunic with long, wide sleeves. He knew how to sing, dance, draw, ride a horse, fight, recite poetry. He was very courteous and lived to serve his father.
The squire loves women and fine things. He loves the arts. In a way his overpowering love for women is a mirror of at least the Christian spirit because it says he has one love whom he is infatuated with. He wants to be with one person.
Chaucer's characters act or are in someway different than their occupation would have them be. The Friar is a pimp, the Nun doesn't care about poor people, etc.
You can take the Squire seriously as he is true to what he loves. He loves women and he shows it. He loves the arts and he shows it.
OXFORD CLERIC
ReplyDeleteThe oxford cleric is a simple humble man. He is very poor and never has any of his own money. He borrows money from his friends to buy books and invest in knowledge. Even though he is very smart he has no been able to secure a lucrative career. This shows a lot about his values and that money and glory are not very important to him. He values learning and knowledge. There isn't much said about his appearance, expect that he is very thin,which again implies he doesn't have much money for food. He wore plain boring clothes that were old and frayed. His face is somber and serious and he didn't laugh much. He loves books more than anything else, books and knowledge. This doesn't really corrupt him in any way but it does make it so that he doesn't want to work and is always poor.
Chaucer uses details in a round about way so that when he is describing a characters more negative qualities they don't sound as bad. His characters are not who you'd expect them to be. It makes the tales and the books interesting and the characters more relatable. He combines to opposites to form a characters personality that makes it kind of ironic. Like the Monk who is supposed to be holey and worship life, but whos favorite thing to do is hunt, There are some characters that are less corrupt/ironic. I think the cleric is one of those, a simple mad who minds his own busniess and hides nothing.
The skipper steals liquor from people while they sleep. It reveals that he doesn't really adhere to any moral code. This is evident when he sends his prisoners on the plank to their deaths after sinking enemy ships. The skipper wears a woolen gown that goes down to his knee and has a dagger that hangs from his neck. His skin is brown from long exposure to the sun at sea. The gown is not described as expensive or shabby, which fits since skippers usually have average wealth. It can be inferred that the skipper loves sailing since he is very experienced and has gone to many exotic places. He is also one of the best at what he does. "That none from Hull to Carthage was his match." (Chaucer 14) This love is not a vice, but an occupation. However, his tendency to steal wine from people is most definitely corrupt. Chaucer uses irony in the prologue in the description of characters. He describes these characters in a positive manner at first, but then thoroughly describes the flaws that contradict how the characters are supposed to act according to their places in society. It can be interpreted that Chaucer even uses irony in the case of the knight, who is described as a perfect person. Chaucer seems to mock the idea of the chivalrous knight, since so many knights ignored this code of chivalry and used their positions in the social hierarchy to take advantage of the less fortunate. However, I can still take my character seriously because Chaucer is simply saying that nobody is perfect. If my character was described as a perfect person, I would have doubts about him of whether he was actually flawless. Chaucer describing each character's negative aspects is important because it tells the reader that these pilgrims are just a bunch of regular people.
ReplyDeleteThe Nun Prioress
ReplyDeleteThe Nun Prioress flaunts her money on self-indulgences such as expensive clothes and fine foods for her dogs. It is unclear how she obtained her money, but it is ironic that she should be so affluent when she is a nun.
The Nun Prioress is described as having very proper manners and as being “charitably solicitous.” She is also inappropriately well dressed for a nun with, “ a coral trinket on her arm, A set of beads, the gaudies tricked in green, Whence hung a golden broach of brightest sheen, On which there first was a graven a crowned A, and lower, Amor vincit omnia.” (Chaucer 7) Amor vincit omnia, “love conquers all” is also an ironic and inappropriate motto for a nun who is supposed to love no one but God.
The Nun Prioress loves her dogs and pampers them by feeding them extravagant foods like “roasted flesh, or milk, or fine white bread.” (Chaucer 7) This is a corruption of the spirit because although a nun’s devotion should be to God, the Nun Prioress puts her dogs at a much higher priority.
The details Chaucer includes about the Nun-prioress make her seem like an unappealing person who cannot be taken seriously. Chaucer includes many ironies (in addition to the ones already mentioned) about the nun-prioress, such as, “she spoke daintily in French... [but] french in Pars she did not know.” Also, although she is described as charitable and warm, her eyes are depicted as “glass grey” and much of her “charity” seems to go to herself and her dogs. Although unappealing, the many contradictions about the Nun Prioress make her a more dynamic, intriguing character, which enhances the over-all tone of the story.
