Grigoryan, 1 Armen Grigoryan English 442 4/30/13

A Current Medieval Discourse

The Canterbury Tales is, more or less, written in the style of a conversation wherein stories are shared and their characters are signified with quotation marks. Employing this technique allows for greater depth and diversity in the analysis of the collection explicitly and implicitly (that is, the literature itself as well as possible themes and the philosophies suggested by it). Taking into consideration the time period in which Chaucer was writing (1343-1400 A.D.) there would undoubtedly be a plethora of religious references, symbols and allusions. Most often they seem to occur directly in the form of references by the characters who tell the tales, as in The Wife of Baths Prologue or through the plot and characters of the tales that are told which can be seen throughout various tales or the taletelling characters themselves. Similar to the umbrella theme of piety throughout the collection, there are also an element in opposition to it to contrast that adds another layer of conflict in addition to the one(s) in the plot(s). This happens on a specific level within each tale as well as with the juxtaposition of tales. The discourse of science vs. religion and the favoritism toward religion manifests through juxtaposing The Canons Yeoman's Tale and The Second Nun's Tale including the individual analysis of each tale. Momentarily digressing from the intended premise of this paper, making a general interpretation of The Canterbury Tales holistically (not at any specific tales) reveals a discourse in which the conflict or comparison between piety, or lack there of, can be seen. There is an element of irony when reading The Second Nuns Tale and The Canons Yeomans Tale sequentially which comes primarily from their plots. Making a

Grigoryan, 1

Grigoryan, 2 broad plot comparison reveals this irony, as in one tale there is a woman whose piety goes to lengths that Saint Cecilia applies her pious ways to all aspects of a womans life in that century which is why The world and eek hir chamber gan she weive (S.N.T, 276). In contrast, the other tales plot (and prologue) consists of a deceitful man whose profession would be the modern day equivalent of a scientist (or chemist). Its likely to be no coincidence that the two plots tell stories about aspects of life that are stereotypically conflicting; one typically denouncing the other whether it be intentional or not. Moreover, individually and together the plots conform to the favoritism for religion when the extremely pious woman finds success in her endeavor to remain a virgin even in marriage and the deceitful alchemist fails at his job and needs to resort to trickery to fool his spectators (in other words, hes a poor chemist). The additional irony of the Canon who is a scientist being the one whose beliefs (lifestyle, profession, and personality) are denounced could suggest favoritism of religion. The discourse between science and religion also shows through the acceptance of the fantastical nature of The Second Nuns Tale. By using conformity and nonconformity as tools of analysis the tales demonstrate the socially acceptable systems of belief to identify with. Saint Cecilias lifestyle and endeavor, though extreme, fully conform to the typical expectations of female decorum with the exception of not having to bear children. In fact, Chaucer has managed to make a contradiction work: the nonconformity of not being expected to have children feeds the conformity of Saint Cecilias pious, and therefore to a large degree, womanly behavior. Such decorum, however, is only a visible manifestation of a larger and more essential principle of piety in Chaucers time, which is unwavering faith to unquestioningly accept Christian doctrines (the specifying of Chaucers time is in fair recognition of various rationales and systematic argumentation to attempt justifying the logical acceptance of faith by some Christian scholars). And with that word anon ther gan appeere

