This Every Reader’s Poet, the twenty-first, differs somewhat from other essays in the series. Though Every Reader’s Poets assumes no knowledge of literature among its readers, aiming at simply acquainting people with a few of the most well-known works by canonical poets, the “Every Reader’s Chaucer” presents challenges unlike any other. Since Chaucer wrote over six hundred years ago, his language is significantly different from modern usage. Modernizations convey much information, but no poetry. I have therefore included below the original Middle English texts and my own prose translations. I recognize that, even apart from the hurdle the language presents to those new to it, I use rather long samples of Chaucer’s poetry. Only the ambitious and particularly curious, perhaps, will attempt to make their way through this post, but I prefer to make the reader’s task rewarding, even if it turns out to be a bit arduous as well.
Geoffrey Chaucer is certainly the most
widely-read and influential medieval English poet. Everyone knows his Canterbury Tales and
specialists are aware of his voluminous other works, including narratives like
his monumental Trojan story Troilus and Criseyde and allegories like The
Parliament of Foules as well as translations of Boethius and Romance of
the Rose and the scientific Treatise on the Astrolabe. Remarkably, he produced this considerable oeuvre
while working at full-time government jobs including positions as Comptroller of
Customs and Clerk of the King’s Works, as well as serving in Parliament. Though his own family was of middle-class
origin he regularly frequented the court. He received pensions and grants
from the throne beginning with a daily
gallon of wine from Edward II, later converted to cash, and patronage continued
under Richard II and Henry IV. Some
historians think it likely that he acted as a spy during his European travels.
Through Chaucer’s time, French was the
language of English royalty (and of British legal courtrooms as well). Poets might choose to write in Latin, Norman
French, or English. Gower, whose dates
are close to Chaucer’s, wrote major works in each. Latin, of course, was associated with
scholarship and the great authors of antiquity, while French could boast of greatest
current social prestige. For Chaucer to
choose to write in English was an unusual choice, but his use of the language established
it for literary usage, inspiring his contemporary Thomas Hoccleve to call him
"the firste fyndere of our fair langage."
Though he advanced the role of their
native language in poetry, he also decisively influenced English poets to use
Continental models of prosody. Old
English verse like Beowulf had been accentual and alliterative. Fluent in Latin, competent in French, and
knowing some Italian as well, Chaucer imported European verse forms that
subsequently came to dominate English poetry, including rhyme, accentual
syllabic meters, and, in particular, iambic pentameter. Most poets who followed Chaucer chronologically
followed these aspects of his poetic practice as well.
Thus the forms of Chaucer’s poetry will
seem more or less familiar to modern readers, but his language is likely to look
a bit daunting at first. He falls
between Shakespeare’s use of what linguists call Early Modern English, usually
readable for today’s readers with a few words glossed, and Old English, which is
definitely a foreign language for twenty-first century readers. At the end of the poet’s life final letter e
was just beginning to be elided and the Great Vowel Shift from European values
to those in English today was underway, significantly changing the sound of the
spoken word. We need not be concerned with the details of
these changes apart from acknowledging that the modern reader of Middle English
will face real difficulties at first.
Readers who do not throw up their hands and retire from the field will
find that, in a short time indeed, they will read Chaucer with pleasure. The ease of reading a modernization
sacrifices too great a share of the
poetry. To encourage reference to the
original text, I here transcribe the Middle English and provide a following prose
translation meant only to facilitate a return to Chaucer’s own words. Even a first-time reader of Middle English,
will, with a bit of effort, find Chaucer intelligible before long.
The “General Prologue” to The Canterbury
Tales provides a description of the company that had assembled to travel
together the sixty miles or so the visit the shrine of St. Thomas. Such a trip is a device to bring together
people of widely varying social classes, amounting really to a microcosm of
English society. Along with the pilgrims’
individual stories, which cover a wide range from the courtly to the ribald, from the literary
to the colloquial, the narration as a whole is a kind of encyclopedia of
English types of the era, a comprehensive catalogue of the period’s sociology
as well as of human psychology. Novels as
we know them were not to be written for several hundred years, but Chaucer is
almost novelistic in his portrayals of his characters. The depiction, for instance, of the Wife of
Bath when she is first introduced, implies a great deal about her in a brief
passage.