What is your character's attitude to or how do they use money? On what
ReplyDeletedo they spend their money? How do these people get their money?
The Friar is definitely not poor; he uses various methods to gain wealth. His primary occupation is absolving the sins of others, for a price of course; he hears confessions for a price, and the more he is paid, the more valuable will be his absolution. He also works as a pimp, receiving money for relationships that he established for his young ladies (with whom he already slept).In 14th century England, a friar was forbidden to own property and had therefore to depend on the charity of the community in which they lived. They were supposed to earn their living by doing good deeds and preaching. Many believe that begging was the primary source of income, however it was supposed to be used as a “last resort”. The friar spends his money on various things, the majority having to do with partying and drinking.
What does this reveal about your chosen character?
First of all, the Friar’s actions clearly reveal his cunningness and slyness: he gets away with all of his inappropriate actions without any consequence what so ever. He is one the most two-faced characters in the whole prologue. It’s also ironic how the Friar lives in the exact opposite way in which he is supposed live.
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?
There isn’t really a concrete description of the Friar’s clothes, except for him wearing a brown robe. However, the text does say that “his neck was whiter than a lily-flower, but strong enough to butt a bruiser down”. This means that although he didn’t do much physical work, he certainly, giving him a nice chubby neck.
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?
Ironically, the Friar enjoys the exact opposite of what traditional friars enjoy. For example, he really enjoys drinking, “knowing every innkeeper and barmaid”, he was the best at joyfully singing and at seducing young girls. He would gladly settle disputes between people and listen to their sins, for a price of course. He is also very musical, playing his harp at inn’s.
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?
This is one of the most ironic parts of the prologue; also every part of the Friar’s persona is irony. For example his love for drinking and partying is the exact opposite of what is expected from him. Instead of listening to people’s confessions and resolving their arguments for free, he does it for a price. Obviously, his pimping is also very ironic. Lastly, his name, Hubert, which traditionally means “famous”, is ironic; friar’s are supposed to be beggars, living of the good of the people. They aren’t supposed to be famous.
For the physician, "Gold stimulates the heart, or so we're told. He therefore had a special love of gold." (Chaucer, 15) The physician clearly adores money. He gets his from his business as a "perfect practicing physician" (Chaucer, 14), and from cheating money out of people from "his apothecaries in a tribe." (Chaucer, 14) This shows the reader that while he may be a good doctor, he is unscrupulous and thinks about himself first.
ReplyDeleteHe loves money, but is stingy, "Yet he was rather close as to expenses and kept the gold he won in pestilences," (Chaucer, 15) not wanting to spend it on "his own diet, [in which] he observed some measure; there were no superfluities for pleasure." (Chaucer, 15) He does, however, enjoy dressing extravagantly, which seems to be the only expense he is willing to spend money on, as he wore "blood-red garments, slashed with bluish grey, and lined with taffeta." (Chaucer, 15)
His clothes do not appear to be appropriate for his character, as he is a doctor, and should not be wearing something as flamboyant as his outfit.
The physician’s one obvious love is that of gold. This would be considered a corruption of the spirit, as one should think more outwardly, about others, instead of focusing on money. The details about the physician given by the author cause me to view him as clever, and corrupt.
Chaucer uses irony in the prologue by using contradictions in his characters, like the friar who sleeps with multitudes of women, the nun who dresses in finery, and the monk who hates to read and write. I feel like I can take my character seriously as he is obviously clever as he is a “perfect practicing physician,” and manages to run a “tribe” of apothecaries. However, I don’t look at him as a good person, or a role model, because he is clearly corrupt and obsessed with money.
Guildsmen:
ReplyDeleteThe guildsmen have money, but they care more for their crafts, and their guild than for expensive things. They are only recently have become rich, and their families weren’t rich. They get money from making things, and from the workshops they own.
Their clothing and gear was new, attesting to their newfound wealth. This could be an overall comment on the new middle class of tradesmen.
Their wives clearly have ambitions for them “their wives declared it was their due” (to be aldermen(a high guild rank)). This is clearly a relevant part of their lives. It is aso interesting that Chaucer would put a of the guidsmen together, this seems to mean that they are a very similar in terms of personality and important traits.
Many characters have an ironic contradiction. Chaucer says that “each one seemed a wealthy Burgess fit to grace a guild hall on a dais” the use of seemed suggests potential flaws held by the guildsmen. Beside this the guildsmen seem to be to be taken seriously.
The Wife of Bath.