Grigoryan, 2

Grigoryan, 3 An old man, clad in white clothes cleere Valerian as deed fil doun for drede And on his book right thus he gan to rede: Thise wordes al with gold ywriten were. (S.N.sT., 200-210) At this point in the plot the tale takes on what would now be considered by many to be fantastical and supernatural. But according to the typical modern understanding of belief in Chaucers and surrounding eras, this event (in addition to not being thought of as fantastical) would likely be accepted in an obvious manner as a message (and gift) from God. Of course this is taking place in a fictional story, although that isnt to suggest that its completely far from the truth. The event itself isnt so much the point of emphasis as much as the absolute acceptance of the fantastical event that might be demonstrated by way of an extreme situation in order to make a statement. That statement being (not to be redundant) that the acceptance of scientifically unjustifiable empirical experiences are more easily and widely accepted than the work of a chemist, for example. The favoritism for religion shows through the tone of The Canons Yeomans Tale toward alchemy and the alchemist. Since chemistry was one of the few active scientific fields in Chaucers time (by modern standards of the accepted fields of science), one could potentially apply the tone and overall attitude toward chemistry to other fields of science active in medieval times. The attitude is entirely negative and is expressed through the tone of the tale-telling character (the yeoman) in one instance when he makes a claim about alchemy that discredits it practically and religiously: In lerning of this elvissh nice loore, Al is in vein and pardee, muchel moore To lerne a lewed man this subtiltee! Fy! Spek nat therof, for it wol nat be. And konne he letterure, or konne he noon,

Grigoryan, 3

Grigoryan, 4 As in effect, he shal finde it al oon; (Can.s Yeo.s T., 842-847) This passage essentially denounces the usefulness and/or necessity of alchemy by claiming that all efforts to learn it are not only vein but more, by ending the line with muchel moore. Though there isnt an immediately explicit reason to believe so, its safe to assume that the indication of learning alchemy being much more than vein could be an indirect way of calling it a sin. This becomes a more acceptable interpretation granted the end of the tale in which its said, How that a man shal come unto this stoon,/I rede, as for the beste, lat it goon!/For whoso maketh God his adversary (Can.s Yeo.s T., 1474-1476) clearly making a suggestion to avoid practicing alchemy (and other sciences) since such practices are only available for people if God intends, and to pursue it with any other justification would make God ones adversary, and henceforth, the practice a sin. Not only does this denounce the necessity and discredit the practical usefulness of the science, but it makes it an undesirable and dangerous practice sure to be reason enough to be sent to hell. To make another point: a comparison of desirability readers may feel for the characters and their situations also may favor the more pious of the two. It seems that within this context Chaucer himself favors Saint Cecilia by granting her not only a resolved conflict but also by giving Valerian a wish, And thow, Valerian, for thow so soone/Assentedest to good conseil also,/Sey what thee list, and thow shalt han thy boone (Sec.NunsT., 232-233). These two events with the addition of divine crowns visible only to the pious, Chaucer makes a statement that such a lifestyle is more rewarding than the alternative. To contrast the two benevolent and fortunate characters in this tale, there is the deceitful alchemist in the yeomans tale who is mostly unsuccessful in his practice. Keep in mind that Chaucer could have easily chosen to write about a successful alchemist who, for example, creates a powerful love potion that makes him wealthy, finds him a virtuous wife, and becomes of means of worship by having medieval atheists find love

Grigoryan, 4

Grigoryan, 5 for God. Instead, there is an economically and skillfully poor alchemist who resorts to trickery and deception to steal his spectators money. Also, prior to the tale even being told, yeoman exposes his Canons evil ways (who the tales alchemist is likely based on) and essentially deserts his service to him. Like with all of The Canterbury Tales juxtaposing tales is an essential tool in understanding not only the tales themselves, but also the themes and philosophical opinions they express. Individually one can see how in each tale there are elements of religion taking priority over science, although this is certainly not the only analysis that can be made. However, in comparing the two the ironies, characters, and tone demonstrating an attitude toward a topic or event are highlighted. It isnt likely that Chaucer made any decisions unintentionally, as the entire collection of poems is written to have one piece be in relation to other tale or prologue, making them dependent on each other to that extent. Considering that its even more reasonable to think that Chaucer was careful in selecting which pieces to link and how to do so. Individually, The Canons Yeomans Tale makes a more explicit attempt at engaging the science vs. religion argument. However, when read in comparison to each other not only is that discourse made clearer, but also the belief which is accepted.

Grigoryan, 5