Hood College Chaucerians

And if that he may feelen, out of drede, That ye me touche, or love in vileynye, He right anon wol sle yow with the dede, And in youre yowthe thus ye shullen dye; (155-158)

"Men myghten dreden wel and skilfully This lyf to lese, myn owene deere brother, If this were lyvynge oonly and noon other." (320-322) (Jurassic Park, 1993)

In al his drede unto the fox he spak, And seyde, "Sire, if that I were as ye, Yet shoulde I seyn, as wys God helps me, Turneth agayn, ye proude cherles alle! A verray prestilence upon you falle! giphy.com

This tale perplexed me to a certain extent, because I couldn't figure out the monk's motive. I was confused as to why he would promise the wife money, borrow it from her husband, and then get her caught. The wife is an imperfect character; she loses virtue by sleeping with the monk, and he still stings her by telling her husband he gave her the money, forcing her to confess to spending it on lavish things. It's like she's trying to be the trickster but ends up being tricked. But is she really tricked if her husband isn't even that mad? He seems to accept her offer of sexual favors as repayment. Here lies the confusion: who is the "winner"??? This story also seems to reinforce a consistent theme among some of these tales, of money and sex. We've seen this in a few stories now, and "The Shipman's Tale" seems to only perpetuate the question asked pertaining to money and sex and what effect they have on power in relationships. In the end, I w...

Why does the Pardoner, who deals with tricking people to make more money, tell a story that condemns such an act? This is an anti-greed tale, but the Pardoner is the greediest guy on the journey.

And with that word it happed hym, par cas, To take the botel ther the poyson was, And drank, and yaf his felawe dynke also, For which anon they storven bothe two. (885-888) (The Lion King, 1994)

Now, goode men, God foryeve yow youre trespas, And ware yow fro the synne of avarice! Myn hooly pardoun may yow alle warice, So that ye offre nobles or sterlynges, Or elles silver broches, spoones, rynges. (904-908)

I thoroughly enjoyed this tale. I have heard of a "January-May" wedding before, and when put in the context of this story (literally), it makes me laugh. Chaucer puts a lot of meaning into the names of these characters, and I found it really amusing that May takes the "forbidden fruit" from Damien. The involvement of Pluto and Proserpina was another interesting aspect of this story, because it takes some level of decision away from the characters: when it comes down to the big reveal of January catching May in the act, the characters' lives are heavily influenced by the gods when they intervene, both in allowing January to catch May, and in giving May a "believable" excuse. I really liked reading this tale, but I couldn't quite decipher the moral of the story. Adultery is bad, but May seemingly gets away with it. Jealousy is bad, but it appears like it works out for January in the end...Ah well, an enjoyable story nonetheless.

I was not expecting the Merchant’s Tale to pull me in so many different directions but he does! In the beginning of the tale, I was all on board with his long spiel about how amazing and wonderful it is to have a wife. As a wife, I know I'm pretty awesome so I appreciated the acknowledgement. But, then January (by the way, what a name!) comes into the scene and starts talking about his specifications for a wife. I mean, she can’t even be older than 20 so I guess all of us over-20s are just doomed forever. It's cool; those women didn't want to be ol' Jan's wife anyway.  After dealing with January and his lovely character, I got some major Tristan and Isolde vibes coming from May and Damian and I was all for it! And then Hades and Persephone (Pluto and Proserpina) come in!? Be still my heart. The Merchant is ticking all my fan-girl boxes. However, at the very end of the tale I had a feeling we were dipping into biblical territory with May being tempted by Damian in t...

O thyng biseke I yow, and warne also, That  ye ne prikke with no tormentynge This tendre mayden, as ye han doon mo; For she is fostred in hire norissynge Moore, tendrely, and, to my supposynge, She koude nat adversitee endure As koude a povre fostred creature. (1037-1043) Giphy.com 

"Grisilde is deed, and eek hire patience, And bothe atones burned in Yitaille; For which I crie in open audience No wedded man so hardy be t'assasille His wives patience in trust to fynde Grisildis, for in certain he shal faille" (1177-1182) giphy.com

Why does the Summoner decide to roast the Friar rather than stick up for summoners? Why does he tell the story about friars in the devil's "tail" in his prologue in addition to telling a demeaning story about friars?

