Carmelo Bono
Dr. Hayes
Geoffrey Chaucer
March 13, 2012
Laughing at the Lower Class with Chaucer
The Miller’s Prologue and The Miller’s Tale are
full of scenes where Chaucer is creating a stereotypical lower class citizen.
This estate satire taking place in the Prologue and Tale of the Miller is
something comparable to the comedy of a modern comedian, David Chappelle. When
trying to understand to obscenity of the Miller and other characters as estate
satire, one must understand the stereotypes that pre-exist from the viewpoint
of competing or controlling classes. Chaucer is utilizing the French art of
Fabliaux when describing the Miller’s status in the three estates; reading S.H.
Rigby’s chapter “Society and Politics” in Steve Ellis’ Oxford Guide: Chaucer, one can see the stereotypical
characteristics that characterize the fabliaux. To build on what the reader is
learning through Rigby’s chapter, a closer examination of The Miller himself
along with David Griffith’s chapter “Visual culture” from Ellis’ Oxford Guide: Chaucer. Taking an even
closer look at The Miller’s Tale will
provide the audience with a sense of carnivalesque as described by Marion
Turner in chapter “Carnivalesque” of Ellis’ Oxford
Guide: Chaucer as, the trading roles between classes or control
figures. The Miller’s Tale is
providing readers with a satirical view of the lower class from all other
points of view, as every other tale is told in the most stereotypical way from
the viewpoints of all other classes and professions.
The tale of the Miller begins after the prologue, which is when the
reader is able to grasp a little more about the Miller to build on his previous
image from the General prologue. In 1999 Shawn Vincent describes a miller on
his website, svincetn.com the miller is “the person who turns grains into flour.”
This falls under the category of less common service occupations. Service
occupations are occupations held by the lowest class (the working class). Rigby
is describing in his chapter “society and politics” how at the time of the Canterbury Tales there are three estates
that rule England
(they still exist today, but are not recognized as such) the clergy, the
nobility and the commoners. The clergy prayed and were representatives by the
church, thus why they are the highest of the estates (church and state are one
in the same institution at the time). The nobility is built with the people who
fight or hold the title of the bourgeois because they are important to the
estates sustainability. Finally the third class, the working class are the
people who suffered the most of the three estates. The working class/commoners
are not unfamiliar to unjust treatment. They are working the hardest and
probably the most deserving of the better treatment because of the hard labour
they are enduring on a daily basis. On the front of The Wadsworth third edition
of Chaucer’s works (1987) there is a picture of three characters (not from the
story exactly) recognizable as the three estates existing at the time. So to
begin the with the Miller’s character in proving his tale is an estate satire
of the working class refer to his profession. His profession (as discussed
previously), is a “dirty job”, hard, time consuming and not as rewarding as
others. This is the beginning characterization of the stereotypical working
class commoner. Next from the “Miller’s
Tale” the audience can see Chaucer demonstrating another third class stereotype
only with more in-depth characterization. John the carpenter is a third class
man whom found him lucky enough to have the hand of the young and beautiful
Alison. The audience is supposed to understand that John is also housing a
clerk, Nicholas whom is a representative as the upper class in this scenario.
The reason Nicholas is important to this understanding of estate satire is
because he is training to become apart of the clergy (first class), but is
currently only at a third class status because he is poor. Nicholas begins
trying to seduce John’s beautiful lady to have sex with her. Now, we begin to
see the stereotype of cutthroat attitude amongst each other in the third class.
Nicholas and John are both third class, however Nicholas feels he is still
entitled to Alison as though he is a first class citizen whom has the power to
do that. Partnerships of people within the same class now seem to have ulterior
motivation for self gain, creating a very animalistic and primitive attitude of
the working class. Instead of the upper-class clergy taking advantage of the
third class carpenter; it is a third class clergy, taking advantage of an
“upper-class” carpenter. It is not hard to see the irony and lose situation for
the lower class.
“The Miller’s Tale” is heavily demonstrating what Griffith will consider, “visual culture” in
his chapter from the Oxford Guide:
Chaucer called “Visual culture.” Griffith
is discussing how the imagery that is filling the pages of Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, is actually very
oppressive and satirical. He is referring to the imagery as “marginal imagery”
which is deriving from the word marginalization, which is the act of othering
(singling out a person based on ethnic, social or physical features), characters
in society who are most prone to ridicule. In “The Miller’s Prologue” Chaucer
is describing the Miller’s actions vividly so that the audience can put the
initial visualization of Robin the Miller from the “General Prologue” together
with it and build a full character profile. Robin in the “General Prologue” is
described as; a large, third class commoner, who is fond of wrestling, red
bearded, gaping mouth and nostrils which had a wart on one of them and growing
hairs from it. The actions of Robin from “The Miller’s Prologue” as being a
drunk, with a big mouth and no filter at all. He is letting the audience feel
like he must ridicule first and ask questions later. Swearing and bagpipe
playing are the only two things he is talented at it seems like according to
the prologue of Robin. The common stereotype of the working class people as
under a microscope of the upper class is that they are all brawn and no brains,
thus the reason they are lower class. Chaucer is also portraying Robin as a
grotesque man that is hard to approach not only because of physical
grotesqueness but discouraging in personality as well. It is actually
surprising that they did not mention an odious stench arising from farting or
burping. Robin is also constantly swearing in front of ladies, clergy and
nobility which is how the upper class citizens would have been considering
lower class citizens to act (vulgar and rude). The vulgarity and rudeness
touched on by Chaucer is building on “The Miller’s Prologue” when he is
portrayed as so drunk he can not properly sit or speak. The upper class drank
just as much if not more than that of the lower class, however the upper class
do not think they act as rude outwardly when drunk as the lower class commoners
do. The bagpipes that Robin carries with him are indeed because he plays them
which are to help create a larger sense of vulgarity. The bagpipes bare a
striking resemblance to the male’s genitals (the penis and scrotum) which goes
to show as one more dirty thing about the lower class citizens or more
specifically, Robin. The final image under discussion is one that we still find
problematic in today’s society. The fact that Robin is a “ginger” or red-head
is a very understandable marginalization. Most people may find it to be the
dead giveaway that there is a stereotype going on. In Robin’s case the reason
he is a red-head in this tale is because he is a representation of a Scotsman.