ReplyDeleteThe wife of Bath is a wealthy character, and she spends her money on her appearance," Her hose were of the finest scarlet red/ And gartered tight; her shoes were soft and new" (Chaucer 15).. She buys expensive and new clothes to put forth an image of wealth and youth. Also, the wife travels a lot, so it can be infered that she spends her money on that as well, "And she had thrice been to Jerusalem...She'd been to Rome and also Boulogne," (Chaucer 15). The Wife gets her money by being a seamstress, "She bettered those from Ypres and of Ghent//In all the parish not a dame did stir//Towards the altar steps in front of her" (Chaucer 15). It can also be assumed, since she was married 5 times, that she has also obtained money from her husbands. All this reveals that the Wife of Bath cared very much about her appearance and her wealth, enjoying the more materialistic things in life as opposed to a life of frugal spending and saving.
As described before, the Wife wore expensive clothes and flaunted herself in them. Whether they are appropriate depends on the wealth of her husband, but she did wear clothes that were a little more on the high end than a wife would have worn. Chaucer describes the wife as, "Bold was her face, handsome, and red in hue," (Chaucer 15). She also had a gap between her teeth and "wide hips" (a reference to her promiscuity). Besides her scarlet hose, the Wife also wore a hat "as broad as is a buckler or a shield," and a "flowing mantle" (Chaucer 15).
The odd thing about the Wife of Bath is that what she loves is love itself. The wife is very corrupted because she has had several past lovers and husbands, "She's had five husbands, all at the church door//apart from other company in her youth," (Chaucer 15). It also says that she had "Large hips" and "...knew the remedies for love's mischances," (Chaucer 15). This does show corruption, because a woman at the time was expected to only sleep with her husband, yet the Wife had had many affairs in her youth. Although Chaucer does admit to the wife's promiscuous behavior, he disregards is by saying, "No need just now to speak of that, forsooth" (Chaucer 15). He then goes on to speak of more positive qualities of the wife. This sheds a more positive, forgiving light on the Wife and her experience.
Chaucer uses irony to make the Wife (and other characters) appear more human in context. The Wife enjoys the taboo things in life (sex outside of marriage, free love), something a lot of people could have relate to at the time when these things were suppressed. I would say that I could take my character seriously, because she has a lot of achievements outside of her affairs that Chaucer mentions (her job a seamstress, her travels). These ironic and human-like qualities are important for setting up the tales because they show diversity within characters and their stories. In the case of the Wife of Bath, she shows how wives are not suppose to act, and that can show important insight in her tale.
Chaucer never specifically addresses the Lawyer's attitude towards money. However, some may be implied. The lawyer "won many a robe and many a fee," and so is obviously rich; however, despite his high honors, he wears what may even potentially be looked at as "pauper" clothes. I implied that this means he may not spend money on traditional things, or perhaps there is a specific thing that he finds much more worthy than clothes. It is obvious how he gets his money: he is an honorable lawyer, who is possibly one of the most well known, he is of the higher class along with the knight and squire, and so because of this he is most certainly very rich. Perhaps this reveals that the lawyer may well be a more morally honorable character ("more" being the key word because he is also morally gray in some areas), and that he does not consider money as a way to earn material goods, but perhaps something else.
ReplyDeleteAs I touched on above, the lawyer's characters are not in the least bit appropriate for someone of his stature. His multi-colored, unattractive patched suit and his make-shift belt made out of pin-striped material even in the time was not considered anything that a member of higher society such as the lawyer would wear. It would appear that his highest praise is reserved for his job. At least seventy-five percent of his prologue is describing how efficient at his job he is. He has every law, sentence, crime, and case memorized, and even if he is "not as busy as he seem[s]" he certainly has put a lot of time into his job. This also segments into what he loves: it is obviously not material goods, such as money (which he does not spend a lot of) or clothes (of which all of his are cheap), and the only other thing that Chaucer mentions in his prologue about the character is his efficiency at his job, so I assume that the lawyer's love is for his job, and he really pays more attention to that than anything else. I don't believe that this is really a corruption of the spirit, in any way...
Chaucer uses irony in the character in two ways: in one, he mentions that the character, while being so incredibly proficient at his job, is "not as busy as he seems to be, and also that, for someone as rich as he is, that he would dress in such sad clothes. I really don't think this character can be taken seriously, because of the contradictions throughout his character. I don't think a rich man who dresses like a pauper can be taken at all seriously, nor can an efficient worker who does not work. I believe that his relaxed attitude that at the same time allows him to excel at work will really come into play for his tale.
This is actually Cas, not Ethan...
1-2. The monk uses his money on hunting gear, expensive clothes such as "fine grey fur, the finest in the land" and a gold pin. The monk would pay as much money for the finest things available and did not care for the price.
ReplyDelete3. It is strange for a monk to have such fine things because it is part of their religion to spare unnecessary items and live a very simple life of study.
4. The monks cloths are do not match his title as monk. He wears the finest of clothes when the stereotypical monk would wear a very simple brown cloth and leave all unnecessary items behind. He wore "fine grey fur, the finest in the land" and a gold pin as well as fine boots. Chaucer also describes him as a fat, in the sense that he ate well, and that his bald head shone like looking-glass.
5. The monks loves to hunt. He is a hunter and Chaucer talk a lot about this. This love is not necessarily a corruption of the spirit but it is quite odd that a monk would enjoy hunting animals instead of writing and studying. Chaucer presents the qualities of the monk in a positive way. There is no negative tone to the monk even if he defies the rules of being a monk. Chaucer thinks of the monk as a good man and it gives us the impression that even if this character defies his own religion he is still a good man.
6. The irony of the Monk is that he loves to hunt and hates to waste his time with reading text and studying. However, I think that it is important to take this character seriously because it seems he is wealthy and Chaucer says in the text that this Monk was a good man. There are flaws within the Monk but Chaucer does not give these flaws a negative tone and takes the monk seriously in the prologue.
The Pardoner spends his money on fake relics and riding clothes that are in keeping with "the latest mode." He obtains it by selling pardons and by fraudulently pretending to have genuine relics. It reveals that he is a sham priest, who has little if any spirituality. The pardoner always rides "in the latest mode," contradictory to a religious character, who one would expect would not care about what he wears. He wears a holy relic on his cap, which shows that he doesn't even treat them like relics, even though he trumpets to others that they are genuine (he treats them so disrespectfully because they are fake). His thin hair is comparable to rat tails and bulging eye balls, suggesting that he is an unattractive man. He also has a small voice, and his chin has no beard (nor will it ever have one, according to the author); this reflects that he lacks virility. The author takes this idea farther when he compares the pardoner to a mare and a gelding; a mare is a female horse and a gelding is a castrated male horse. Therefore, the author is implying that the pardoner is sexually deprived (perhaps castrated), perhaps even a hermaphrodite.
ReplyDeleteThe pardoner loves using deception to obtain money. With his frequent embarrassment of the priest and his congregation (he made "monkeys" of them) by deceiving them with fake relics (e.g. a pillow case is "Our Lady's" veil in his book, and he claims pig bones to be those of saints), he obtains donations from his victims. Additionally, he presumably pockets the indulgences he is supposed to give to the church. He also uses "flatteries" and prevarication" to make more in one day than "the parson in a month or two." Finally, most ironic of all (after all, one would expect slightly more ethical behavior from a member of the church) he uses a "honey-tongue" and preaches in order to win silver from the crowds. The Pardoner should be taken seriously insofar as he reflects the heavy level of corruption within the church, which is a serious problem; on any other level one cannot attach any importance to his actions.
1. The Miller has "a thumb of gold", which implies that he weighs down the scale with his thumb while weighing his customer's flour. This causes the flour to cost more, thus cheating his customer's of their money.
ReplyDelete2. Not so much attention is payed to the miller's clothing but more to his physical appearance. He is described as a very ugly man. He is very strong but in more a burly way (he rips doors off hinges). His mouth is like a furnace and he has a huge red wart on his nose. None of these attributes could be even remotely considered attractive. The two possessions he is carrying are his bagpipes and his sword. Though this is not a very pleasant image i think it is still pretty accurate in comparison to millers of the 14th century. These men would have needed to be very strong because they owned their own mills and would be responsible for all repairs and equipment.
3. The miller loves himself, money, and drinking. You can tell this especially in the prologue to his story. In which he brags about himself and has no problem with saying he is very drunk. He loves money which is what I talked about in the first question with him weighing down the scale with his thumb. In his case I think that love is a corruption of the spirit. However, if the things he loved were more aimed outward or involving people in a positive I wouldn't necessarily say that it was a corruption.
4. The details Chaucer include about the miller, like his mouth being like a furnace and his drinking problem, certainly made me form an opinion about what I think the miller would have been like. I imagine him being a very loud-mouthed, rude and pretty self-centered man.
5. I don't think that the miller is actually very ironic at all in comparison to what 14th century millers would actually have been like. There is a real life quote about millers having thumbs of gold. This quote was probably Chaucer used, not what culture took from Chaucer. However the personality of the miller is not one that i would generally take entirely seriously under any circumstances. This tone helps us know how much to believe about the character's story, and to understand what sort of message the tale is trying to get across.