Page 168 - DENG405_BRITISH_POETRY

Unit 18: The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales (Non-detailed Study): Discussion and Analysis-X

Yet can the Parson’s sermon seem anything other than just another genre? In a work which has Notes
anthologized genres–we have already read beast fables, saint’s lives, fabliaux, Breton lays, and all
manner of other stories–and problematised them, drawing attention to their speaker’s voice as
something (as the Pardoner points out) ventriloquized, can we really be expected to take the Parson’s
voice seriously?
Critics disagree wildly about the answer to this question. The same problem applies to Chaucer’s
retraction–which, as in the Man of Law’s prologue, blurs the line between the Chaucer writing the
Tales (who has also written the Book of the Duchess, Troilus and Criseyde, and so on) and the
fictional Chaucer who is a character within the pilgrimage. Is the Chaucer who writes these tales
just another constructed voice?
Or, perhaps, is the Retraction of the tales a genuine one? Chaucer, in this theory, genuinely was
dying and was unable to finish the work–or for some reason, felt the need to immediately retract it,
as he genuinely believed that it did come too close to sin. Thus, before the Host’s plan was complete,
he concluded the tale with a pious sermon and then a Retraction: no-one could therefore accuse the
Tales of being unchristian. Is it a death-bed confession?
A Retraction is a fairly usual way for a medieval work to end, and perhaps that points us to the
aforementioned effect: its very normality is perhaps a clue that Chaucer’s intention is not pure and
simple. For it could be read simply as another “funny voice”–the voice of the Chaucer who told Sir
Thopas: could be read as comedy rather than penance. Moreover, as E.T. Donaldson has firmly
stated, the use of the Parson’s Tale as an interpretative key to unlock the whole of the Tales is
problematic, particularly when you consider the deliberate religious provocation of tales like the
Miller’s, the Wife of Bath’s and the Merchant’s. The tales by no means seem to be written to a purely
Christian agenda-though Christianity is undoubtedly a key theme.
End-points in Chaucer are difficult to definitively interpret, and perhaps this dichotomy was intended
by Chaucer himself. Perhaps this ending is simply one way of closing down the Tales–the Manciple’s
tale, of course, has been only the most recent in a line of tales which reiterate the advice of these
final fragments to hold one’s peace, and know when to fall silent. Is this Chaucer, on an imaginary,
real or literary deathbed, punningly, holding his peace, but also being “at peace”? One thing is for
sure: understanding the ending of the Tales seems a fitting encapsulation of the complex problem
of interpreting the work as a whole.

18.4 Summary
• The Host is quite amazed, but then asks why–if the Canon is so important-he cares so little for
his honor, and dresses so shabbily.
• The Host then turns to the Yeoman himself, asking why his face is so discolored.
• In London, there lived a priest who sung masses for the dead – and one day he was visited by
the false Canon, who begged him to lend him a certain amount of gold.
• Next, the Canon told the priest to bring him a chalk stone, promising to make a gold ingot of
the same shape.
• The Host did so, hasting the Parson to tell his tale before the sun went down.

18.5 Keywords

Horrified : Full with horror.
Shabbily : Dressed in old or worn clothes.
Ingot : A rectangular block of steel, gold or other metal.
Sling : A sweetened drink of spirits, especially gin and water.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 161