Chaunticleer Essay

8/12/2019 Chaunticleer Essay

1/8

The Canterbury Tales were written in 1386 by Geoffrey Chaucer. In "The

General Prologue," Chaucer introduces the on! as a rebellious erson

who does what he wants and does not follow the rules of the #onastery.

$owe%er, in the iddle &ges, #on!s could not beha%e this way. They had

to follow the rules of the #onastery which were written by 't. (enedict.

They too! %ows as roof that they would follow these rules. In the iddle

&ges, #on!s had to follow rules and be di%ided.

The rules for the #onasteries were written in )*+ by 't. (enedict. $e

was the leader of a #onastery and wanted to write a set of rules "that

were not so strict that #on!s would abandon their %ocations"Americana,

. )-*. They were si#le and allowed #on!s to e/ercise their #inds and

li%e stress0free li%es. The rules said that #on!s had to ray, erfor#

#anual labor, and study. The studying was beneficial to the #on!s since

they were able to beco#e well educated. The !nowledge gained fro#

studying led #any #on!s to write boo!s. &s art of their #anual labor,

they hand coied boo!s because /ero/ #achines were not in%ented yet.

&ccording to the ncycloedia ericana, in the #iddle &ges, #on!s in

#onasteries were di%ided into choir #on!s and lay brothers. This was a

way of di%iding the wor! because choir #on!s had to recite the rayer,

the 2i%ine ffice, which was a re4uire#ent in the rules. The lay brothers

did the #anual labor. $and coying boo!s robably too! a long ti#e and

they had a lot of other wor! to do, li!e studying and raying.

on!s in the iddle &ges had to follow the rules and be di%ided. It was

ad%antageous to be a #on! because all they did was de%ote their li%es to

studying and raying. 'ince they led stress free li%es, they were able to


2/8

concentrate on their studies. The di%ision of #on!s into lay brothers and

choir #on!s see#ed li!e an ad5ust#ent to the rule because the wor! was

di%ided whereas before, all the #on!s had to recite rayers and do

#anual labor. &lthough these acti%ities are different fro# the on!s

acti%ities, e%eryone did what they lo%ed. The #on!s followed the rules of

the #onastery while the on! rode horses and hunted hares.

Geoffrey Chaucer

The !nown details of Geoffrey Chaucers life are s!etchy at best. $e was

born in 7ondon to %intner ohn Chaucer so#eti#e between 13-+013--.

The ne/t we hear of young Geoffrey is in 13)9 as a age in the

household of Prince 7ionel. $e then ser%ed with the ar#y of dward III in

:rance, and was catured and ranso#ed. 'o#eti#e in the #id0136+s

Chaucer #arried Philia ;oet, lady in waiting to


3/8

&round 1389 Chaucer began his #aster wor!, The Canterbury Tales.

This lengthy oe#, which weighs in at an i#ressi%e 19,+++ lines, was

ne%er finished. It tells the tale of a grou of ilgri#s 5ourneying fro#

7ondon to the shrine of Tho#as @ (ec!et at Canterbury. To ass the ti#e

on their tri, they tell each other stories.

The stories the#sel%es are not always as i#ressi%e as is Chaucers

ability to %i%idly ortray a broad cross0section of nglish society, its

foibles, fancies, and attitudes. The Canterbury Talesare by turns bawdy,

hu#orous, and reaching, and the characters co#e ali%e.

Prior to Chaucers ti#e with the notable e/cetion of Aillia# 7anglands

Vision of Piers the Plowman, literary wor!s were written in 7atin. Chaucer

is rightly re#e#bered as the first #a5or author to oulari>e the use of

nglish in literature.

Geoffrey Chaucer died on ctober *), 1-++, and was buried at

Aest#inster &bbey.

Chaucer's The Nun's Priest's Tale

The Nun's Priest's Tale is 4uite different fro# all the rest of

Geoffrey Chaucers The Canterbury Tales because it reresents the

official historical start oint of the #oc!0heroic style and it is the uni4ue

beast fable to be found in this great wor! of genius. Therefore, whereasall the other tales deal with dialogs and actions of hu#an characters, this

tale is surrisingly concerned with ani#al characters li%ing in a far#. 'uch

ani#als Ba rooster, a hen and a fo/B sea! the hu#an language and


4/8

suffer fro# hu#an frailties so that they ser%e as hu#orous characters

designed to #a!e us laugh at real eoles %anity and %ices.

The Nun's Priests Tale is in essence a #erry tale which in its

surface see#s to only con%ey the #isfortunes that endures a coc! Bcalled

ChaunticleerB when he chooses to ignore the threatening #eaning of a

drea# in order to lease his lo%ely wife Ba beautiful and colourful hen

na#ed Pertelote. This tale is originally based in both a :rench story, Le

oman de enart! as well as in one of Aeso"'s #ables$ onetheless,

Chaucers tale greatly differs fro# the old style of beast fables because itintroduces significant changes to the original story that ser%e Chaucer to

use language in such a inno%ati%e #anner that actually gi%es birth to a

new literary genreD the #oc!0heroic.

ne of the #a5or differences fro# the original fable, that actually

ser%es Chaucer to create the #oc!0heroic style, is the fact that Chaucer

gi%es a great i#ortance to the drea# of Chaunticleer. ost of the tale

actually deals with the coc!s drea#, as well as with its discussion and

interretations. The Chaunticleers drea# is 4uite long and finely detailed

and fran!ly stands as the central oint of interest in the fable. &s a result,

while in Le oman de enart the drea# is #erely atte#ted to suly a

warn against %anity, in Chaucers %ersion we beco#e #ore interested in

!nowing the result of such of an a#ount of seculation on the rele%ance

of drea#s and beco#e increasingly interested in !nowing if Pertelote

who does not belie%e at all in the rele%ance of drea#s or Chaunticleer

who considers drea#s ha%e a real re#onitory signification will

ulti#ately be ro%en right. 'uch seculations and confrontations between


5/8

a gallant coc! and his fa%ourite hen are recisely the basis for the #oc!0

heroic style since they finally result in an incongruous Bor at least,

une/ectedB fusion of seeches and characters that necessarily arouse

an e/hilarating co#ic effect.

The hu#our in Chaucers #oc!0heroic style then basically dwells in

such reosterous incongruity of con%eying the life of a coc!, a fo/ and a

hen in a #anner assu#edly consider being #ore aroriate for an eic

or for a courtly lo%e story. The hu#our of the story also deends uon the

confrontation between the coo!s learned 4uotations of the authority ofthe &ncients and the hens aeal to si#le e/erience. Ahile

Chaunticleer is caable of 4uoting a wide Band i#ressi%eB range of

authorities to sustain his oinion about drea#s, Pertelote can scarcely

4uote two e/a#les of authorities whose e/erience with drea#s indicate

that drea#s are irrele%ant. Chaunticleers learned argu#ent is hu#orous,

first, because he is only a coc!, but also because we reali>e that all the

cases of significant and rohetic drea#s that he cites are only cited to

sohistically i#ly that his own drea# Bthe drea# of an insignificant

coc!B is also a ortent. In fact, Chaucer achie%es a co#ic hu#ani>ation

of Chaunticleer recisely by gi%en hi# a refined education and seechD

Chaunticleer #ay be an insignificant coc!, but is a coc! that can

#asterfully deal with abstractions, 4uote the words of reuted scholars,

and bring into his argu#ent the !nowledge and hilosohical concerns of

his own ti#e. In addition, to co#le#ent the hu#orous scene,

Chaunticleer and Pertelote flirt, argue, 4uarrel and feel lo%e as any hu#an

coule does. The fo/, by the way, is li!ewise gi%en hu#an0li!e seech


6/8

and he e%en e#loys a learned language of olite flattery and

ersuasi%eness to cheat Chaunticleer.

