Nun's Priest's Tale, more than just a beast fable
The Nun's Priest's Tale; More than just a Beast FableAt first glance the Nun's Priest's Tale appears to be a simplistic beast fable that provides the reader with a very basic moral lesson. Too often it is overlooked as one of Chaucer's lesser tales in terms of content and literary meaning. However, after a very close reading and much research I am of the opinion that this tale is one of Chaucer's most ingenious. This is true, in that Chaucer is able to encapsulate a number of different genres while offering the reader several different moral lessons, all in the framework of a simple and short tale whose main characters are a rooster a fox and a hen. Before one can analyze a beast fable one must know exactly what a beast fable is. A beast fable is obviously a story that has animals as main characters. It goes beyond that however, a true beast fable is one where "animals are used as embodiments or caricatures of human virtues, vices, prudences, and follies ... and the other typical qualities of mankind. They are generally brief cautionary anecdotes that use the obvious resemblances between man and animals to point a moral or push a proverb home entertainingly" (Coghill and Tolkien 12).
Pertelote begins the debate by stating her belief that dreams have no meaning: "Nothyng, God woot, but vanitee in sweven is" (2922). He suggests that maybe this was Chauntecleer's fate, and that he may have had no way of avoiding it despite his dream. On one hand, The Nun's Priest contends that Chauntecleer was properly informed. "The Nun's Priest's Tale and the Liberal Arts," Review of English Studies NS30 (1979), 257-267. The following passage describes Chauntecleer's instant attraction to Pertelote. Why would Chaucer have Chauntecleer ignore his own conclusions? What does this action say about the significance of the debate? One scholar contends that,The arguments used by Chauntecleer and Pertelote, irrelevant as they turn out to be, are not in themselves invalid; they are merely inapplicable to a situation which involves a natural predator and his prey (Scheps 7). He therefore responds with a contrary view stating that dreams can be a "warnynge of thynges that men after seen" (3126). The pinnacle of Christian misogyny evident in the text, however, is delivered through the words of the Nun's Priest, which is ironically appropriate as he is a 'henpecked' cleric with a female superior. It is further false because "Eve did not give Adam any counsel; she gave him an apple" (Payne, 211). The comedy of people falling in love at the age of seven days . In other words saying that woman is the source of man's happiness. Chaucer never lets the reader forget that the romance of this story truly is nothing more than the actions of two barnyard chickens; They peck, they are incestuous, they are not nobly born, nor are they knights or ladies, as one would expect romance characters to be. She does not suggest that he wander in the yard as the passage suggests, Chautecleer decidedly did this on his own. It is this absurdity, along with the breaking of expectations, which creates an awareness of the usually exclusive nature of romance conventions and thus creates the comical nature of the work.
Common topics in this essay:
Nun's Priest,
Priest's Tale,
Chauntecleer Pertelote,
Pertelote Syn,
Nun's Priest's,
Nothyng God,
Genesis Chauntecleer,
Homer's Hector,
Chautecleer Chaucer,
Eve Adam,
nun's priest's,
beast fable,
nun's priest's tale,
priest's tale,
nun's priest,
tale chaucer,
priest's tale chaucer,
rhetorical debate,
chaucer review,
christian misogyny,
moral lessons,
main characters,
tale chaucer review,
tolkien christopher chaucer,
debate christian misogyny,
|
Acceptance Essays