A Good Wif
was ther of biside Bathe,
But she was
som-del deef, and that was scathe.
Of
clooth-makyng she hadde swich an haunt
She passed
hem of Ypres and of Gaunt.
In al the
parisshe wif ne was ther noon
That to the
offrynge bifore hire sholde goon;
And if ther
dide, certeyn so wrooth was she
That she was
out of alle charitee.
Hir
coverchiefs ful fyne weren of ground;
I dorste
swere they weyeden ten pound
That on a
Sonday weren upon hir heed.
Hir hosen
weren of fyn scarlet reed,
Ful streite
y-teyd, and shoes ful moyste and newe.
Boold was hir
face, and fair, and reed of hewe.
She was a
worthy womman al hir lyve;
Housbondes at
chirche dore she hadde fyve,
Withouten
oother compaignye in youthe;
But ther-of
nedeth nat to speke as nowthe.
And thries
hadde she been at Jérusalem;
She hadde
passed many a straunge strem;
At Rome she
hadde been, and at Boloigne,
In Galice at
Seint Jame, and at Coloigne.
She koude
muchel of wandrynge by the weye.
Gat-tothed
was she, soothly for to seye.
Upon an
amblere esily she sat,
Y-wympled
wel, and on hir heed an hat
As brood as
is a bokeler or a targe;
A foot-mantel
aboute hir hipes large,
And on hire
feet a paire of spores sharpe.
In
felaweshipe wel koude she laughe and carpe;
Of remedies
of love she knew per chauncé,
For she koude
of that art the olde daunce.
(445-476)
There was a good wife who lived near Bath, but she was
somewhat deaf, and that was a pity. She
was so good at cloth-making that she surpassed the producers in Ypres and Ghent. In her parish no one else could go to make an
offering before her. If anyone beat her,
she was so angry she lost all charitable feeling. Her kerchiefs were very finely woven, I dare
swear that what she wore on her head on Sunday weighed ten pounds. Her stockings were a fine scarlet red,
tightly tied and shoes quite supple and new.
She was a respectable woman all her life. She had married five husbands by the church
door, not counting her boyfriends in youth of which we need say no more. She had visited Jerusalem three times and had
been through many a strange body of water.
She had been at Rome and at Boulogne, at St. James in Galicia and at
Cologne. She knew much about wandering
the byways. She was gap-toothed to tell
the truth and sat easily on a pacing horse.
On her head over a good wimple she wore a hat as broad as a buckler or
shield and around her big hips she had an overskirt while on her feet she had
sharp spurs. In society she knew well
how to laugh and gab. She happened to
know many remedies for love, for she knew well the ways of that old dance.
Though medieval England was, of course, a
patriarchal society, the example of the Wife of Bath proves that a determined
woman could enjoy significant autonomy.
Her skill at weaving provided a secure economic base, and her pride at
having achieved a certain affluence is evident in her wish to make a show of
her offerings in church. For her
Christian charity was incidental to social rivalry and the conspicuous display
of wealth. Thus her clothing also conveys
status with elaborate headwear for religious services where she would be seen
by all (like some contemporary church ladies).
Her physical vigor is suggested by her having outlived five husbands,
not to mention her earlier boyfriends, though she always kept her behavior
within bounds, remaining a “worthy woman.” Her restless energy is also indicated by her
extensive travels. Few people made a
pilgrimage to the Holy Land even once, but she has done it three times as well
as having visited the chief shrines of Europe.
Though physically imperfect with her partial deafness and gap-teeth, she
has lived a full and adventurous life.
Her joie de vivre is indicated by her pleasure in conversation
and even more in her character as a lover, one who knows well “that old
dance.”
The many concrete details in her depiction
all contribute to a unified and convincing picture of a woman who makes the
most of her possibilities, letting neither her husbands’ deaths nor her
physical imperfections limit her pleasure in living the good life. These characteristics are further developed
in the tale she later tells, as well as in its prologue, twice as long as the
story itself, but virtually all are at least implied in these thirty-one lines
of verse in the Prologue.
Though Chaucer’s
fame rests on his long poems, chiefly The Canterbury Tales and Troilus
and Criseyde, he did leave a number of shorter pieces, among them a love
poem, the “Balade to Rosamounde.” The
ballade form was one of the three patterns (the “formes fixes”)
developed in fourteenth century France, but the versification was not the only
Continental convention Chaucer naturalized for Britain. The poem’s content, a courtly love lament in
which the lover extravagantly praises his beloved while complaining of her
coldness, had appeared in poetry since ancient times, but it had been
particularly cultivated among the Troubadours, trouvères, and Minnesinger
of Europe since the beginning of the twelfth century. Chaucer explicitly declares his use of such
“courtly” conventions by saying he acts “curtaysly.”
Madame, ye
ben of al beaute shryne
As fer as
cercled is the mapamounde,
For as the
cristal glorious ye shyne,
And lyke ruby
ben your chekes rounde.
Therwith ye
ben so mery and so jocounde
That at a revel whan that I see you daunce,
It is an oynement unto my wounde,
Thogh ye to me ne do no daliaunce.
For thogh I wepe of teres ful a tyne,
Yet may that wo myn herte nat
confounde;
Your semy voys that ye so smal out
twyne
Maketh my thoght in joy and blis
habounde.
So curtaysly I go with love bounde
That to myself I sey in my penaunce,
"Suffyseth
me to love you, Rosemounde,
Thogh ye to
me ne do no daliaunce."
Nas neuer pyk walwed in galauntyne
As I in love am walwed and ywounde,
For which ful ofte I of myself devyne
That I am trew Tristam the secounde.
My love may not refreyde nor
affounde,
I brenne ay in an amorous plesaunce.
Do what you lyst, I wyl your thral be
founde,
Thogh ye to me ne do no daliaunce.
Madame, you
are a shrine of beauty itself, as much as exists through the map of the world,
for you shine like glorious crystal, and your full cheeks are like rubies,
besides which you are so merry and jolly that when I see you dance at a party
it is a balm to my wounds. Though you do
not make love to me in return, though I weep a bowlful of tears, may that woe
not confound my heart. Your becoming
voice that you use so softly makes my thoughts abound in joy and bliss. So I proceed courteously bound by love that I
say to myself in penance, “Let me love you, Rosamond, though you to me give no
love back.” Never was pike so covered in
aspic as I am covered in love and wounded.
For this reason I often declare to myself that I am a second
Tristan. My love may not cool down or be
destroyed, I burn always in the delight of love. Do as you please, I wis you would recognize
your slave, though to me you give no love in return.
The superlatives,
cast in imagery of precious stones, resemble those in dream visions. The poet’s praise of the woman is thus
otherworldly, miraculous, verging on supernatural. She herself constitutes a “shrine” to a sort
of divine beauty. The second stanza
describes the lover’s frustration as a sort of semi-religious penance. The third stanza compares him, besotted by
love, to a fish served in aspic, and then balances this striking and novel image
with a reference to Tristan, tragic protagonist of one of the most well-known
medieval legends. The question of to
what extent such conventions reflected actual behavior remains debated, but
such artificial lyric conventions convey the very real helplessness one may
experience with overmastering desire and the mystic power of sexual love. Chaucer here defines the note later to be
elaborated at great length by Elizabethan sonneteers and modern country music
composers.
Such love was not,
however the only variety of eros that Chaucer depicts. The first of the pilgrims’ stories is the knight’s
very refined and courtly tale and, after his conclusion, the host asks the monk
to follow, but the miller, sufficiently drunk that he has difficulty staying in
the saddle, intrudes, wanting to be next.
When the host asks him to allow his “better” to precede him, he threatens
to leave the company, promising his tale will be “noble.” The host then relents and the miller tells an
altogether vulgar story about two lusty youths
and an old carpenter’s young wife.