(ut in any case, it is e4ually i#ortant to notice that Chaucer ne%er

allows the reader to o%erloo! the co#ic incongruity of the situation since

he #a!es the narrator the nuns riest to continually re#e#ber to the

reader that these ele%ated seeches are said by ani#als and are said

into a s#all far#yard. 'o, the cheerful oosition between setting,

situation and characters always re#ains resent throughout the tale. The

whole tale is e%idently characteri>ed by its rhetorical usage of e/e#la,and by references to science and hilosohy that do not resond to the

basic con%entions of beast0fables and its ani#al characters. &nd 5ust as

the tale reaches its cli#a/, the narrati%e digressions of the nuns riest

beco#e #ore fre4uent and the final "#oral" of the tale is ne%er

una#biguously #anifested.

:inally, Chaunticleer and Pertelotes disutation about the truthful

#eaning of drea#s also ser%es Chaucer to hu#orously deal with a rather

old disute about the ossibility of finding any truth and useful #eaning in

tales that are essentially fictional, and therefore, al#ost always seen as

#ere #a!e0belie%e. Throughout The Nun's Priest's Talewe also beco#e

collaterally and hu#orously ac4uainted with dense hilosohical the#es

of Chaucers ti#e such as :ortune, :ate, :reedo# and Pro%idence. 'ince

Chaunticleer is not ready to face the announced disaster when it arri%es

and since he see#s to ha%e totally forgotten the celestial warnings,

#orality de#ands that he ay the rice of his negligence. Co#ically

enough, Chaunticleer escaes fro# the fo/ because he uses his 4uic!


7/8

thin!ing rather than because he has really learned anything for# his own

thoughtful considerations about the i#ortance of drea#s and its

warnings. $owe%er, it is worth0re#e#bering that the #ost significant

co#ic feature of the tale is the use of stylistic arody. &t se%eral oints of

the tale, the #ain characters, a coc! and a hen, Chaunticleer and

Pertelote, are described in ter#s better suited to the high0born characters

of courtly ro#ance. &t the cli#a/, the narrati%e funnily e#loys a %ariety

of e/cla#ations and literary references that would be better suited to a

heroic story of high significance.

Commentary

I really en5oy this boo! fro# the beginning to the end, each story

was so different and the characters were uni4ue. I en5oy the hu#or that

Chaucer rints to each story and The Nun's Priest's Tale was #y

fa%ourite of the all boo!. I li!e how the nun relates the storyE you really

belie%e that all the ani#als can tal!E you can feel their e#otions and all

the concerns. I ha%e to ad#it that for a #o#ent I identify #yself with

Chaunticleer, because so#eti#es you didnFt listen that little %oice in your

head that tries to warn you and instead of that you listen to otherFs eole

oinion and at the end you regret yourself for doing that. This tale is not

far away fro# the reality because we ha%e to struggle each day with

these concerns, with this lac! of faith in oursel%es and #ost of the ti#es

we let other eole decided for usE we tend to trust in the wrong eole

and when we reali>e it, itFs 5ust too late. This tale let us a great #essage

or as far I can understand it tells us to belie%e in oursel%es, trust in our

beliefs and ne%er let others to ta!e the decision for us.


8/8

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Geoffrey Chaucer. The Canterbury Tales. Penguin, U.S.A., 1969.

Oen, A. Char!e".Discussions of The Canterbury Tales.Hea#h $ Co%&any, Bo"#on, 1961.

Sher%an, Roger.A mirror of Chaucer's World. Prince#on Uni'er"i#y Pre"", Prince#on, (.). 196*.

Breer, +.S. Chaucer in His Time. ho%a" (e!"on, Lon-on, 196.

/agen0ne#ch, -ar- 2e-3. Chaucer: Modern Essays in Criticism. O4for- Uni'er"i#y Pre"", (. Y,

19*9.

Chaunticleer Essay

Documents

Transcript of Chaunticleer Essay