  Ther nys, ywys, no serpent so cruel, Whan man tret on his tayl, ne half so fel,  As womman is, whan she hath caught an ire; Vengeance is thanne al that they desire. (2001-2004)

And therfore may ye se that oure prayeres - I speke of us, we mendinantz, we freres - Be to the hye God moore acceptable Than youres, with youre festes at the table. Fro Paradise first, if I shal nat lie, Was man out chaced for his glotonye, And chaast was man in Paradis, certein. (1911-1917) (The Interview, 2014)

Having read and blogged about this woman before, I had a prior understanding on her liberal beliefs. 5 husbands sounds like a lot, but the Wife of Bath (Alison) is certain to justify herself and spends a lot of her introduction explaining and defending her choices, as well as delving into her marriages: good, bad, and ugly. She resents the idea that people accuse her of bigamy because her marriages are sequential and not simultaneous. I think Chaucer was probably making fun of the "gold-digger" or "black widow" tropes, but it doesn't quite work like that for me. To quote an idea I mentioned about the WoB in the aforementioned previous blog post, she gestures to the idea of not "following a rubric, and following her own path" which I still find empowering especially at a time where women weren't generally thinking like that/acting on it.

I have been waiting for the Wife of Bath and she’s here! Words cannot accurately express how much I love her. She’s one of those characters that has so much depth and it’s always so fascinating to read through all her layers to see how she became this bad-ass woman. Girlfriend is not afraid to break the mold and fit things towards her agenda. Taking Scripture and interpreting it so that she is absolved of marrying five times? That’s a bold move to just stomp on those double standards. Perhaps my favorite part after her little spiel about marriage is her actively talking about the crap women go through when tied to a man. She notes that men will often choose wives for a variety of vain reasons but then moan and gripe about her whether she’s rich, poor, ugly, pretty. Women can’t win in the world, but despite all the gender constraints on the Wife of Bath, she continues to do her thing and make the system work for her rather than against her. 

The Wife of Bath is my favorite character, without question. She’s an expert in all things relating to marriage and doesn’t care about authority, therefore, making her experiences far more worthwhile. In the time of Chaucer, women didn’t have many options when it comes to free will, so divorce was out of the question. But the Wife has been married five times, and I like how she takes the scripture of God and turns it around to benefit her. Nowhere in the bible can she find where it says women can’t be married more than once, so obviously, she’s the most reasonable human being in the Canterbury Tales. I also appreciate that the Wife is someone who has gone through a lot of hardships in her life, therefore losing her beauty, but she can live her life by her standards, and no one is going to diminish her happiness. 

I found it interesting that the Wife of Bath had so many biblical examples to defend her five marriages, which certainly would have made her story more appealing to the many clergy members on the pilgrimage. Although, scholarly, she favors experience. She takes a dominant role in her relationships and uses her sexuality to her advantage. I think it is also interesting that she mentions that the reason for sex is reproduction and argues it's importance in creating other virgins, but does not mention whether she has any children of her own. If she had any with her last husband, I assume they would have been disturbed when their parents got in a fist fight in the living room. I am also assuming she is def in one ear, as stated in the prologue, from the strike she took in the head from her husband that knocked her to the ground. It is impressive that she held her own against a grown man and defended what she believed in, especially considering the time it was written. She is a woman th...

" Our old-style position that objectivist neutrality is where medievalists should be no longer works, because it facilitates white supremacists/white nationalists/KKK/Nazis and their horrific deployment of the Middle Ages"  -Dorothy Kim "Teaching Medieval Studies in a Time of White Supremacy"  " The tale, like other crusading romances, demands to be understood through the lens of a medieval notion of racial identity that is characterized by religious and political difference." -Cord Whitaker "Race and Racism: The Man of Law's Tale" 

"Put simply: if you believe that public scholars are doing something that is necessary for the continuing health and popularity of our discipline, then you owe them your support when their work brings an abusive backlash." -- Sara Bond and Donna Zuckerberg "Support isn't a zero-sum game: withholding it from someone you consider privileged doesn't mean you'll have more to give to someone less privileged." -- Sara Bond and Donna Zuckerberg Quotes taken from "Whose Job Is It to Support a Harassed Scholar?" By Donna Zuckerberg