This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Geoffrey Chaucer (c. 1343 – 25 October 1400) was an English poet, author, and civil servant best known for The Canterbury Tales. He has been called the "father of English literature", or, alternatively, the "father of English poetry". He was the first writer to be buried in what has since come to be called Poets' Corner, in Westminster Abbey. Chaucer also gained fame as a philosopher and astronomer, composing the scientific A Treatise on the Astrolabe for his 10-year-old son, Lewis. He maintained a career in the civil service as a bureaucrat, courtier, diplomat, and member of parliament. Among Chaucer's many other works are The Book of the Duchess, The House of Fame, The Legend of Good Women, and Troilus and Criseyde. He is seen as crucial in legitimising the literary use of Middle English when the dominant literary languages in England were still Anglo-Norman French and Latin. Chaucer's contemporary Thomas Hoccleve hailed him as "the firste fyndere of our fair langage" (i.e., the first one capable of finding poetic matter in English). Almost two thousand English words are first attested to in Chaucerian manuscripts. As scholar Bruce Holsinger has argued, charting Chaucer's life and work comes with many challenges related to the "difficult disjunction between the written record of his public and private life and the literary corpus he left behind". His recorded works and his life show many personas that are "ironic, mysterious, elusive [or] cagey" in nature, ever-changing with new discoveries.
Warning: if you're reading Canterbury Tales to ingest all things medieval, skip this one : it's Greek! I skimmed the SparkNotes because Coghill's translation is too tedious and melodramatic. Since this is Chaucer's first and longest Tale - he never completed the entire tome - perhaps too much time was misappropriated on it? It just goes on and on, ad nauseum.
I was going to read the translated edition of this but my english teacher said the original wouldn't be too much trouble and gave a copy of the prologue. It was nicely written and all but it's really just a list of characters with their descriptions, so when I finished it I decided to move onto the first story, 'The Knight's Tale'. If you're into Greek myths I'd really recommend this, or at least a translated version of it (there are many out there) since it has the same style of story to something like the Trojan Horse, in fact one of the main characters is Theseus (who fought the Minotaur) only later in his life. The story follows Palamon and Arcita, these two knights and cousins who are imprisoned by Theseus. They fall in love with his sister, Emelye, who they view from their window, and the rest of the story follows as they both attempt to escape, and also fight over her to win her courtship. What really struck me was that, although it obviously came from a time where people would have had different values and ideas, the story is still something that feels quite real. You can understand the characters Chaucer writes, as they go through love and jealousy and grief in the same way we would - there's an honesty to it. Particularly it's ending, I was expecting a happy ending to be honest and it surprised me by how bittersweet it was. Other highlights are two really great monologues that are in the second half of the story. One made by Saturn (the god) is chilling and almost disturbing, the other is made by Theseus - called the First Mover - and is about the nature of life and humanity, something you can imagine Shakespeare would have drawn on.
If you wanna read it then give the original text a go if you're feeling brave, otherwise if you want to seek it out in one of the multitudes of different adaptations or translations out there, it's worth it just for the story.
Chaucer…. No thank u! So Greek and also Shakespeare core but just doesn’t have the strengths those have. Really it was fine I just didn’t want to read Chaucer at this point of semester.
read this for uni. no, i wouldn’t have voluntarily picked up this book. yes, i hate to admit it but i kinda liked it… something about two unhinged men fighting for a woman who couldn’t care less was kinda alright for me.
Cheated and read the modern English translation version because I don't understand shit when I looked at the middle English. Otherwise, big love to the story!
Part 2 of my occasional journey through The Canterbury Tales. The Knight's Tale is the first tale proper after the prologue and is an example of the Courtly Romance that was popular at the time (think the legends of King Arthur and that kind of stuff. These are the sort of tales that drove Don Quixote slightly mad. The story of Arcite and Palamon is an adaptation from an episode in Boccachio's Decameron and was an example of why Chaucer's idea of the tales was so inspired, in that this was a story written years before (mentioned in the prologue to his Legend of Good Women) and able to be reused in the voice of one of his many characters. The story itself is interesting enough - it starts well, but once the tournament starts it bogs down in description of armour and swords rather than telling the story - so three quarters of it are very good and one quarter is tiresome description. So good, but not one of the best tales.
I am surprised I enjoyed this as much as I did. Reading this alongside a modern translation increased my comprehension and appreciation. That said, it was an enjoyable challenge to read this in the Middle English.
Okay, I didn't actually read this in an edition of its own, but as part of the huge and monumental 'Riverside Chaucer', which is just... SO HEAVY. But it took me like two hours to read, so I figured I deserved to be able to count it as a book (that's around the same length of time it'd take me to read a lot of YA novels).
Anyway. I've never read any Chaucer before. I'm taking a paper this year from the English Faculty, and because it's a 3rd year paper, they expect you to know how to read Middle English -- because they teach it in first year. But I don't do English, I do ASNaC, so I've never even read Chaucer before and... it's all a struggle. Plus I have no idea what my supervisor will want me to do or what kind of thing I'm expected to discuss about the text.
