THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

CHAUCER’S USE OF SATIRE IN MULTIPLE GENRES WITHIN

THE CANTERBURY TALES

LOREN BASELER

SPRING 2020

A thesis

submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees

in English and French

with honors in English

Reviewed and approved* by the following:

Caroline D. Eckhardt

Professor of Comparative Literature and English

Thesis Supervisor

Carla Mulford

Professor of English

Honors Adviser

* Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College.

i

ABSTRACT

This thesis will focus on The Canterbury Tales as a representation of Chaucer’s mastery

over the conventions of literary genres, along with his all-encompassing mode of satire. It will

analyze critical theory in relation to genre studies on Chaucer, as well as conduct a close-reading

analysis on “The Knight’s Tale,” “The Miller’s Tale,” and “The Pardoner’s Tale.” These three

are selected because each exemplifies a fundamentally different genre, and the differences in

genre demonstrate how Chaucer uses multiple different genres with satiric effects. The analyses

included here will discuss the genre conventions within the stories that are both preserved and

broken within these three tales. They will also discuss the mode of satire as it is used in each

story, whether that story seems to have a primarily conventional use of its main genre or not. The

goal of this thesis is to allow the reader to see the prevalence of social satire in various parts of

Chaucer’s work in The Canterbury Tales and discuss how he uses satire to address multiple

themes in three of its important genres: romance, fabliau, and exemplum.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... iii

Chapter 1: Chaucer’s Awareness of Genre in The Canterbury Tales ......................... 1

Common Medieval Genres within The Canterbury Tales ............................................... 3 Choice of the Tales .......................................................................................................... 11

Chapter 2: The Knight’s Tale ..................................................................................... 12

Existing Scholarship ........................................................................................................ 12 Genre Analysis ................................................................................................................. 14

Chapter 3: The Miller’s Tale....................................................................................... 22

Existing Scholarship ........................................................................................................ 22 Genre Analysis ................................................................................................................. 23

Chapter 4: The Pardoner’s Tale .................................................................................. 33

Existing Scholarship ........................................................................................................ 33 Genre Analysis ................................................................................................................. 34

Chapter 5: Societal Critiques through “The Knight’s Tale,” “The Miller’s Tale,” and

“The Pardoner’s Tale” .......................................................................................... 42

Works Cited ................................................................................................................. 48

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank you to my parents for their unwavering support throughout my education. Thank

you to Mrs. Cowart from Franklin Area High School who first introduced me to The Canterbury

Tales and who reinforced my love for literature. Thank you to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Caroline

D. Eckhardt, for her detailed readings of my thesis. Her thoughtful comments and dedicated

guidance helped me to complete this thesis to the best of my ability. I also thank her for her

positive encouragement both in and outside of the classroom, as her instruction has helped me

become more successful not only as a Chaucerian, but also as a continued learner.

1

Chapter 1:

Chaucer’s Awareness of Genre in The Canterbury Tales

Throughout The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer uses satire to create commentaries on many

different aspects of his society, including its gender distinctions, other popular literature, social

class distinctions, and the role of the Church. He uses his tales to draw attention to the problems

associated with each of these categories, and his commentaries create an effective space for

satire to operate. Chaucer comments on his society through many different genres, perspectives,

and social classes in order to critique the ruling standards of his society. If we approach The

Canterbury Tales with the understanding that Chaucer wants to critique his society, then we can

see the appropriateness of satire in each genre that Chaucer utilizes.

Chaucer demonstrates his mastery and knowledge throughout The Canterbury Tales by

including a vast number of genres throughout his work. We can first see Chaucer’s manipulation

of genre by observing the work as a whole. The Canterbury Tales falls under the genre category

of a frame tale. Amanda Gerber discusses the qualities of a frame tale in her book Medieval

Ovid: Frame Narrative and Political Allegory in reference to many famous works including

Ovid’s Metamorphosis and also Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales. She states that “the frame

narrative . . . can be generally identified by the application of framing devices that interweave a

collection of shorter embedded stories” (3). Chaucer utilizes this tactic in The Canterbury Tales

as he sets up the prologue with the indication that each person present in the story will be able to

tell their own tales about whatever they want to share. Gerber goes on to discuss the flexibility

and inconsistencies within the genre of frame narratives as she says, “the genre, if it can even be

2

called such, often resists description owing to its capacity to encapsulate a multitude of genres

within its frame, its centuries of use, and its various cultural applications” (3). Gerber’s

hesitation about referring refer to frame narratives as a genre indicates the inconsistencies

throughout not only the works that are classified as such, but also the stipulations to classify a

work as a frame narrative. In fact, she refers to the inconsistences specifically when she states,

“the most consistent aspect of the frame narrative is its inconsistency . . . even more than its

function to gather materials, the frame narrative is defined by its interpretive context for

collected and juxtaposed tales” (3). By defining The Canterbury Tales as a frame narrative, we

recognize the expectation of different genres throughout the work. Chaucer uses this overall

genre for his work in order to enhance his ability to alter genre normative, as frame narratives

consist of smaller works within a whole.

At a first glance, it can seem as though Chaucer follows the conventions of a frame

narrative genre. Frame narratives allow different genres to be present in each work, as

mentioned, but the presence of great variety is not common. The other classic frame narratives

mentioned above tell different stories, but each story contributes to a greater meaning in its

entirety. Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales, however, does not seem stick to one theme

throughout. Chaucer’s tales have religious, social, and political messages that differ in each

story, and they do not culminate in an over-arching message for Chaucer’s readers. Even from

the onset of The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer breaks the expectations of his chosen genre, and this

breaking of genre sets up the rest of his narratives.

In the book A New Companion to Chaucer, Caroline D. Eckhardt discusses the vast

number of genres that are present in The Canterbury Tales and also the links between many of

those genres. She says, “Sometimes Chaucer builds extensive links between tales of different

3

genres, as if to put genres in conversation with each other, whether in a parodying relationship or

not” (Eckhardt 191). The recognition of Chaucer’s purposeful use of multiple genres and their

relationship to each other can be applied to his use of satire. He employs a number of different

genres in order to demonstrate the versatility of the function of satire, and satire is a mode

through which we can bind together “The Knight’s Tale,” “The Miller’s Tale,” and “The

Pardoner’s Tale.”

Common Medieval Genres within The Canterbury Tales

Chaucer’s choice of genre in The Canterbury Tales is based on other common genres and

traditions of medieval literature. One of the most common modes of existence of medieval

literature is the oral tradition that preceded it and accompanied written documents. The long oral

tradition that came before Chaucer’s time had heavily influenced many genres of written

literature, and the frame-tale genre is one of the genres that has been the most influenced. Lee

Haring discusses the importance of the oral tradition in the frame narrative in his article

“Framing in Oral Narrative.” Haring discusses this tradition in relation to A Thousand and One

Nights, but his arguments remain relevant to other works within the frame-narrative genre.

Haring states that A Thousand and One Nights, “shows the literary imitation of that orally

invented device; it standardizes the movement from one story into the next” (229). The framing

genre was built directly from the tradition of telling stories to other people, and Chaucer

emulates this tradition in The Canterbury Tales. Even though The Canterbury Tales was written

near the end of the medieval period where the written tradition had been more established,

Chaucer’s focus on stories that also circulated in oral tradition would have helped him appeal to

4

a medieval audience. Each of Chaucer’s tales could have also stood alone without the context of

the others, as if someone would have heard only one or two of the stories at a time. Thus,

Chaucer’s tales are effective individually as well as contributing to the work as a whole. Every

person who potentially heard the tales could take away a different message depending on the tale

and message behind it, and the impact remained whether they heard the rest of the stories or not.

As we know, Chaucer’s tales remained unfinished, but the effectiveness of each tale on its own

helped it remain popular for readers and researchers today.

In addition to the overall frame-tale genre, the Harvard website pages for Chaucer literary

studies discusses some of the other genres present in The Canterbury Tales and also the aspects

of these different genres. This section of the thesis will discuss the genres present in the three

chosen tales and the most common defining aspects of these genres. In later chapters, how these

expectations of genre were or were not met will be discussed in regard to each tale. The first

genre mentioned on Harvard’s website is the fabliau. “The Miller’s Tale” is classified as a classic

example of a fabliau. There are other examples of this genre in The Canterbury Tales including

the Reeve’s Tale, the Shipman’s Tale, and the Summoner’s Tale. Fabliaux often follow specific

genre conventions, as outlined by the following sources, but not every fabliau follows this form.

The characteristics outlined here are instead a common and recurrent pattern throughout different

fabliaux. The most common aspect of a fabliau is the comical tone of the story. Harvard’s

website cites The Riverside Chaucer to give the definition of a fabliau: “A fabliau is a brief,

comic tale in verse, usually scurrilous and often scatological or obscene” (7). The quote goes on

to discuss many other aspects that classify a fabliau as such. The characters are ordinary people,

often relatable to the common working-class at the time, yet it remains unordinary at the same

time. The characters are exaggerated in their gullibility, low morality, or sexuality, and while

5

seemingly fabliaux tell stories of every-day people, the actual characterizations of the people are

often unattainable (Riverside 7). The fabliau is a French genre that was popular in the thirteenth

century, but it fell out of popularity among the writers of Chaucer’s time. While there were

comedies, they lacked the obscenity and crudeness associated with the fabliau and were mostly

in prose rather than verse (Medieval Genres). Chaucer chose a genre that was not a common

among English writers at the time, and this choice is indicative of his desire to incorporate satire

and social commentary into each of his stories, since the fabliau is a near perfect genre for

satirical purposes. The Riverside Chaucer discusses the types of behaviors that are often

punished in fabliaux and how these behaviors do not always coincide with the standards set by

society, presumably the upper class. It states, “greed, hypocrisy, and pride are invariably

punished, but so too are old age, mere slow-wittedness, and, most frequently, the presumption of

a husband, especially and old one, who attempts to guard his wife’s chastity” (8). The fabliau has

satirical elements inherently, and it is these satirical elements that Chaucer capitalizes on in “The

Miller’s Tale.” The fabliau allows a reader to see the class distinctions in Chaucer’s society, and

his choice of this genre is a direct commentary on his society at the time.