The bagpipes, vulgarity, drunken attitude, and red hair is a very literal image
how many of English will go ahead to describe the Scottish whom they viewed
(and actually were for awhile) lower class citizens. This stems from years of
unrest between the two people, which people can see still continues today only
it is understood as a marginalization of people with red hair not necessarily
because they are Scottish. This is the visual culture of the Scottish that Griffith is referring to
when he is speaking about imagery which visualizes a culture.
Carnivalesque is a term that has sunk its way into our vocabulary as
the word masquerade. The reason the word masquerade is at use when referring to
Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales today and
not carnival is because carnival today is where people go for a show. But back
in Chaucer’s time carnivalesque is the idea of masquerades. These masquerades
were consistent and talked about in many different aspects of literature
because it is a magical time when social roles will take part in the act of
switching roles. This will be done many a time and time again even today there
are carnivalesque events that occur, of course in different ways than they may
have taken place in the past. Common carnivalesque events in England at the time of Chaucer will
be servant and master switching roles, as well as men and women switching
roles. So for example, the master and the servant may switch roles within the
house for a day and this is done to appease the lower class citizens when
unrest and tension began building up within the social hierarchy. What Marion
Turner is writing about in her piece on the “carnivalesque” in An Oxford Guide: Chaucer is that Chaucer
has been harnessing this idea of carnivalesque and using it in the fabliaux.
The way that Turner is saying Chaucer is accomplishing this is by switching the
roles of lower and upper/middle class characters. More specifically it can be
closely read and understood in “The Miller’s Tale”. By incorporating the carnivalesque into the Canterbury Tales, a humour and satire is
coming as result to this brilliant action. The carnivalesque that Chaucer is
implanting into the tale that Robin tells begins with John the Carpenter. John
is a carpenter which is a lower class occupation and he is housing clergy in
training (clerk), Nicholas. Clergy is the highest class, so for it to hold a
representation in the lowest class; a class so low that it is living off of the
lower class is a switch of roles. The switch which makes this story carnivalesque
begins with John and Nicholas because John should be seeking refuge in the arms
of the clergy or nobility, not the other way around. One can also note the fact
that Alison and Nicholas are the ones going behind John’s back. This is a very
carnivalesque idea in the sense that for Alison, she is the woman; if anything
John should be going behind her back and Nicholas is technically apart of the
clergy who is not supposed to condone such adultery. The clerk is committing a
sin by coveting they neighbour’s “property” and this is normally portrayed a
very lower class action. Nicholas
becomes the complete reason for Robin’s tale to be carnivalesque because when
Absolon (who is also apart of the clergy) is searing the rear end of with an
extremely hot piece of metal it was representative of the battle that is waging
between the lower and the upper class. So, fighting with the character (John)
who is a representation of the higher class since he has everything where the
clerk has nothing; and the quarrel between Absolon is solid evidence for a
reader to recognize the marginalization and “sleaziness” of the lower class
characteristics.
Readers of Chaucer’s Canterbury
Tales will enjoy the reading as it is quite humorous and entertaining. What
readers need to keep in mind though is that, it is the fact that it holds more
than sex jokes and funny looking characters within its words. This is French
style fabliaux by Chaucer; this means it holds a moral lesson or two that can
be learned by not only one class, but all classes. Each word Chaucer is
choosing to use in this work is specifically chosen to perform a planned action
in the mind of the reader by Chaucer or to draw an image that will be crucial
to the rest of the story in the mind of the of the reader. From An Oxford Guide: Chaucer Steve Ellis
introduces three writers who are providing other scholars of Chaucer with some
fresh and young ideas that may further currently thoughts on the Canterbury Tales or inspire new ones.
Beginning the chapter on “Society and politics” by S.H, Rigby which spoke about
the difference in three estates and then building on estates by looking at how
they are constructed through what David Griffith will consider as “Visual
Culture” the audience of the Canterbury
Tales will understand how “The Miller’s Tale” and “The Miller’s Prologue”
are estate satire. Marion Turner tops off the discussion of Robin’s tale and
prologue as estate satire by talking about the carnivalesque aspects of the
tale referring to struggles between the upper and lower class citizens.
Works Cited
- Vincent, Shawn. What did people
do in the Middle Ages?. 1999. Web. 14 Mar. 2012.
<1.http://www.svincent.com/MagicJar/Economics/MedievalOccupations.html>.
- Rigby, S.H.. "Society and
Polictics." An Oxford
Guide Chaucer. Comp. Steve Ellis. 3rd. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1987. Print.
- Griffith, David. "Visual
Culture." An Oxford
Guide Chaucer. Comp. Steve Ellis. 3rd. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1987. Print.
- Turner, Marion.
"Carnivalesque." An Oxford
Guide Chaucer. Comp. Steve Ellis. 3rd. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1987. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment