First, I
just wanted to preface my post by saying that last spring I took Chaucer with
Dr. Forni (love her!) and we spent a lot of time on The Miller’s Prologue and
Tale. Anyway, as we see in The Miller’s Prologue, there are several references
to The Knight’s Tale (which is told before the Miller’s Tale). Specifically,
the main female character in The Knight’s tale, Emelye, is described as being
angel-like or as looking like a delicate flower-- descriptors that suggest a
more elevated vocabulary or sophisticated tongue. On the other hand, in The
Miller’s Tale, Alisoun is described as looking like a slender weasel. He
wrties: “Fair was this younge wyf, and
therwital/ As any wezele hir body gent and small. / A ceynt she wered, barred
al of sil,/ A barmclooth as whit as mourne milk/(3233-3236). I found this
description to be extremely interesting and rather telling (and funny!). While
the Miller choses less conventional ways of describing Alisoun’s beauty (i.e.
by telling us that Alisoun’s apron is as white as milk), his descriptions are equally
as meaningful as the descriptors used in The Knight’s Tale. Here, I think
Chaucer is commenting on social class, indicating that regardless of the
Miller’s lesser social rank that he is still capable of effective and
meaningful speech.
This same
issue of social class also comes up throughout the rest of The Miller’s
Prologue and Tale. Namely, Chaucer assigns the bawdy content we see within the
Miller’s tale to that of the Miller because it reflects the Miller’s social
standing; it seems appropriate. In addition, Chaucer (the poet) has the Miller
disclaim, “But first I make a protestacioun/ That I am dronke; I knowe it by my
soun./ And therefore if I mysspeke or seye,/ Wyte it the ale of Southwerk. I
you preye”(3137-3140). Or in other words, the Miller is saying that he is drunk
and that if we are offended by his story that we should blame Chaucer (the
pilgrim) for allowing him to tell his tale. Interestingly though, several lines
later, Chaucer (the pilgrim) states, “Blameth nat me if that ye chese
amys”(3181), reversing the blame back to the Miller himself. I think that by
eliminating a definitive place or person to assign the blame, Chaucer makes
room for his underlying premise (especially amidst all of the humor).
Dr. Forni
also taught us the term “Fabliaux”, which she defined as being a bawdy and
often humorous story that involves some sort of trick that occurs at the climax
of the plot. The Miller’s Tale appropriately fits into this genre as we observe
the “fart scene”--the trick that is played on Absolon. However, despite all the
silliness, Chaucer is working to convey an important message. Similar to the
discussion we had during our last class, in Sidney’s article, he states,
“Comedy is an imitation of the common errors of our life, which he representeth
in the most ridiculous and scornful way”(94). In this same way, Chaucer is
using humor in order to (more easily) address a more complex/ serious issue, as
well as to warn his audience against overstepping their boundaries in relation
to God: “Men sholde nat knowe of Goddes pryvetee”(3454).
No comments:
Post a Comment