Chaucer’s arguably most popular tale, “The Knight’s Tale,” is commonly referred to as

an example of medieval romance. There are many interesting aspects of this tale that could make

it the most popular, but the prevalence of medieval romance at the time probably led to its

popularity today. Chaucer’s use of a classic and popular genre of his time makes his alterations

and breaks of the genre evident when it is compared to other works in this genre. There are many

different types of medieval romance, and the genre itself contains a broad range of

characteristics. This analysis will focus on the most frequent genre conventions in medieval

romance, but does not encapsulate all of them. Geraldine Heng discusses the prevalence of the

6

medieval romance in her book Empire of Magic Medieval Romance and the Politics of Cultural

Fantasy. She says, “If romance did not begin in the Middle Ages, the genre is nonetheless so

indelibly marked by the Middle Ages – when it was arguably the most prominent, sophisticated,

and widely synonymous with medieval time itself” (2). The popularity of the medieval romance

genre is an important aspect to consider when analyzing Chaucer’s “Knight’s Tale” because of

subsequent breaking of the genre conventions. Yin Liu defines several aspects of a medieval

romance including the presence of supernatural figures, love as a guiding force, knights, and

fantastic battles (Liu). While not all medieval romances followed these genre conventions, many

of them contained these aspects of the genre, and Chaucer’s tale is no different. Chaucer seems

to focus on the marriage-type of medieval romance that usually includes the aforementioned

aspects. The medieval romance is a foundation for medieval literature, so Chaucer’s use of this

genre is another way for him to interject satire. Chaucer uses the most popular genre of his time

period to attract readers, and then he alters the genre conventions of the romance to criticize the

standards set by the genre. His ridicule of his society is evident in the changes he makes to his

romance, and these changes ultimately affect the entire reading of the story.

The final tale that this thesis will discuss is “The Pardoner’s Tale.” This tale is an

exemplum which is a story that is meant to teach a lesson to its readers. Exempla themselves

have many different styles as well, and the following sources outline only some of the common

characteristics that we see when analyzing the exemplum genre. There are many levels to the so-

called lessons that readers learn in “The Pardoner’s Tale,” and the importance of the lessons is

defined by the genre conventions of an exemplum. John Lyons discusses the convention of an

exemplum story in his book Exemplum: The Rhetoric of Example in Early Modern France and

Italy. Lyons claims that “once a text has advertised an example, the complexity, not to say

7

trickiness, of the relationships established is often completely unperceived to the reader” (ix). An

exemplum, thus, needs to be inferred by a reader the same way that one infers a metaphor or

other type of literary device. The difference lies in the subtleties of an exemplum. The story

teaches a lesson of some sort to the reader through the actions of the characters, and the reader is

meant to apply this learned lesson to their lives. Lyons discusses the applications of exemplum

when he says, “Example may therefore qualify as the most ideological of figures, in the sense of

being the figure that is most intimately bound to a representation of the world and that most

serves as a veil for the mechanics of that representation” (ix). Exemplum as a genre, as Lyons

argues, is the closest one can get to an actual representation of the real world within literature.

Using this interpretation of an exemplum, we can analyze Chaucer’s choice to use this genre as

another form of satire. The Pardoner in Chaucer’s tale is not one of good moral standing, and his

statements in his prologue prove to the audience that he is not a man to be trusted. Chaucer takes

the genre of exemplum that emphasizes trusting the figure providing the example and breaks it

by giving his audience an untrustworthy figure. This mockery of the genre provides an opening

for satire to play a critical role in the telling of “The Pardoner’s Tale.”

Chaucer utilizes each of these genres in order to break the conventions within their

respective genres, including elements of satire within each tale that leaves readers with a

comment and critique of his society. Thus, it is important to discuss the role of satire as a lens

through which to view other genres as well. Satire as a mode can be molded to fit into the

classifications of any genre, and it is this versatility that Chaucer capitalizes on in order to frame

each of his genres as satirical.

Satire is often considered a low form of literature even though it is also one of the most

widespread and easily accessible types of literature. Gilbert Highet says in the opening of his

8

book The Anatomy of Satire, “Satire is not the greatest type of literature” (3). Despite the ease of

subject, satire is often ranked below dramas and poetry. It is also a very common form of

literature, and many of the classic authors have written satirical works, such as Voltaire, Goethe,

Shakespeare, and many others. These authors used satire because of its relatability to an audience

and ease to communicate through. Highet says, “It pictures real men and women, often in lurid

colors, but always with unforgettable clarity. It uses the bold and vivid language of its own time,

eschewing stale clichés and dead conventions. Where other patterns of literature tend sometimes

to be formal and remote, satire is free, easy, and direct” (3). The people in satires are memorable

because of their extreme details. The characters are often bizarre, but still maintain close contact

with the reality of the reader. The realistic aspects of the characters are imperative to the

foundations of a satire, as the satire is used to leave a commentary on a social situation that the

reader most likely engages with on a regular basis. Satire also entertains the reader by using

vivid language. It can be difficult to read an entire play or drama for enjoyment because they

often lack language that will keep an audience engaged. The detailed language in many satires

keeps a reader’s focus, along with differentiating satire from other forms of literature that are not

as bold in their word choices. The last aspect of satire that Highet discusses is the formality that

often separates a text from a reader. Texts that use difficult language and a vast number of

literary devices are too formal for the average reader, and they may confuse the reader too much

and indirectly convince her to stop reading. Satire is a literary form that is accessible to everyone

who can read, despite an ability to analyze or think critically. While satire may not be considered

a great and classic form of literature, it remains one of the most direct and easy to understand

types of literature.

9

To be able to discuss the function of satire, it is important to understand how the author is

directly connected to the message of the work. Arthur Pollard discusses the satirist in his book

Satire. Pollard makes claims about the goals and attitude of the satirist as he is writing his work.

Pollard begins by claiming that it would be difficult to know a satirist personally because of his

subject matter. He says, “He is more than usually conscious of the follies and vices of his fellows

and he cannot himself from showing that he is” (1). A satirist comments on the issues he sees in

his daily life, so it would be difficult to see your personal bad habits be an inspiration for a

commentary on the problems of society. The satirist does not draw his satires from imagines

issues within society. Rather, he comments on the problems he sees every day in his life. Pollard

also discusses the potential consequences that come with being a satirist, such as “he can so

easily lay himself open to the charge of moral superiority or even of hypocrisy if people think

that they see in him the faults he condemns in others” (1). It is in this instance of moral

superiority that people find faults within the satirist himself, either because the artist actually

commits the acts he is condemning or because they see the act in themselves. In the latter

instance, it would be natural for a reader to attempt to find fault in the satirist because he

emphasized their particular flaw. Pollard also discusses how a satirist and a preacher share

similar roles in that they both attempt to “persuade and convince” but the satirist’s position “in

relation to those he addresses is more delicate and more difficult than that of a preacher” (1). The

comparison of a preacher and a satirist helps us to understand the level of persuasion that a

satirist must possess. Pollard goes on to discuss the particularities of his comparison between the

satirist and the preacher: “The latter seeks primarily to make his hearers accept virtue; the former

must make his readers agree with him in identifying and condemning behavior and men he

regards as vicious. These men are our fellow-beings, and the vast majority of us would prefer not

10

to condemn” (1). The satirist, then, is taking a risk in condemning is fellow-man. If he is to

condemn someone’s behaviors, he must convince every person who reads his satire that they too

should condemn those behaviors which goes against human nature, according to Pollard. Thus,

the satirist’s goal is often one of persuasion of the audience rather than simply drawing attention

to an issue.

Pollard also discusses the enjoyment of condemning a social structure that the satirist

receives from writing the satire and the reactions of the audience. Pollard says, “He [the satirist]

asks us to admire the skill . . . to recognize him as an artist and satire as an art. This desire,

however, is usually implicit” (1-2). The satirist receives enjoyment out of critiquing society,

according to Pollard, because he is able to articulate it in such a unique way, but this happiness

from constructing such a societal commentary is not the most rewarding aspect. The most

important aspect of creating a satire for the satirist is the more serious intent behind the writing.

This intent is to persuade the audience into the satirist’s belief system in order to condemn

certain behaviors that the author sees in their society. Each satire differs in theme and application

to reality because every satirist despises certain characteristics of others, and those characteristics

may not be the same from person to person. Because the satire as a type of literature is a social

commentary or ridicule, it is critical to the analysis to understand the satirist’s motivations in

writing.

Both readers and researchers can analyze the function of satire by considering satire not

as a separate genre but as an idea or mode that is moldable into numerous different genres.

Chaucer uses in the latter method, as the analysis of this paper suggests. If we were to study

satire as a genre, however, there are certain aspects, mentioned above, that are common and

representable throughout all many such works.

11

Choice of the Tales

The three aforementioned tales have all been extensively researched, whether on their

own or in relation to one another. “The Knight’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Tale” are researched in

relation to each other, for example, because their storylines are similar, the characters interact

outside of the tales themselves, and many other parallels exist between the two. “The Pardoner’s

Tale,” however, has no obvious link to the other tales. This thesis focuses on the adaptability of

satire to fit many different genres. Satire can function in every genre that Chaucer utilizes, and

these three tales combined encompass the genres of many of his tales. Through these three

examples one can see the plasticity of satire in The Canterbury Tales as the genres and function

of satire are analyzed.

12

Chapter 2:

The Knight’s Tale

Existing Scholarship

In order to understand the value that Chaucer places on genre, it is necessary to discuss

his source material and the political and social climate of the time. Chaucer takes the idea for

“The Knight’s Tale” from Teseida delle Nozze d’Emilia by Giovanni Boccaccio, and he alters

not only the content of the poem, but also the length and style. It was common for medieval

writers to borrow ideas from other sources, but Chaucer varies greatly from his original material

“The Knight’s Tale” is significantly shorter in length and focuses primarily on the fight for love.

Many of the military fights in the original poem are glossed over by Chaucer, such as the victory

that Theseus has at Thebes. Chaucer seems to include that only in order to give background

information about why Emily is important to Theseus. Chaucer also uses the romance genre to

deliver a political message in a subtle way. Byung-Yong Son discusses the politics behind

Chaucer’s choice in the romance genre for “The Knight’s Tale” stating, “Therefore, to lessen the

burden and avoid a political controversy, he appropriated and transformed the convention of

romance” (Son). Son goes on to discuss Chaucer’s upbringing, saying that he was “a son of rich

merchant and served as a bureaucrat, courtier and diplomat” (Son). These circumstances caused

Chaucer be reserved in his presentation of political messages. He could not be direct with his

social commentary because of his position in government, so he uses Theseus in “The Knight's

Tale” to give commentary on how he believes a king should act.

13

Son argues that “The Knight’s Tale” is not truly a story about romance, as the

relationship among Arcite, Palamon, and Emily is “no interactive relationship” (Son). Instead,

Chaucer uses the genre to portray Theseus “as merciful and powerful king. He shows mercy to

begging ladies and defeats Old Creon. However, he imprisons Palamon and Arcite, and never

intends to set them free” (Son). Even later, Theseus spares the lives of Palamon and Arcite and

proposes the tournament instead. Son claims that Chaucer uses Theseus in order to comment on

how a king should “use his political ability to tide over a difficult situation and value the opinion

of Parliament” (Son). Chaucer’s political commentary is subtle and well-hidden throughout the

poem, but it is present in the depiction of Theseus as a just king who pities and helps others in

need. The use of the romance genre allowed Chaucer to seemingly tell a story that involved a

king and knights while being able to discreetly send a message to anyone reading his poem about

how kings should act toward the people they are ruling. It is also plausible that Chaucer simply

wanted to write a story in which he knew people would be interested. There are many unknown

authors (and therefore, unknown audiences) in medieval literature, but knowing about Chaucer’s

life allows readers to understand his knowledge of written works before him. Writers more often

than not need to adjust their material and content to reflect popular literature of the time. If a

work is too drastic or different, there is an immense possibility that it will not be read by anyone.

Chaucer uses the popularity of the medieval romance genre to his advantage, but he alters some

conventions of the genre to make his story stand out from those before him.

J.R. Hulbert discusses the reasoning behind altering the characters and other aspects of

Bocaccio’s original, and he claims that Chaucer alters these aspects because of audience

expectation. He states in his conclusion that “Chaucer wrote for medieval readers, imbued with

certain special theories” (Hulbert 385). This idea implies that Chaucer made his decisions based

14

on what he believed would entertain his audience the most. While Hulbert has claimed that

Chaucer’s changes were indicative of his awareness of audience, I argue that Chaucer did the

opposite. I agree that Chaucer wrote with his audience in mind and that his changes were for his

audience, but I believe the changes have more significance than how entertained Chaucer wanted

his audience to be. Chaucer chose a story that people would have been familiar with and changed

aspects in order to further his use of satire. The following analysis will explain how Chaucer’s

choices to stray from genre and source material convention are directly related to his satirical

arguments with The Knight’s Tale.

Genre Analysis

Since some of the possible reasons for Chaucer’s genre alterations have been established, it is

now valuable to look at where he uses genre conventions in order to further his plot and themes

in “The Knight’s Tale.” One of the most obvious conventions that Chaucer uses is the presence

of a hero. While most medieval romance genres only have one knight as the central figure in the

narrative, Chaucer has two. Palamon and Arcite are very similar characters, and readers do not

feel an allegiance to one character more than the other. Chaucer presents both characters in a

similar way with the only differences being how they are separated from Emily and which of the

characters saw her first in the tower. Palamon and Arcite are both knights who have been

defeated in a war, but their lives were graciously saved by a just and piteous king. Both knights

are locked in a tower for their crime of being on the “wrong” side of the war. However, Arcite is

eventually released from the prison because of a friend’s pleas to Theseus, and he is told to never

return under penalty of death. Arcite is told that if he is found, “In any contree of this Theseus, /

15

And he were caught, it was acorded thus, / That with a swerd he sholde lese his heed” (1213-

1215). Palamon also leaves the prison, but he leaves by drugging a guard and escaping the tower.

These similar circumstances create characters that make it difficult for an audience to choose a

side in the fight over Emily. Chaucer’s refusal to favor one character over another can be

analyzed in multiple ways. He may have wanted readers to feel positively at the end of the story

no matter who won, and this is made possible by eliminating the option of rooting for a

character. When we consider how Chaucer creates Emily as a character, however, one could

argue that he created a situation where readers did not prefer either knight because he recognized

that we should not support those who battle over a woman without her input on the matter.

Chaucer makes it much easier to connect with Emily as a character, and his characterization of

her combined with his choice to not separate the two male characters is indicative of his use of

satire. Chaucer makes a commentary on stories who do not give women agency, and he goes

against this idea with his representation of the knights and Emily.

The two characters are also similar in their descriptions of love for Emily. The narrator

describes both knights as being hurt by their love for her by saying, “And with that sighte hir

beautee hurte him so, / That, if that Palamon was wounded sore, / Arcite is hurt as muche as he,

or moore” (1114-1116). It is at this point in the story that Palamon and Arcite are driven by love.

The plot becomes one of romance and striving for love, and Palamon and Arcite fight each other

for the right to Emily. They fight valiantly, as knights do, even starting with a fight to the death

for her. It is only with the intervention of Theseus that they choose to handle the conflict in a

tournament, which is arguably an even more chivalric ideal. It is through this fight that the

supernatural elements of the story are introduced, which is another common convention of the

medieval romance genre.

16

The supernatural forces in “The Knight’s Tale” are the Roman gods and goddesses that

are present in the story. There are four gods that are influential in the outcome of the story and

each of them takes allegiance with a character in the narrative: Mars, the god of war, is

associated with Arcite; Venus, the goddess of love, is associated with Palamon; Diana, the

goddess of chastity, is associated with Emily; and Saturn, god of the harvest, who controls all of

the fates of the characters. Mars, Diana, and Venus are described in great detail as Theseus

builds the temple in their honor. Their presence in the story is more valuable to Chaucer than

simply having supernatural beings be a part of his narrative. One of Chaucer’s main themes in

“The Knight’s Tale” is how fate is prevalent in the lives of the characters (and also in the lives of

those who are reading his poem). Saturn, in particular, provides an uneasy feeling about fate’s

control over the lives of humans. Saturn discusses his control over the death of humans in a long

catalogue of horror, stating, “My cours, that hath so wyde for to turne, / Hath moore power than

woot any man . . . My lookyng is the fader of pestilence” (2454-2469). Saturn is able to control

the outcome of the battle, even if Mars is going to intervene. The battle between the two knights

has now become a battle among the gods who have the true control over their lives. Their control

is exhibited whenever all of the prayers of the characters come true: Arcite wins the battle,

Palamon marries Emily, and Emily is given the husband that cares for her most (as deemed by

Venus, the goddess of love). Chaucer's choice of using Roman gods to exhibit control over the

characters’ lives is a logical one that emphasizes his view that fate is inevitable and

uncontrollable. The idea of fate versus free will is another common theme in medieval literature,

and Chaucer capitalizes on this by using other conventions of medieval literature.

While it is important to recognize where Chaucer remained true to the medieval romance

genre, the real importance of “The Knight’s Tale” lies in his changing of the genre. Chaucer uses

17

multiple subtleties in order to stay true to what his audience expects from a medieval romance

story, and he ultimately provides a resolution to the story as well. However, his alterations

provide more depth for the characters and plot line than following the genre would have.

One of the most drastic changes that Chaucer makes is the exclusion of an adventure.

Most often, when there is a knight in a medieval narrative, he must go on an adventure. His goal

is to complete his quest, whatever that quest may entail. Chaucer eliminates the quest and

adventure entirely and focuses solely on the relationship among the three characters and their

relationship to fate. Walter Wadiak focuses on Chaucer’s exclusion of adventure in his article

titled, “Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale and the Politics of Distinction.” Wadiak claims that Chaucer’s

deletion of an adventure in a tale about to knights is a direct response to his want to change the

predictability of his text. Chaucer is critiquing the commonality of all knight’s tales: a woman is

captured, one knight risks his life and presents chivalric values in order to save her, he saves her,

and then they live together happily. Chaucer includes none of this in “The Knight’s Tale.” In

contrast, the knights are the ones who are captured rather than the womanly love interest. Emily

is actually content with her situation with Theseus and even prays to remain unmarried during

her time in the temple: “I / Desire to ben a mayden al my lyf, / Ne nevere wol I be no love ne

wyf” (2304-2306). There are also two knights rather than one, and neither is extremely chivalric.

While they are both willing to die for Emily, they must be convinced to participate in the

tournament. Both fight fairly, but readers do not see them as true heroes of the story. Another

contrast is that the winner of the battle does not win the love of the woman. Instead, it is the loser

who wins the love, and the winner dies. Wadiak addresses this predictability when he says, “ I

argue instead that Chaucer subverts romance adventure as it is conventionally understood not

because adventure is too “masculine” but because it names for him what is predictable and

18

debased about the mass of English romances” (Wadiak 164). Chaucer wants to set his poem

apart from others, and he does this by straying fairly far from the predictable plot line of the

medieval romance genre. This is only one instance in which Chaucer recognizes a genre

convention and then completely alters it in order to make his story memorable. The lack of

adventure is more subtle than completely changing an element of the story, but it is enough that

Chaucer’s work stands out while remaining relevant to his audience.

Another prominent change in Chaucer’s “The Knight’s Tale” is the sense of female

agency that he gives Emily. Again, Chaucer seemingly follows the expected characterization of a

woman in medieval literature: she is the object of knightly affection, and she is not allowed to

make decisions about her own life. Theseus, after taking Emily along with his wife from Thebes,

believes that he can control what happens to Emily. He discusses giving her to Palamon and

Arcite as if he is discussing giving away a piece of land. Theseus says, “That wheither of yow

bothe that hath myght, / This is to seyn, that wheither he or thow / May with his hundred, as I

spak of now, / Sleen his contrarie, or out of lystes dryve, / Thanne shal I yeve Emelya to wyve”

(1856-1860). Palamon and Arcite both treat Emily as though she has no choice in loving them.

Neither of the men thinks to solve the problem of their argument by asking Emily who she would

want to marry. Instead, they take it upon themselves to argue over her based on who saw her

first. Even at the end of the poem, it is difficult to see how Emily has any control over her life,

since she asked to remain unmarried and gets married to Palamon anyway. However, once one

delves deeper into Emily's character and Chaucer’s representation of her, it becomes clearer that

Chaucer wanted to give Emily a sense of choice and control over her own life, even more so than

the two knights in the story.

19

Even though Palamon, Arcite, and Emily all pray to Roman deities in the temple, Emily

is the only one who is actually spoken to by a god. This sign alone is important to the idea that

Emily has control over her life. The two knights receive signs from their respective deities, but

Emily is worth a conversation to the goddess Diana. While Diana denied her request to remain

unmarried, it is the conversation and the promise of love that remains important throughout the

rest of the poem. Diana says to her, “Doghter, stynt thyn hevynesse. / Among the goddes hye it is

affermed, / And by eterne word writen and confermed, / Thou shalt ben wedded unto oon of tho /

That han for thee so muchel care and wo” (2348-2352). Diana’s denial of Emily’s request to

remain unmarried is not an act of oppression because she is a woman and has no choice in the

matter. Instead, Diana tells her that fate has decided that she cannot choose because it has already

been written, not because she is a woman. This idea plays into Chaucer's theme of fate being

inevitable to both the characters in the poem and the people reading the poem. Chaucer uses

Diana’s conversation with Emily to demonstrate that fate has determined what is going to happen

to her, even if the men in her life believe that they control what happens to her.

Emily is the only one whose future is determined by fate rather than godly intervention.

Mars answers Arcite’s prayer and gives him victory, and Venus answers Palamon’s prayer by

asking Saturn to help her, which ultimately gives Emily to Palamon through Arcite’s death.

Emily’s prayer is answered because the goddess of love knew Palamon loved her the most,

which was the second part of her prayer to Diana. Emily recognizes that she cannot control fate

and is one of the only characters who can see outside of her personal wants for her life. Chaucer

gives Emily a sense of agency and control over her life because she can see the forces beyond

her control that influence her life, and she accepts these forces. Before she leaves the temple, she

voices her confusion about Diana’s message aloud, but she also states her trust in Diana to

20

protect her. Emily says, “What amounteth this, allas? / I putte me in thy proteccioun, / Dyane,

and in thy disposicioun” (2362-23634). Angela Weisl states that Chaucer pushes, “boundaries

(the glass ceiling that defines roles, positions, and possibilities), testing the genre's limits ... to

show both its confines and its potential" (Weisl 3). He pushes these genre boundaries through his

representation of Emily in “The Knight’s Tale.” Most women in medieval romance genre are

only the object of a man’s attention, and they rarely have speaking parts, let alone control over

their lives. Chaucer uses Emily to present a different ideal of women in medieval literature, but

he does it in a subtle way that will not make his readers question whether his work is relevant to

the current time period.

One of the most striking differences between Chaucer’s work and the conventional

medieval romance genre is the ending that Chaucer provides. Resolution is a major part of the

genre, and Chaucer does give a resolution of some sort in the poem. However, he also combines

the resolution and “happy” ending with one of tragedy. Not only is there death at the end of the

poem, but it is the death of Emily’s deserved winner. Arcite and Palamon battled, and Arcite

won the tournament. However, due to godly intervention, Arcite dies and can no longer marry

Emily. Although his death is in Chaucer’s source material, Chaucer does not have Emily marry

Arcite before he dies. Instead, readers get a proclamation from Arcite that Palamon deserves to

marry Emily because, “So worthy to ben loved as Palamon, / That serveth yow, and wol doon al

his lyf. / And if that evere ye shul been a wyf, / Foryet nat Palamon, the gentil man” (2794-

2797). Chaucer’s ending is not one of total resolution, and it leaves readers with an uneasy

feeling before the ultimate resolution. Egeus, the father of Theseus, goes on to discuss the world

being a “thurghfare ful of wo, / And we been pilgrymes, passynge to and fro; / Deeth is an ende

of every worldly soore” (2847-2849). This imagery is dark and unsettling for readers, but it

21

enforces Chaucer’s theme of fate being uncontrollable. People are simply passing through life,

and they have little to no control over what fate has determined for them. Shortly after this,

Chaucer ends his tale with “For now is Palamon in alle wele, / Lyvyng in blisse, in richesse, and

in heele; / And Emelye hym loveth so tendrely, / And he hir serveth so gentilly, / That nevere

was ther no word hem bitwene / Of jalousie, or any other teene” (3101-3106). Chaucer’s

resolution exists because Palamon and Emily are stated to live happily together and leaves

readers feeling satisfied at the end of his tale, but he varied greatly from the conventional

resolutions of the medieval genre. This underlying sense of unsettling knowledge about the

future remains throughout the end of his poem, but it is combated by Chaucer’s addition of a

“happily ever after” statement.

22

Chapter 3:

The Miller’s Tale

Existing Scholarship

Most of the existing scholarship on “The Miller’s Tale” focuses on relationships between

the characters or the genre of the fabliau. In his journal article titled “The English Fabliau

Tradition and Chaucer’s ‘Miller’s Tale,’” Robert E. Lewis outlines the aspects of the French

fabliau and then relates these aspects to the history of the English fabliau. Lewis makes the

argument that while the commonly accepted genre of French fabliau existed at Chaucer’s time,

the English fabliau existed as well. He argues that Dame Sirith is not only an example of an

English fabliau but also a likely precedent for “The Miller’s Tale.” He cites word commonalities

between the two stories, and he makes his claims based on the idea that “The Miller’s Tale” is

more similar (in terms of the genre conventions of the English fabliau, as he calls it) to Dame

Sirith than the French tradition of fabliau. He says:

There must have been an English fabliau tradition before Chaucer and if Dame Sirith is

representative of that tradition–and I like to think it is because it has a spirit and a

dramatic technique that are quite different from the French–then Chaucer had a precedent

and a model in the tradition for the diction and the parody that he puts into “The Miller’s

Tale.” (Lewis 255)

Lewis focuses, as many other scholars do, on the conventions of Chaucer’s fabliau that differ

from the French tradition. His reasoning that there was another model for Chaucer to follow is

supported by his research, yet he does not discuss the similarities between the French tradition

and the English fabliau. While there are differences, there are also numerous similarities that

23

lend themselves to a French tradition altered into Chaucer’s preferred writing language.

Additionally, Lewis does not seem to discuss the specific elements of the fabliau that are altered,

and I believe that there is significance in each omission or addition that Chaucer makes to genre

convention. In thischapter, I will discuss how Chaucer’s choices in characterization and genre

convention were purposeful, and that his purpose is to critique the society surrounding the

Miller. Chaucer uses the conventions of the French fabliau yet writes in English because it

furthers his satirical basis.

Genre Analysis

Chaucer’s “The Miller’s Tale” is a perfect example of the genre of fabliau. As outlined in

the “Genres” chapter of this thesis, the fabliau implies a certain level of satire. This section will

first examine how “The Miller’s Tale” fits into the genre of fabliau, and the significance of this

story in relation to “The Knight’s Tale” for a satirical purpose. Then, I will discuss the societal

implications of the tale and what this choice of satire reveals about Chaucer’s values and society

at the time.

One of the most obvious characteristics of the fabliau is the format of the tale. It is

written entirely in verse with rhymes. Most fabliaux in English literature at the time were written

in prose, so Chaucer reverts to the original format of the French fabliau in order to write his tale.

Chaucer’s choice to return to an older form of the fabliau tells his audience from the beginning

that he is not interested in following a strictly contemporary genre convention. Chaucer did not

choose the fabliau because it was currently a popular genre of literature in English, as he may

have done with “The Knight’s Tale.” Instead, he chose a form that had been altered drastically

24

from its original and chose that original format to follow. Not only does this establish Chaucer as

a well-rounded and knowledgeable writer, but it also keeps his audience interested in his work.

Even if the story itself is not extremely appealing to a specific audience, the presence of genre

alteration and difference from other works at that time creates a place for readers to be interested.

The second aspect of the fabliau that readers see in the tale itself is the presence of a working-

class character who interacts regularly with someone in the class above him. The Miller begins

his tale with “Whilom ther was dwellyng at Oxenford / A riche gnof, that gestes heeld to bord /

And of his craft he was a carpenter. / With hym ther was dwellyng a poure scoler, / Hadde lerned

art, but al his fantasye / Was turned for to lerne astrologye” (3187-3192). The young scholar,

later named as Nicholas, is a poor student who wants to learn astronomy. We learn as the tale

goes on that Nicholas lives with the rich carpenter whose name is John. John’s wife, Alisoun, is

young and beautiful, and Nicholas is captivated by her. From the first lines of the poem, readers

know that there will be issues of class distinction throughout the poem. These class distinctions

are important in a fabliau because fabliaux often critique the behaviors of the upper class,

especially if these punishments are in favor of the working-class. At the top of the economic

hierarchy in this household is John, the rich carpenter. He is placed economically higher than

Nicholas and the fourth character, Absalon. We learn from the second page of the tale, however,

that while John is higher in monetary distinction, his morals are not superior to others. The

Miller says, “Men sholde wedden after hire estaat, / for youthe and elde is often at debaat”

(3229-3230). This statement occurs early in the tale, and it causes the reader to question not only

age differences (youth and old age) but also the societal structures that were enforced in the

Middle Ages. Instead of assuming that the rich carpenter deserves sympathy and understanding

for his choices, the Miller expresses contempt for him. Because readers question the integrity of

25

John, we question the existence of the social structure, specifically in relation to morality, as a

whole. This distinction between social structures remains important throughout the entirety of

the tale, and it is the basis of the punishments that occur for the characters at the end of the tale.

Another aspect of the fabliau that Chaucer follows is the exaggerated nature of his

characters. While fabliaux have relatable, working-class characters, they remain exaggerated and

potentially unattainable in nature. Absolon, for example, represents the extremes of a man who

pines after a woman whom he cannot have. Absolon goes to sing to Alisoun every day, despite

her warnings that she is not interested in him. The Miller says, “This passeth forth: what wol ye

bet than weel? / Fro day to day this joly Absolon / So woweth hire, that hym is wo bigon. / He

waketh al the nyght and al the day” (3370-3373). The persistence of Absolon represents an

exaggerated version of a love-struck man because no average man would stay somewhere day

and night to beg for love from a married woman. John is also exaggerated, even though his

requests are seemingly not absurd. To a contemporary audience, an old man marrying an

eighteen-year-old has implications, but her youth is not John’s main focus. Instead, he is focused

on keeping her from sexual endeavors outside of their marriage. This request is normal in a

marriage, but it is the way in which John acts that creates the exaggerated aspects of his

character. In the same passage that cast doubt on John’s morality, the Miller says that “Jalous he

was, and heeld hir narwe in cage” (3224). John goes to the extent of making his wife feel trapped

in a cage which is much more drastic than a man who simply wants his wife to remain faithful.

These exaggerated characters help to enhance the satirical elements of the story as they embody

a basic character turned obsessive, just as satire takes a basic human vice and crafts a societal

commentary out of it.

26

The tale is also obviously comical and obscene with the scene that involves the kissing of

Alisoun’s “naked ers” and the branding of Nicholas. These scenes are also extremely dramatized

and cause the reader to understand that there is a level of exaggeration in the characters. Chaucer

makes the characters relatable enough to the working class, but they can truly appreciate the

story when they are separated from it. If the situations and the characters were too realistic in a

fabliau, then the working class may not enjoy it as much. They may feel as though they cannot

read a raunchy, crude story based on people that actually exist. A fabliau is supposed to entertain

and make people laugh, and the suffering and punishment that the characters face in a fabliau

would complicate the entertainment by inducing sympathy from the audience. Chaucer chooses

to adhere to the genre convention here because if he did not, he may lose a reader’s interest in his

story which would affect the reading of the rest of his tales.

The obscenities in the story drastically differ from the positivity and upper-class language

of “The Knight’s Tale.” If we compare the descriptions of Emily versus the description of

Alisoun, we see the stark contrast. As previously mentioned in the chapter on “The Knight’s

Tale,” Chaucer’s description of Emily is elegant and heightened, making her seem other-worldly.

We understand that Emily is a true lady by medieval standards and thus, worthy of the battle that

ensues between the two men. The description we receive of Alisoun, however, gives us no sign

of worthiness to the two men. Nearly every seemingly positive comment that the Miller notes

about Alisoun is compromised by an insult. For example, the first line of description we receive

about Alisoun is “Fair was this yonge wyf, and therwithal / As any wezele hir body gent and

smal” (3233-3234). While the adjectives small and graceful seem positive in relation to the

description of a woman, Chaucer then adds an animal the encapsulates her smallness and

graceful nature: a weasel. Weasel’s are often considered sneaky and sly which completely

27

contradicts the adjectives that were previously assigned to Alisoun. The entire passage continues

in this manner of giving seemingly positive descriptions of Alisoun, only for Chaucer to insert a

small piece that changes the entire meaning of the description. Readers know from the very

beginning description of Alisoun that she is a very different woman from Emily, who was

described in the same situation with two men pining after her. Chaucer’s direct contrast of Emily

and Alisoun shows his awareness of not only the basis of a fabliau but also of his stories within

the context of one another.

Chaucer also characterizes Alisoun by giving her a voice and agency. Similarly, to how

Emily had the ultimate influence on the outcome of the tournament, Alisoun seems to have the

final say in her life as well. Chaucer gives Alisoun a number of speaking lines, and these lines

are indicative of Alisoun’s control over her situation. Although Alisoun does not speak as much

as her male counterparts, the meaning behind Alisoun’s words is more important than the

number of speaking parts she is given. Sophie Marnett wrote an article that compares the voices

of men and women in different fabliaux, and she discusses not only the frequency of men

compared to women but also the length of speaking done at each time: “Une approche globale du

corpus montre que les fabliaux ont tendance à présenter les homme comme parlant et pensant

plus souvent que les femmes” (Marnett 115). This tendency for men to speak (and think) more

often than women is contradicted, however, by the amount of time that male and female

characters spend speaking: “En effet, le nombre de fabliaux où les paroles et les pensées des

hommes sont plus longues que celles des femmes équivaut à celui où c’est le contraire” (Marnett

115). This study helps us to understand the trends for the fabliaux in reference to female

speaking parts, and we see that Alisoun speaks less than the men in the story. Her speaking parts,

however, are integral to her character. For example, when she submits to Nicholas’s advances,

28

the Miller says, “That she hir love him graunted atte laste” (3290). Alisoun grants her ‘love’ to

Nicholas rather than submitting to him. While her thoughts and words are fewer than the male

characters, they are of great importance for her agency.

Another potential way of viewing the contrast between Emily and Alisoun is through the

social dynamics presented to the audience. One of the key aspects of a fabliau is the focus on the

working class, specifically those who are affected by a higher power. While John does not

represent the upper class in the medieval social strata, we know that he holds a higher position

than Nicholas as Nicholas boards with him during his time as a student. Even though John does

not hold a higher social position than Nicholas when compared to those actually in the upper

class, there is a distinct separation between John and Nicholas. There is even more of a

separation when we compare this tale to “The Knight’s Tale.” Palamon and Arcite are

technically of a higher class than every character in this story, so their lower class and obscenity

is even more noticeable. By placing “The Miller’s Tale” directly after “The Knight’s Tale,”

Chaucer makes his audience aware of class distinctions not only within “The Miller’s Tale” but

also within the tale in relation to the other tales. This separation is necessary to the foundation of

a fabliau, and he follows the same idea in relation to Emily and Alisoun. Readers may

sympathize with Emily who is the object of attention for two different men but seemingly has no

control over her situation. Emily does not get to choose, but Alisoun does. Alisoun takes action

against Absolon and her husband by participating in their punishments. Chaucer gives Alisoun

the agency that Emily did not have. The class distinctions, even though they are a classic part of

the fabliau, create a satirical commentary on the role of women in Chaucer’s society. He seems

to suggest that women in the lower class have more power than those in the upper class. Chaucer

directly critiques the role of women in upper classes by placing Alisoun and Emily in the same

29

position and giving Alisoun more control over her life. Chaucer’s critiques of the roles that

women play in society directly relate to the satirical elements that are usually a component in

fabliaux. Chaucer breaks this genre convention, though, by critiquing a facet of society that

remained uncritiqued by nearly everyone in Chaucer’s lifetime.

Another convention of the fabliau that Chaucer uses to create elements of satire in “The

Miller’s Tale” is the behaviors that are punished in the tale. Often, social standards for morality

are set by the upper class. In the middle ages, the upper classes, in conventional terms is not

always in economic reality, are the clergy and the nobility. The fabliau often critiques those

standards by punishing regularly established societal rules but also actions that go against these

standards. The only person in the tale who remains unpunished by others is Alisoun, and she is

not reproached by the other townspeople for not being punished. Alisoun not only cheated on her

husband, which is considered a major sin in the eyes of the Church, but she also lied and

embarrassed Absolon by having him kiss her behind rather than her lips. In the eyes of the

Church, Alisoun committed one of the worst sins out of all of the characters in the story, yet she

remains unpunished. Chaucer uses Alisoun as the prime example of the fabliau that mocks the

rules of the upper class, and he also uses the other characters to demonstrate this idea.

Absolon is punished for continuously pining after Alisoun by both Alisoun and Nicholas.

It is specifically mentioned in the tale that flatulence makes Absolon squeamish, so the

punishment that he receives from Nicholas becomes even worse. Readers are aware of the

weight of this punishment because the mention of squeamishness seems awkward to include in

the description of Absolon as a character. We receive nearly thirty lines of description of

Absolon, only for that stanza to end with “But sooth to seyn, he was somdeel squaymous / of

fartyng” (3337). Chaucer wanted to ensure that readers were aware that the punishments Absolon

30

received for attempting to steal a married woman was the worst punishment he could receive,

and he does this by including a surprising line that readers will remember. Absolon’s behavior

fits the societal standards set by the upper class, so Chaucer follows convention by punishing

him.

Nicholas is punished in return by Absolon when Absolon brands him with a hot fire

poker. The punishment that Nicholas receives also aligns with the societal standards of

Chaucer’s time, as he committed the same crime that Absolon did. The main difference between

Absolon and Nicholas is that Alisoun loved Nicholas back, while she had no interest in Absolon.

This distinction may be the reason that Nicholas was only punished once while Absolon and

John were punished in two different ways. While Nicholas’s punishment was a terrible one that

will leave him with a scar for the rest of his life, it is not a personalized terrible punishment like

the one Absolon received or one of public humiliation like the one that John receives. Chaucer’s

choice to punish Nicholas for pursuing and encouraging adultery in a lesser way than John and

Absolon may demonstrate the previously mentioned idea that he believes working class women

can make decisions that will affect their lives. Even though Alisoun seems completely stripped

of her choices as a person when John marries her, she ends up with the most control by the end

of the tale, and John becomes the one who suffers the most.

Chaucer directly mocks the rules of the economically upper class through John’s

character. While his actions are not as clear cut as Alisoun’s, John has some behaviors that are

reprehensible and others that seem completely reasonable. For example, he married a wife much

younger than he, and this age gap is one of the sins that he is punished for. If John had chosen a

more appropriate wife that was his age, he most likely would not have lost her to a young man.

As previously discussed, it is implied at the beginning that John made a poor choice in choosing

31

such a young bride because she would want someone who was her own age rather than an old

and jealous man who used his wealth to marry her. We can infer that Alisoun married John

because of his promise of money and security because of Absolon’s remark that “For som fok

wol ben wonnen for richesse / And somme for strokes, and somme for gentilesse” (180). The

other behavior that John is punished for is his intense jealousy and focus on wanting for his wife

to remain loyal to him. These behaviors that John displays, while drastic and exaggerated, are

more reasonable than both Nicholas and Absolon. Whether the way he married Alisoun is moral

or not, it is reasonable that John would want his wife to remain loyal to him. Wanting a wife to

not be adulterous is not a major sin to any social class, yet John is punished the harshest. By the

end of the tale, he has been punished both personally and publicly. He injured himself when he

fell from the roof, and he was also publicly shamed by the townspeople who believed Nicholas

over him. John must face public scorn in his town as being a senile, old man who has also lost

his wife. In Chaucer’s time, a person’s town was often their life, and they rarely traveled,

especially if they were in the lower class, unless they were in occupations such as servants to the

rich. The punishment of social scorn that John receives is arguably the worst punishment that the

characters face, yet he committed no sins in the eyes of the Church. The level of punishment that

the characters face is directly related to Chaucer’s critiques of the morality of the upper classes

or those who have gained power because of their wealth.

Chaucer uses the fabliau that is based around satire as a way to critique multiple facets of

his own society, specifically the societal morals and social standing of women in wealthy or

upper class situations. While the critique of the upper class is a usual aspect of the fabliau,

Chaucer’s addition of the critique of a woman’s social standing makes this fabliau different from

others. Chaucer is able to take a form of societal commentary that usually includes satire and add

32

another level of analysis and critique that is uncommon, and this difference causes Chaucer’s

fabliau to stand out among the rest of the fabliaux that were written at the time.

33

Chapter 4:

The Pardoner’s Tale

Existing Scholarship

Most of the scholarship done on “The Pardoner’s Tale” focuses on the contradictions of

the Pardoner’s character and the story that he tells. There has also been extensive research on the

reactions of the rest of the party to the Pardoner, as he is one of the only characters with an

epilogue to his tale. Edmund Reiss discusses the shortcomings of others in their characterization

of the Pardoner in his article “The Final Irony of the Pardoner’s Tale.” The faults that Reiss finds

in other scholarship is the characterization of the Pardoner as a man who deserves pity or

sympathy from readers. Several authors have discussed the ways in which the Pardoner should

be viewed sympathetically as a man who has faults yet tries to help those he preaches to. Reiss

believes that the Pardoner is fully aware of his decisions and remains an ambiguous character

that we neither truly sympathize with nor condemn outright.

Reiss supports his argument with direct quotes from the Pardoner, but he spends much of

his time using previous scholarship to direct his argument. The final irony, as he refers to it, is

that “Nothing has been achieved through the tale, no one understands, and all we are left with is

the irony that the Pardoner is the only unpardoned man of those who went on the road to

Canterbury” (266). While I agree with Reiss that the Pardoner has great control over language

and knows that he is corrupt (and continues to be corrupt, even after he has told his nearly

perfect exemplum), I believe that Reiss does not deeply analyze the importance of the Pardoner

being aware of his impacted morality. Whether or not the Pardoner is aware and active in his

corrupted state remains extremely important to how readers understand not only the character of

34

the Pardoner but also the significance of his relationship to the tale that he tells. In this chapter, I

will argue that Chaucer’s depiction of the Pardoner as a man who is aware and proud of his

corruption is integral to his tale being perceived as satire. While the tale itself is nearly perfect,

the Pardoner’s deceitful actions enforce Chaucer’s satirical approach to critiquing the Church.

Genre Analysis

While the other chapters of this essay have focused primarily on the tales that the

Canterbury pilgrims told to the other travelers, this chapter will focus more on the pilgrim’s

prologue. The Pardoner’s prologue is much longer than the rest of the characters’ prologues, so it

is important to focus on this aspect of his tale. In order to discuss the importance of “The

Pardoner’s Tale,” we must first understand the role of a pardoner in medieval society. The

Pardoner was considered a member of the clergy, but he did not have much authority within the

Church. A pardoner was supposed to work underneath a bishop, and his job was to collect money

for the cause of his church and return the money he collected to the bishop. Technically, he was

not supposed to preach or hear confessions from people. A pardoner also sold indulgences which

signified a forgiveness of sins with the promise that the person would confess their sins as soon

as possible. The Pardoner was not authorized to actually forgive anyone of their sins nor was he

permitted to keep the money for his own personal benefit. The role of the pardoner, if enacted

properly, had nothing immoral associated with it in the eyes of the Church. However, the idea

that pardoners were immoral was a common one during the middle ages, and many pardoners

took advantage of a system that allowed them to collect money on behalf of the Church

(Jusserand).

35

The Pardoner in The Canterbury Tales breaks all of the aforementioned rules for a

pardoner at the time. In fact, one could argue that the Pardoner is one of the most sinful

characters in The Canterbury Tales. If we look at the characterization of the Pardoner through his

speeches in his prologue, we can see many of the sins associated with the seven deadly sins.

While not officially in the Bible, the seven deadly sins were an important aspect of the middle

ages. People believed in them as though they were a part of the Bible, and they were even

enforced by the Pope. The sins originally were eight instead of seven when they were first

created by Evagrius of Pontus, but they were cut down to seven when Pope Gregory I declared

them to be rules to live by (Newhauser). The sins were reduced to include the seven that nearly

everyone is familiar with today: lust, greed, sloth, pride, envy, wrath, and gluttony. The

Pardoner possesses nearly every one of these sins, and he presents them openly in his prologue.

It is rare for a character to admit their vices to their own audience, as their characterizations are

usually shown through their actions or the stories they choose to tell. The Pardoner, however,

openly admits to all of the sins that he has committed, and readers become aware that the

Pardoner is not only greedy but also embodies nearly every one of the sins they have been told to

avoid.

The first sin that readers see in the Pardoner is pride. The Pardoner tells his audience

about how he performs his sermons, which he knows he is not supposed to perform as part of his

job. His description of how he delivers sermons shows readers that he is extremely proud of his

ability to tell false tales for money as he describes the exaggerative measures that he takes to

make himself more interesting and believable. For example, he says, “And in Latyn I speke a

words fewe, / To saffron with my predicacioun” (344-345). The Pardoner believes himself to be

clever in how he enhances his presentation of a sermon in order to convince people to donate

36

more money to him. These actions are those of an extremely prideful man, and the Pardoner fits

the first of the seven sins.

The next sin that the Pardoner exhibits, and ultimately, the strongest, is greed. The

Pardoner is an extremely greedy man who uses his position in the Church to pray on peoples’

fear of going to hell in order to gain more money for his personal lifestyle. The Pardoner admits

that he only uses the money for himself and that he does not care about the ultimate salvation or

damnation of anyone that he preaches to. He says, “For myn entente is nat but for to wynne, /

And nothyng for correccioun of sinne” (403-404). The Pardoner’s greatest sin is that of greed,

and he goes on to tell his tale of how greed is the root of all evil. This is the most satirical aspect

of the pardoner, as he has no problem admitting that his personal vice is greed, yet telling others

to avoid greed as it destroys everything. The Pardoner mentions being greedy at multiple points

in his prologue, so readers are very aware of the extent of this vice.

We see the next three sins that the Pardoner exhibits in a matter of ten lines of his

prologue. The first of these is sloth, as he says, “I wol nat do no labour with myne handes, / ne

make baskettes” (444-445). The Pardoner says that he takes advantage of his job because he does

not want to do manual labor for money. This claim shows that the Pardoner has the ability to

work, but he chooses to live a sinful life rather than one where he earns his money. The Pardoner

shows that he is slothful because he chooses a life of stealing from innocent people rather than

simply working. The next sin he discusses is gluttony when he says, “I wol have moneie, wolle,

chese, and whete . . . I wol drynke licour of the vyne” (448-452). The Pardoner not only states

that he wants a lot of food and alcohol, but he also claims that he would rather have all of those

things over a starving widow and her children who were dying from hunger. In this example, the

Pardoner demonstrates his gluttony and also his selfishness in regard to others. The final sin that

37

the Pardoner demonstrates is lust when he says, “And have a joly wenche in every toun” (453).

The Pardoner openly admits to sleeping with multiple women outside of marriage, so often that

he has a woman in every town that he visits. This behavior is extremely sinful for a regular

member of the Church and even more so for a member of the clergy. The Pardoner, however, has

no qualms about sharing these horrible sins with everyone who is about to listen to him preach,

and he is prideful enough to think that his confession will not affect how they view his tale.

The Pardoner’s actual tale is a near perfect exemplum. The Pardoner uses many common

ideas throughout his tale that we see in medieval exempla. His tale is focused on three men who

are close enough to each other to seem like brothers, and the number three is a common

occurrence in Christian ideology. These three men are overcome by greed, and each man suffers

for his greed by dying at the end of the tale. The Pardoner also has the presence of an old man in

the story who leads them toward their ultimate deaths which is a common trait in exempla. The

old man often represents trickery or a higher power, like Death. The men are also in search of

Death, so the Pardoner uses the character of the old man (whom the men mock and bully) to

represent the Death that they are searching for. The only problem with the exemplum is that the

Pardoner claims that greed is the root of all evil, or “Radix malorum est Cupiditas,” yet greed is

not what led the young men to the tree where they found the gold (490). Rather, it is revenge.

The men never would have ridiculed the old man or even found the gold had they not been

searching for Death in order to avenge their other friend. It seems, then, that greed is not the root

of all evil: it is revenge. This small flaw in the tale can be representative of how the Pardoner is

not truly preaching for other people. If he had been truly preaching this tale as often as he claims

for the right reasons, he would have found the flaw in his tale. Instead, the Pardoner is focused

on the theatrics of telling the tale and not whether it is completely accurate or not. The rest of the

38

tale, however, follows the exemplum perfectly. Each character is punished for his sin of greed,

and the Pardoner uses their deaths as a warning for others who may be greedy. He then claims

that he is able to absolve sins like those of the men in his tale if only people will donate to the

Church. Chaucer chooses to stick to genre conventions of the exemplum because if the Pardoner

told a ridiculous tale that was not near perfect, it would break the idea that the Pardoner is able to

convince others to donate with his sermons. The near perfect tale that the Pardoner tells creates a

satirical commentary on the Church as a whole because even a man as imperfect as the Pardoner

can create and spin a tale that will be believable to those who listen to him.

While Chaucer characterizes the Pardoner in the prologue, he also characterizes the

Church and the clergy as a whole. When the Pardoner speaks of his relics, he states that they are

fake and have no real value to him or to the person who buys them. This is a commentary on the

Church and their false promises of forgiveness in the eyes of God. The Pardoner even discusses

that he is not the only member of the Church who tricks people out of their money in the name of

the Church. At the beginning of his prologue, he says, “And after that thanne telle I forth my

tales, / Bulles of popes and of cardynals, / Of patriarkes, and bishopes I shewe” (341-343). The

Pardoner claims that his tales stem from those that he has been taught by other members of the

clergy. While the tales themselves are not problematic and actually represent the supposed

morality of the Church, it is implied that the performative aspects of the sermons are also taught

by the Church. Shortly after this declaration, the Pardoner begins to discuss how he adds Latin

and does other things that enhance the experience of listening to his sermons. Placing this

admission of exaggeration directly after a statement about how the Pardoner was influenced by

others in the church implies to Chaucer’s audience that he learned from the Church how to

effectively fool people into donating money to false purposes.

39

The Pardoner even interjects with specific Biblical references in order to make himself

seem more believable. While describing the abilities that his relics have, he says, “Fastynge,

drynken of this welle a draughte, / As thilke holy Jewe oure eldres taughte, / His beestes and his

stoor shal multiplie” (363-365). The Pardoner’s interjections of specific biblical references as

well as his knowledge of Latin shows the audience that not only are the clergy deceitful, but it is

also nearly impossible to not be deceived. The clergy who deceive others often spend time and

energy learning specific parts of the Bible to use, even memorizing titles in Latin for their

sermons. They become more and more convincing as they perform their sermons, and because of

their convincing arguments and specifically cited examples, they seem like they know the Bible

extensively. It would be easy to ignore a Pardoner who tells a sermon with no biblical references

and who cannot answer specific questions about the religion or Church itself, so the deceitful

clergy take the time to learn their parts as though they were actors. The learning of the Bible to

convince others that the Pardoner is valid creates an even worse moral dilemma than simply

attempting to deceive people. The Pardoner, and other deceitful clergy, put significant effort into

their deceitful ways. In theory, it would cost them the same amount of energy to actually do

work that would reward them monetarily, yet they choose to put their efforts into deceit. Chaucer

is heavily critical of this practice, and we can see that others in the society are also critical of this

when the Pardoner finishes his tale.

After the Pardoner finishes, he attempts to convince the members of the pilgrimage

community to give him money for his relics and to get their names on his list of those who will

be absolved of their sins. The Pardoner had just told the entire group in his prologue that he

tricked others with his tales, but he believes himself to be convincing enough in his tale-telling

that they will still donate to him knowing that he is a fraud. Readers do not see how most of the

40

party would have reacted to the Pardoner still asking for money because the Host interjects

before anyone else can respond to him. The Host calls the Pardoner numerous insults and even

states that he would rather castrate the Pardoner than buy one of his false relics. This angers the

Pardoner enough that he cannot speak. The Pardoner’s inability to speak after the Host insults

him shows how shocked the Pardoner must be as his profession is based on convincing people to

donate to him. It may also indicate how rarely people refuse to donate to the Pardoner, especially

when we consider the confidence that the Pardoner possesses when he asks for money at the end

of his tale. The Host is not the only character that we see react in the epilogue of the Pardoner’s

tale. The Knight also interjects after the Host insults the Pardoner in order to bring peace back to

the company. The Knight tells the two to reason with each other in order to continue the journey

with happiness, but he also tells the Pardoner to “drawe thee neer” (966). The Knight attempts to

resolve this conflict between the Pardoner and the Host by having the Pardoner remain a part of

the pilgrimage group. Despite the Pardoner’s deceitful actions and immoral character, the Knight

encourages the Host to forgive him, and the argument ends peacefully as they ride forward. The

reactions of the Knight and the Host show readers that while many people were deceived by

selfish pardoners, it was not acceptable for it to happen. However, their resistance represents the

actions that were taken in medieval life against corrupt clergy: dislike and mistrust in general,

rather than negative action toward the corrupt ones from the Church.

People were upset with the idea of corrupt clergy, but little was usually done to remove

the corrupt from the high class in society. Chaucer uses the Pardoner as an example of the severe

faults of those who lead the Church, yet no one stops these people from representing the Church.

Chaucer is able to comment on the negative aspects of the Church through his tales, and although

no one stops the Pardoner from being corrupt or continuing to deceive people, the existence of

41

the tale itself is a resistance. Without the lengthy prologue and addition of an epilogue, “The

Pardoner’s Tale” would not have been a satirical tale. Chaucer included both of those aspects,

however, to create a satirical commentary on the values of the Church. Chaucer did not break the

genre convention within the story itself, but he surrounded the tale with other elements that

changed the meaning of the tale completely. If we read the tale on its own without the

surrounding content, we may believe the Pardoner just as those who listened to his tales and

donated did. Chaucer’s addition of the background information to the Pardoner’s character

allowed doubt to surround the tale, and satire became a vehicle for Chaucer’s commentary on the

roles of those in the Church.

42

Chapter 5: Societal Critiques through “The Knight’s Tale,” “The Miller’s Tale,” and “The

Pardoner’s Tale”

Chaucer’s choice to use satire as a mode to critique his society is evident in the three

aforementioned tales and their respective genres. Chaucer alters these genres to fit his satirical

viewpoint, and he maintains this satirical approach throughout each genre. His choice to utilize

satire in many of his tales is directly related to his wish, but possible inability because of social

status, to comment directly on his society. In this chapter, we will look at the specific aspects of

society that Chaucer wanted to critique, and how his tales demonstrate these critiques through his

use of satire.

Chaucer was one of the only medieval writers who we are aware of that created

numerous female characters with agency. Often, women were only objects for men to marry or

own, and Chaucer’s recognition of the larger range of roles of women is present in many of his

tales. Both “The Knight’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Tale” discuss roles of ownership that were

common standards in medieval society. Women were subordinate to men in every social class,

whether they were excluded from participating or simply considered a piece of property. The

view that women were lesser than men was prevalent in all facets of medieval society, and

Chaucer not only recognizes this idea but also combats it through his tales.

Emily in “The Knight’s Tale” has no control over being married to either Palamon or

Arcite, and she is visibly upset about her lack of control over her own life. Marriage is a form of

ownership, especially in the medieval time period, and Chaucer combats the idea of owning

women through giving Emily agency when she speaks to Diana and asks for her help. While

Emily cannot avoid getting married because of the societal standards set for her, she is able to

pray for the man who loves her most to marry her. Chaucer uses the character of Emily to create

43

a commentary about the societal standards that prevent women from being able to avoid

marriage. Chaucer’s use of satire in “The Knight’s Tale” allows him to comment on not only

these standards that Emily has to meet, but also allows her to potentially change her fate within

the standards. Chaucer knows that it is difficult to actually change societal standards set for

women, but he challenges them through Emily in order to bring awareness to the issues. Emily’s

gender actually gives her more power over the battle than the skill of either of the knights, even

if she remains trapped in a society associated with the oppression of women.

Chaucer also uses the character of Alisoun to create a commentary on the idea of a

woman’s place in society. Alisoun represents the lower-class standards for women, but they are

similar to that of the nobility class. Rather than simply being married as Emily is, Alisoun is

influenced by John’s money to marry him. Because of the monetary influences associated with

the marriage of Alisoun and John, Alisoun becomes more of an object for John to control.

Chaucer critiques this utter control of Alisoun by John because he is much older and because of

the monetary influence on Alisoun. By the end of “The Miller’s Tale,” Alisoun is the only

character who has sinned and not been punished. She also punished Absolon without any

consequences, and she ends the story with the man that she truly loves. The complete lack of

punishment for Alisoun shows that Chaucer values her as a character, and he again breaks the

societal standard set for women. Alisoun has the power over John by the end of the tale, and this

power goes against everything that the society permits for a woman. Chaucer’s description of

Alisoun shows his dislike for a society that undermines women, and his disagreement with the

treatment of women in medieval society allows him to use satire as an outlet for this

disagreement. If Chaucer did not disagree with the treatment of women, then he never would

have used satire to create a commentary on the role of women in his society.

44

Another critique that Chaucer had of medieval society was genre convention in general.

Chaucer played with the idea of genre throughout his tales by slightly altering nearly every genre

he decided to encapsulate. The previous analyses showed how Chaucer altered rules of genre in

three of his tales, but he continued to do so in his other works as well. Chaucer was very aware

of the popular literary techniques and stories of his time, and he specifically chose the popular

genres to alter. For example, the medieval romance is arguably the most popular genre of story in

all of medieval literature, so Chaucer chose for the Knight to begin his tales. The choice to have

a medieval romance begin the tales sets up the rest of the genre-breaking that Chaucer enacts

through his tales. Chaucer’s breaking of genre convention is a direct commentary to audience

expectations for literature at the time, and his use of satire throughout every genre makes this

point even further. Chaucer’s tales remain among the most studied medieval literature because of

his choice to directly comment on the expectations that audiences had at the time and then break

those expectations. The popularity of literature that often told the same story in the same way

allowed Chaucer’s tales to stand out in relation to them. Their popularity also created an easy

satirical commentary for Chaucer to incorporate into his tales, and Chaucer is able to critique

multiple facets of his society through the addition if satire into both genres that originally utilized

satire and genres that did not.

Chaucer also critiqued the social class distinctions that defined medieval society. Social

class was an extremely important part of daily life for people at this time, and it was difficult or

nearly impossible to climb the social strata as they were designated by birth. The king and clergy

reigned over everyone, the nobility protected and served the Church, and the peasants often led

miserable lives that supported the two classes above them. Chaucer was born into an affluent

family, and we can see his critique of the societal classes in The Canterbury Tales. Chaucer does

45

not begin his tales with a member of the highest class, as no member of royalty or the high

nobility is included in the pilgrimage. Rather, he begins with the Knight who has high, but not

the highest, social status. The Knight is the first pilgrim the narrator introduces in the General

Prologue and that the Knight also begins the tales because of his high social class, even though

there are members of the clergy present. To disrupt the social order that was suggested so far, the

Miller tells his tale second as a direct mockery to “The Knight’s Tale.” The Miller’s insistence

on telling his tale second and the Host allowing it to happen is indicative of Chaucer’s contempt

for social order dictating everything.

Chaucer demonstrates his disagreement with social order not only through the ordering of

his tales but also through the messages within them. As previously mentioned in “The Miller’s

Tale” chapter, Chaucer uses Alisoun who is a member of the peasantry class to show that women

in the lower classes actually have more freedom and agency than those in the upper class of

nobility. The strict social classes in Chaucer’s time combined with the prevalent inability to

change one’s social class created another situation where Chaucer could use satire to comment

on his society. Although Chaucer belonged to the upper class, he recognized the struggles of the

class below him and the ultimate power of the class above him. His position in society allowed

him to draw attention to the absurdity of strict social classes.

The top of the social class included the aspect of Chaucer’s society that he critiqued the

most: the Church. Chaucer disagreed with and disliked many aspects of the Church, and this was

problematic for him because in Christian Europe, the Church was the institutional center of

medieval society. The Catholic Church set or reinforced all of the social standards and rules that

Chaucer previously critiqued, so he focused many of his writings on critiquing the Church in

general. It is important to draw a distinction between the critique of religion and the Church as an

46

institution because Chaucer did not critique religion in general. Rather, he was concerned about

those in the Church who did not truly practice the religion in the way they claimed everyone else

should. We can see this in many of Chaucer’s tales in The Canterbury Tales, and “The

Pardoner’s Tale” is only one example where Chaucer criticizes those in the Church that do not

follow their preaching. Chaucer believed that those in the clergy should be held accountable for

their actions, and he uses the Pardoner to demonstrate the hypocrisy within the Church. Although

the Church included some members who were poor and lived very simple lives of services to

other, many members of the clergy were members of the highest class of medieval society, and

they often lived well above their means. In comparison to the peasants who often starved, some

representatives of the clergy lived lavishly. Chaucer uses the Pardoner to show this lifestyle that

came from scamming others rather than working.

The presence of the Church as the ultimate power in many aspects of medieval society

creates an opportunity for Chaucer to critique the institution through satire. Chaucer draws

attention to the negative aspects of the Church and how these negatives affect the people who

must abide by the rules of the Church. Chaucer not only breaks down the societal rules set forth

by Church but also breaks down the idea of an immoral clergy. Chaucer’s critiques of society

stem almost directly from the societal standards set by the Church, and his use of satire is a direct

message to those in the Church that are corrupt, who enforce those rules, and those who follow

the rules without being aware of the hypocrisy present in their society.

Medieval society as a whole created the perfect scenario for satire to be relevant. Chaucer

found numerous aspects of society to critique, and the criticisms frequently stemmed back to the

institution of the Church. Chaucer’s position in noble households (he grew up in a royal

household and held various posts serving royal and noble individuals) allowed him to create

47

these commentaries because he could see both ends of the social structure while existing in

between them. Chaucer’s use of satire through numerous genres and perspectives stemmed

directly from the society that he lived in. Without these influences, Chaucer may never have

created The Canterbury Tales. The Canterbury Tales creates commentaries about all aspects of

Chaucer’s society, and his critical commentaries not only helped members of his society see the

flaws that he saw, but they also assist scholars today to understand several critiques of medieval

society that we do not see in other works. Chaucer’s mode of satire through genre creates an

environment of entertainment and teaching where we are able to appreciate the literary value of

his stories along with understanding society at the time.

48

Works Cited

Chaucer, Geoffrey, et al. The Riverside Chaucer, gen. ed. Larry Benson et al. Oxford University

Press, 2008.

Eckhardt, Caroline D. “Genre.” A New Companion to Chaucer, by Peter Brown, Wiley

Blackwell, 2019, pp. 185–196.

Gerber, Amanda J. Medieval Ovid: Frame Narrative and Political Allegory. Palgrave

Macmillan, 2015.

Haller, Robert S. “The ‘Knight's Tale’ and the Epic Tradition.” The Chaucer Review, vol. 1, no.

2, 1966, pp. 67–84. JSTOR.

Haring, Lee. "Framing in Oral Narrative." Marvels & Tales, vol. 18 no. 2, 2004, p. 229-

245. Project MUSE.

Highet, Gilbert. The Anatomy of Satire. Princeton University Press, 1972.

Heng, Geraldine. Empire of Magic Medieval Romance and the Politics of Cultural Fantasy.

Columbia University Press, 2012.

Hulbert, J. R. “What Was Chaucer's Aim in the ‘Knight's Tale?’.” Studies in Philology, vol. 26,

no. 3, 1929, pp. 375–385. JSTOR.

Jusserand, J. J. English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages. 8th Ed. London: T. Fisher Unwin,

1891. 311-337.

Lewis, Robert E. “The English Fabliau Tradition and Chaucer's ‘Miller's Tale.’” Modern

Philology, vol. 79, no. 3, 1982, pp. 241–255. JSTOR.

Liu, Yin. “Middle English Romance as Prototype Genre.” The Chaucer Review, vol. 40, no. 4,

2006, pp.335-353.

Lyons, John D. Exemplum: The Rhetoric of Example in Early Modern France and Italy.

Princeton University Press, 2014.

Marnette, Sophie. “Voix De Femmes Et Voix d’Hommes Dans Les Fabliaux.” Cahiers De

Recherches Médiévales Et Humanistes, vol. 22, 1 Dec. 2011, pp. 105–122., doi:

10.4000/crm.12519.

“Medieval Literary Genres and Themes.” Medieval Literary Genres and Themes, The President

and Fellows of Harvard College, 2019, chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/pages/literary-subjects.

49

Newhauser, Richard. The Seven Deadly Sins: from Communities to Individuals. Brill, 2007.

Pollard, Arthur. Satire. Routledge, 2019.

Reiss, Edmund. “The Final Irony of the Pardoner's Tale.” College English, vol. 25, no. 4, 1964,

pp. 260–266. JSTOR.

Son, Byung-Yong. “The Political Nature of Romance: Focusing on Knight’s Tale.” Medieval

and Early Modern Studies (MEMESAK, Korea), vol. 23, no. 1, 2015, pp. 61.

Wadiak, Walter. “Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale and the Politics of Distinction.” Philological

Quarterly, vol. 89, no. 2/3, Spring 2010, pp. 159-184. EBSCOhost.

Weisl, Angela Jean. “Conquering the Reign of Femeny: Gender and Genre in Chaucer’s

Romance.” Chaucer Studies, vol. 22. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1995. pp. ix, 133.

ACADEMIC VITA

Loren Baseler

Education: Bachelor of Arts in English, May 2020

Bachelor of Arts in French and Francophone Studies, May 2020

Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania

Awards and Achievements:

• Student Marshal for the French and Francophone Department – Spring 2020

• Dean’s List - Fall 2016, Spring 2017, Fall 2017, Spring 2018, Fall 2018, Spring 2019,

Fall 2019

• Integrated Study Abroad in Montpellier, France - Spring 2019

• The Excellence in English Faculty Award - Spring 2018

• The Sichi Scholarship for Academic Excellence in English - Spring 2018

• PSUGA Honors Award - Spring 2017, Spring 2018

• Editor-in-Chief of ABSENCE, Literary and Visual Art Magazine - Fall 2016, Spring

2017, Fall 2017, Spring 2018

• Schreyer Honors College/Paterno Fellows Program - Entrance Fall 2017

Work Experience:

• American Shakespeare Center Liaison Intern (September 2019 - December 2019)

o Connected the physical advertising strategies with the digital through the use of

QR codes

o Developed original content for the social media platforms Facebook, Instagram,

and Twitter to engage with users on all platforms

o Designed and maintained a website that provided audiences with longer content

along with connecting all of the performance’s social media

o Increased performance attendance by over 100% from 2017 to 2019

o Researched and wrote the handbook for future interns to utilize throughout the

advertising process

• Pennsylvania State University - Teaching Assistant for ENGL 15

(August 2019 - December 2019)

o Operated technology for the professor

o Corrected student responses to prompts

o Assisted with small group discussions

• Assistant to the Press Coordinator of ABSENCE, A Penn State Campus Literary and

Visual Arts Magazine (Fall 2016 - Spring 2018)

o Led the publication team for the magazine

Ran staff meetings; organized Excel spreadsheet of submissions; contacted

and worked directly with authors and artists; ordered Table of Contents

with each accepted work; delegated work groups and supervised head

decisions; reviewed each submitted work in detail

o Planned Open Mic Nights for students to share creativity on the campus

o Contacted staff and other members of the campus community to be involved in

the Celebration of the Arts Ceremony

o Found supporting research for Press Coordinator

• Pennsylvania State University Libraries - Desk Assistant (Fall 2016 - Spring 2018)

o Managed help desk by answering student questions, checking out/returning

library items, and answering phone calls

o Shelved and organized library items within the Library of Congress System

o Processed mail for library staff