That said, this wasn't too difficult to read. I found myself skimming in places and had to force myself to pay a bit more attention and actually check the footnotes for things I didn't understand, but it was easier than some of the other Middle English we were asked to read (presumably that stuff was earlier / less well-edited). It was also an interesting story, which helped.
I hadn't realised how much Chaucer drew on Classical material, but a considerable amount of this story is about Theseus, which is interesting. It was also super weird to read a medieval text that wasn't, like, overtly Christian. Even medieval Irish adaptations of Classical texts don't feel Classical -- the gods are ignored as much as possible and fudged into something approximate where they're unavoidable. Here, though, the gods are firmly in the story, shaping events and being prayed to and so on, which was kind of weird to adjust to. I guess that's what happens when you go a few hundred years later and stuff isn't only being written in monasteries.
I also have to admit that, insofar as I was rooting for either character, I was rather rooting for Palamon, so I was kind of pleased with how things turned out? Though I still wish Emily could've just run off into the woods and been a devotee of Diana like she wanted to. That would have been a much better ending.
Two young knights and prisoners of war fall head over heels in love with King Theseus’s sister, Emily, through the bars of their cell. Once they both leave prison (one through exile, one by escaping), Theseus allows them to duel for his sister’s hand in an official, chivalric capacity once they’ve each had a year to gather their armies. Havoc ensues, both for the humans and the Ancient Greek gods.
At first, this seems like a standard chivalric tale full of stoic Boethian philosophy (ie. God’s got it covered even if we find our fates very fickle). But Chaucer exposes many holes in chivalric ideology too. Women have little agency when they don’t want to marry either of the men fighting over her. Theseus’s traditional ideas of God creating a stable universe are completely undermined by the squabbling and chaos of the Greek gods, particularly the psychopathic Saturn. Chaucer even writes that women have a tendency to be won over to their partners once “fortune” (ie. Fate) makes itself clear. Surely this is ironic? Chaucer must be satirising the Knight here, because it’s bonkers. He shows us how reluctant Emily was earlier in the story, and how petty the Greek gods are in their version of “fate”.
This is a thought-provoking piece of medieval literature: one that simultaneously celebrates chivalric literature on the surface level, and exposes its many inconsistencies more deeply.
I read a different version translated by Joseph Glaser but couldn't find it here. The rhythm in the poetry was really good and it all made sense when you were reading it; there was nothing that left you wondering what it meant. After reading this book I heard two speeches given on it by my fellow classmates. After hearing one of the speeches something the speaker said stuck with me. He said that the "love" through the entire book was false and screamed of lies. I reread it and saw indeed that Arctic and Palamon's "love" for Emily was entirely selfish and for their own glory. "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs." 1 Corinthians 13 4-5 Arctic and Palamon obviously did not get the memo. They betrayed each other and wearing willing to kill each other for their "love" for Emily.
It's crazy how different cultural values can change how a text is viewed bc now this is a HORROR story. Emily just wanted to hunt, and walk in the woods and not marry and potentially be a lesbian. And then these MEN come out of nowhere and fall in love with her w/o even talking to her and then they have a big massive fight over it. And then she gets married to the one who survives.
Besides the ending, the language was really pretty through out but justice for my girl Emily!!! She just wants to wear green, frolic, and kiss women.
I am not well-equipped with experience to judge or rate this piece of poetry, so I won't, but I will say that it was...engrossing. However, it seems to be objectifying women, not taking their consent or decisions in regard. It just saddens me that most pieces of classic literature scrutinized in educational institutes are somewhat sexist in one way or another. When will we stop normalizing this?
Right, I wouldn’t say reading Chaucer is a pleasure read. I’ve mainly come back to it out of curiosity, to see if my opinion has changed. Overall, it has as I partly feel my interest in the story was influenced by A Knight’s Tale the movie. In the collection of tellers in The Canterbury Tales there are better ones than this.
The first of the Canterbury Tales (not including the general prologue) is set in Ancient Greece and concerns two knights of Theseus’ court battling for a woman’s hand. Very fun
This would have been my doom, had I not read another review further down that not all the tales are like this. In fact, it was advised to skip this one. I read it, although I’ll admit to skimming parts. So tedious. The story isn’t so bad, but the way it is told makes it just confirm to all my prejudices and fears about medieval texts.
I made it through, though. Victory is mine.
I’m sure there is a lot of super intelligent stuff to be said about this tale, but I’m afraid I’m not the one to say it.
STRUGGLED with this bc of the middle english BUT i am a whore for greek mythos and retellings. could do without the less than subtle misogyny but ancient greece and retellings surrounding it are not notorious for their wonderful treatment of women so. enjoyable and satisfying once i actually read it. i did have to read a summary prior just bc i genuinely had no idea what was going on BUT once i was clear on the plot actually finishing the thing wasn’t too bad :)