Nicholas, a student, rooms with the carpenter and, noticing that the
wife “hadde a likerous ye,” (“had a lecherous eye”), one day when the husband
is away, “prively he caughte hire by the queynte” (“he intimately grabs her by
the cunt”), and the two plot a tryst.
Without describing
the details of their rather elaborate plot, it is enough to know that a parish
clerk, Absolon, also has his eye on the fair wife and gives her gifts, but she
does not care for him, preferring the poor clerk. He approaches her window at night, asking for
a kiss and Nicholas and Alison enjoy a hearty laugh when Absolon is tricked
into kissing her bare ass in the dark
Abak he
stirte, and thoughte it was amys,
For wel he
wiste a womman hath no berd.
He felte a
thyng al rough and long yherd,
And seyde,
"Fy! allas! what have I do?"
Back he
jumped, and thought it was amiss, for he knew well that a woman has no beard. He felt a rough and long-haired thing, and
said, “Fie! Alas! What have I done?”
When he returns, Nicholas and Alson assume that the trick
will work equally well a second time, but Absolon surprises them.
This Nicholas
was risen for to pisse,
And thoughte
he wolde amenden al the jape;
He sholde
kisse his ers er that he scape.
And up the
wyndowe dide he hastily,
And out his
ers he putteth pryvely
Over the
buttok, to the haunche-bon;
And therwith
spak this clerk, this Absolon,
"Spek,
sweete bryd, I noot nat where thou art."
This Nicholas
anon leet fle a fart
As greet as
it had been a thonder-dent,
That with the
strook he was almoost yblent;
And he was
redy with his iren hoot,
And Nicholas
amydde the ers he smoot.
Of gooth the
skyn an hande-brede aboute,
The hoote
kultour brende so his toute,
And for the
smert he wende for to dye.
As he were
wood, for wo he gan to crye,
"Help!
Water! Water! Help, for Goddes herte!"
Nicholas had
got up in order to piss and thought he would improve the joke and make him kiss
his ass before he escapes. So he rapidly
open the window and stealthily puts out his ass, the whole buttock up to the
haunch-bone. And with that this clerk,
this Absolon, speaks, “Speak, sweet bird, I don’t know where you are.” This Nicholas then lets fly a fart as great
as a crack of thunder so that he was almost blinded by the stroke. And he (Absolon) was ready with his hot iron and off goes the skin for a hand’s breadth
around. The hot plow blade so burned bis
butt he thought he would die with the pain.
He began to cry like a crazy person, “Help! Water!
Water! Help, for god’s heart!”
The conclusion,
for the story goes on to detail the carpenter’s disgrace, causes “everyone to
laugh at this contention” (“every wight gan laughen at this stryf”). Far from the lofty, idealistic,
self-discipline of the ballade, this story is the sort the French call a fabliau,
a novel genre with few roots in earlier European literature. Fabliaux typically
employ earthy humor with a very indelicate view of love-making and an eye more
toward entertainment than didacticism. In such passages moderns may hear the vernacular
voice of medieval England directly.
Though Chaucer was
innovative, he was in some ways a typical
medieval poet. For instance,
though he wrote gritty and realistic stories in colloquial language, he also
cultivated the art of rhetoric and wrote a number of allegorical dream visions
with no pretense of resemblance to everyday lived experience. His Parlement of Foules (Parliament of Fowls). In this story the narrator falls asleep
reading Cicero’s Somnium Scipionis (Dream of Scipio) and himself
dreams that Scipio himself is leading him through the heavenly realms were,
after passing through a temple of Venus, he comes upon a meeting of all the
birds called that they might each choose
a mate. The following passage illustrates the allegorical
technique of personifying abstractions.
Tho was I war
of Plesance anoonright,
And of Array, and Lust, and Curteisye,
And of the Craft that can and hath the might 220
To doon by force a wight to doon folye:
Disfigurat was she, I nil nat lie.
And by hemself under an ook, I gesse,
Saw I Delit that stood by Gentilesse.
