I was intrigued by Sidney’s claim that poetry is superior to
history. He states that historians are “so tied, not to what should be but to
what is, to the particular truth of things and not to the general reason of things,
that his example draweth no necessary consequence and therefore a less fruitful
doctrine” (89). While I might never have so boldly claimed that literature (or
poetry) is better than history, I have always believed that literature has its
own way of teaching people history. Literature not only teaches facts, such as
the daily interactions and common routines of the people of the time, it also,
as Sidney states, teaches the general reason. When the Miller rudely interrupts
the host to declare that it is in fact his turn, Chaucer is commenting on the
rising social status of the working middle class. Although crude, the Miller
has money in his own way. He is part of a guild, which in this time is like a
labor union but with the owners instead of the workers. No longer does only the
old money of the nobles have influence. While the Miller might not be as
refined as the Knight, who’s tale proceeds him, he is boldly taking a stand by
proclaiming his right to follow the Knight’s tale. Not only does he intend to
follow the Knight, he claims that he will “quyte” (line 19) him. He believes
that he can both answer and outdo the previous story. While the middle class
might not have the etiquettes of the nobles, the actions of the Miller
represent their rise in influence.
By claiming
that his story will “quyte” the Knight’s tale, he is also claiming that his
characters are more true and realistic. His Alison is made to be a more
interesting woman than the knight’s damsel. She is a “real” woman who “real”
men want, whether they are noble or common. If one digs deep, Chaucer also has
a moral aspect to the tale. In Dr. Scheye’s English History class, we discussed
how there is a correlation between Noah’s flood, which is a purification of
sins, and the water that Nicholas calls for at the end. In both cases, water is
used for a pseudo baptism. Through the Miller, Chaucer might be commentating on
how it is necessary for society to cleanse its sins. This is similar to how Aristophanes’
Lysistrata had an underlying moral
meaning to his comedic, and often bawdy, words. Just as Sidney states, authors
can draw consequences from their historical works.
Sidney
believes that poetry, by “pretending no more [than a fun and interesting
experience], doth intend the winning of the mind from wickedness to virtue.” I
agree with this argument for literature in general. As we have seen in Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Aristophanes’
Lysistrata, greater morals can, and
should, be found when reading. Literature lures people in on the pretext of
being just an enjoyable diversion, but in the end it can teach a valuable
lesson. Literature, or poetry, is a jack of all trades: it can teach history, philosophy, science, and so many other fields of learning.
No comments:
Post a Comment