Canterbury Tales

[Blue Hen]

We are about to start reading Canterbury Tales and WTM says 'selected tales'. Which ones would you recommend reading? or the ones to avoid?

 

Thanks,

Carole, DE

[Jane in NC]

We are about to start reading Canterbury Tales and WTM says 'selected tales'. Which ones would you recommend reading? or the ones to avoid?

 

Thanks,

Carole, DE

 

Hi Carole,

 

I'm prereading this now having recalled that some of Chaucer is, shall we say, base. What I do not know is if this is another situation like one finds with Gilgamesh in which some editions are more explicit than others.

 

The edition that I decided to use may not be everyone's first choice. After spending some time looking at a number of CTs at Barnes and Noble one night, I went with the Bantam edition (Hietts and Beidler translating) which has Middle English on the left facing page. The often preferred Penguin edition (Coghill) is written in verse, while I opted for the drier, literal translation, determining that my son would probably prefer a literal version in which he can occasionally glance at the Middle English.

 

That aside, The Miller's Tale is the bawdy one that many people leave out. Now I know that my son will be particularly amused by the carpenter's foolishness so I am not feeling inclined to censor this one at the moment--gotta think about it some more. As I recall, much of Chaucer is colorful--more sinners than saints.

 

So far I know that you'd be safe with the prologue and the Knight's Tale. The Reeve's Tale offended me more than The Miller's. Obviously I have more reading to do this week!

 

Jane

[cajun.classical]

We are about to start reading Canterbury Tales and WTM says 'selected tales'. Which ones would you recommend reading? or the ones to avoid?

 

Thanks,

Carole, DE

 

I'll try to post more later, but I'll give you a few thoughts to consider now. I studied the Canterbury Tales in graduate school. The problem with picking and choosing and leaving out the more bawdy tales is that Chaucer intended the tales to be read in pairs. He makes his point by contrasting two different views on the same subject. So, for example The Knights Tale is a story of chivalry and a love so platonic it's laughable. The Knight represents courtly love. Then the Miller gives a bawdy tale of a love that is only physical--the complete opposite of what the Knight believes. There are many examples of this sort of thing.

 

The tales are both individual stories and comments on the other tales. You might want to check out Realms of Gold by Leland Ryken. He gives a good explanation and defense of Chaucer's bawdiness and will help to put the tales in the proper perspective. Actually, I've been asked this question so many times that I've seriously considered writing a Reader's Guide to Chaucer. Maybe after the kids are grown...

 

Hope that helps some.

[momee]

I never heard that about the pairs - thanks for posting it.

Maybe you should write something for those of us with less smarts in that area, I'm mean experience :)

[Julie in GA]

The thing is, even when there's a good reason for bawdiness, there is still an age-appropriateness issue here. With very young children, you have to pick & choose what images and ideas they can handle.

[cajun.classical]

I never heard that about the pairs - thanks for posting it.

Maybe you should write something for those of us with less smarts in that area, I'm mean experience :)

 

I briefly looked over my Chaucer notes and it's probably more correct for me to say that the Tales belong in groups, rather than pairs. So, the first group includes the Knight's Tale, the Miller's Tale and The Reeve's Tale. After the knight tells his tale, the host asks the Miller to "quit" the Knight's tale, to "one up him" and he does, telling a complete parody of the Knight's Tale. However, the Miller makes a carpenter the butt of his joke. The Reeve is a carpenter, so he in turn tells a tale that makes a Miller that butt of his joke.

 

You get the idea.

[cajun.classical]

The thing is, even when there's a good reason for bawdiness, there is still an age-appropriateness issue here. With very young children, you have to pick & choose what images and ideas they can handle.

 

Yes, of course I agree. But I think it's helpful for a least the parent/teacher to understand how the tales work together. That way the teacher could at least give a summary of the more bawdy tales--rather than skipping them all together--it would provide a context that would elucidate the other tales.

 

I completely agree that parents should be cautious. And I made my comments without knowing the age of the student in question. I've taught the more bawdy tales to high school students and I assure you that, for this group of kids at least, the tale wasn't as bawdy as their discussions in the hall among themselves. But of course each parent must exercise discretion.

[Julie in GA]

I forgot I was on the high school board. Oops! I wouldn't have made my comment about age-appropriateness if I had realized that. Sorry! For the high school level I totally agree with you. :)

[Blue Hen]

I've enjoyed your comments and it has given me greater incentive to read through CT along with my DS. At 15yo he's quite ready for some bawdy tales.