I saw Beautee withouten any attir, 225
And Youthe ful of game and jolitee,
Foolhardinesse, and Flaterye, and Desir,
Messagerye, and Meede, and other three—
Hir names shal nat here be told for me;
And upon pileres grete of jasper longe 230
I saw a temple of bras yfounded stronge.
Aboute that temple daunceden alway
Wommen ynowe, of whiche some ther were
Faire of hemself, and some of hem were gay;
In kirteles al dischevele wente they there: 235
That was hir office alway, yeer by yere.
And on the temple of douves white and faire
Saw I sittinge many an hundred paire.
Bifore the temple-dore ful sobrely
Dame Pees sat with a curtin in hir hond, 240
And by hir side, wonder discreetly,
Dame Pacience sitting ther I foond,
With face pale, upon an hil of sond;
And aldernext withinne and eek withoute
Biheeste and Art, and of hir folk a route. 245
Then I was
aware of Pleasure nearby, and of Ornament, Desire, and Courtesy, and of the
Cunning that can have the power to force people to act foolishly. She was disfigured, I will not lie, and, by
himself, under an oak, I guess, I saw Delight that stood by Nobility. I saw Beauty, lacking any clothes, and Youth,
full of sport and jolliness, Foolhardiness, and Flattery, and Desire,
Message-sending, and pay-offs and three
others I shall not mention. And, with big
pillars of lengthy jasper, I saw a temple of brass with strong foundation. About that temple plenty of women were always
dancing all over, of which some were fair themselves and some in fine
outfits. They went there with disorderly
gowns . That was their role always, year
by year. And on the temple I saw white and pretty doves sittings, many a
hundred pair. In front of the temple
door Dame Peace sat, a curtain in her hand, and, by her side, marvelously
discreetly I found sitting, with a pale face on a hill of sand, and right next
to her, both within and without, Promise and Subtlety and their entourage.
Here his picture
of love is more objective, more philosophical, than in the Ballade, but still
quite genteel when compared to the down-to-earth desire of the Wife of
Bath. He suggests that love is rarely
ideal; it may be motivated by fancy dress, lust, and the use of refined
formulas, but it leads people to act foolishly.
This love is therefore to some extent “disfigured,” Delight, significantly, is sitting alone
though not far from the conventions of courtesy that ease human relations. He mentions then naked Beauty and energetic
Youth, likely guarantees of joy in love, but associated here with foolishness,
flattery, and the desire that leads to crazy behavior. The reader can imagine the gambits of lovers
by his references to messengers and bribes as well as “three other things I
will not mention here.” One may only
guess at such unnamed factors. Though
this locus of love is to some extent disorderly, yet the scene includes as well
Dame Patience, the Promise (of a favorable outcome), artfulness, and their
followers.
Whereas the description of the Wife of Bath had been, in a way, realistic and novel-like, implying likely plot-lines for the life of such a woman, and the Balade is a lyric outcry as though direct from the heart, and the Miller’s Tale is a dirty joke, with the allegory of The Parlement of Foules the reader finds an essayistic analysis of love's nature in general. Together these four texts provide a realistic view, than an idealized one, then a low and comic one, and finally an analytic sketch from top to bottom.
Chaucer is an encyclopedic artist, like
Homer and Shakespeare, aand his own personality is occluded as he strives to present the panorama of lived
experience. No single tone contains his
vision; he seeks to cover alevels of society and to embrace self-contradictory themes. Whereas today poetry is often considered a
matter of self-expression and individuality and innovation are prized, Chaucer
wrote at a time when precedent and imitation were prestigious and his own
practice managed to transform English literature while maintaining a
substantial loyalty to tradition at the same time. The fact that he produced a very large body
of sophisticated work while also taking an active professional role apart from writing
suggests not only his own considerable talents, but the cultural gap between
his era and modernity. Today it is
scarcely possible to imagine a government official who is a poet; then literary
accomplishment was thought a desideratum for all gentleman.
The task of
reading his words in the original Middle
English may seem at first demanding, but, for the student who takes the
trouble, it yields the great pleasure of hearing Chaucer’s voice directly, across
the centuries, in some instructive ways strange, in others very like ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment