What conclusion can you draw about Chaucer's purpose and his audience in The Miller's Tale following The Knight's Tale? The order of the telling of the tales is not random, so what is the effect of that deliberate order?
Sorry for the late post!
8 comments:
One of the most obvious similarities within The Miller’s Tale and The Knight’s Tale is the love triangle that exists in each. Both tales illustrate Chaucer’s purpose in entertaining and depict his audience as those interested in hearing stories. I think that perhaps Chaucer chose to have the miller tell his tale immediately following the knight’s tale because it contrasts the differences in their characters. During this time period, knights were well admired, and the knight’s tale was one of chivalry and fighting for a true love. Although the characters within in The Knight’s Tale are not perfect, Arcite is redeemed and thought of as honorable in the end. However, the miller’s tale is not as admirable as the knight’s story because he is drunk and the tale includes themes of infidelity and, at times, crude actions. The distinction between the two tales exemplify the knight’s respectable character and make the miller look less tasteful to Chaucer’s audience.
The miller in Chacuer's The Miller's Tale is a loud-mouthed belligerent drunk who takes pleasure in telling bawdy tales. In contrast, the knight from The Knight's Tale is a noble, courteous and respectable knight.
The Knight's Tale is about love and chivalry, while the Miller's Tale, while also about love, is lewd and ill-mannered.
Chaucer must have chosen to tell these tales in this order not only to entertain, but also to show the differences in each character and the differing types of love. Chaucer's purpose may have also been to make his characters seem more real.
Chaucer probably wanted to contrast the two while showing the similarities. Perhaps he was trying to shake up the competition. Here you have this noble story of fighting for pure love and the story itself is very entertaining, but then you hear the story of the Miller and even though the romance aspect is still involved alongside the adultery, it is equally just as entertaining. Thinking about the time period, is was really taboo to be so vulgar with storytelling, but I think it was Chaucer's plan. Maybe he thought that vulgar stories of the sort still had their entertainment value and, like we've mentioned in class before, sometimes authors communicated their real thoughts through their stories because it was considered a serious offense if it came from their own mouths. It could be that he was trying to show that vulgar stories such as that of the Miller are of equal importance of that of a typical chivalrous story like that of the Knight. Just because it's taboo doesn't mean that it isn't good.
Jill,
I agree with you in Chaucer's way of contrasting the two characters. Indeed this was a method to make the characters seem more realistic, but I think it goes much deeper than that. There are those different types of love, just like you said, but I believe he was trying to make a point. Just because there are such perverted stories doesn't make them any less of a good tale, one that is equally worthy of winning the competition on the pilgrimage. Just a thought! :)
Although on different ends of the spectrum, both the Knight’s Tale and the Miller’s Tale deal with one woman and men competing for her. The Knight tells a story showcasing honor and chivalry. Whereas the drunk Miller tells a perverse tale of adultery. Chaucer may have been introducing different types of characters to the audience. First comes the honorable knight, then to counteract him he shows a drunken man who still delivers a good story. In this tactic, the audience is hearing two very different stories, yet they are grounded on the same theme. This is representing their similarities as well as keeping them grouped together for the sake of the audience.
Gabby,
I’m glad you brought up the point that the Miller’s tale is equally entertaining, if not more entertaining than the Knight’s tale. You’re right about the stories being taboo to the time period; however, now that you draw on that fact, I too agree with you about that being Chaucer’s plan. In today’s time bawdy stories serve almost as the most appealing and entertaining type of story. Of course everyone loves a heroic and honorable tale, however, we are not certain that the people did not like to hear a risque tale ever now-and-then.Chaucer could have been using this to his advantage by placing a crude tale directly after a respectable one.
Gabby and Mariah,
You both make good points. Chaucer most likely did use the Miller's Tale to show that bawdy tales are just as entertaining as serious ones.
It is true that even today, many people love a good raunchy story. That's probably why there are so many comedy movies constantly being made.
Jill, Gabby, and Mariah,
I thought all of the points you discussed were very interesting! I focused more on the character distinctions rather than the actual enjoyment of the stories for Chaucer's audience. I agree that people often enjoy "a good raunchy story" now and then. I also think it's often times more interesting to watch a trainwreck than a happily ever after time and time again.
Post a Comment