Analysis Of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales

The Millere is a cherl, ye knowe wel this;

So was the Reve eek and othere mo,

And harlotrie they tolden bothe two.

(A 3182-84)” 147 BROWN

Chaucer is aware of the connection between teller and tale. This is crucial to an understanding of Chaucerian characters as agents, and, in particular, the Merchant as a reflexive subject, capable of irony, cynicism and humour. This self-awareness lends to the argument that he is autonomous.

In this essay, I intend to justify the claim that Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales participate in the trope of the modern subject. Furthermore, I will explore the religious and societal critique that this literature participates in, using literary mechanisms and intertextual reference as a means of exploring the ways in which Chaucer’s Merchant’s Tale as well as its Prologue and Epilogue accomplish this critique. [Finally, I will conclude with my understanding of how Chaucer’s writing, as a late Medieval text, contributes to meta-literature, our conception of the progression from one literary epoch to another.] The emphasis, as this essay will hopefully show, is an exploration of the roles texts bear towards each other. In starting this elective tutorial series, I never expected Ricardian literature to ask questions regarding intertextuality, intention, irony and the socio-political landscape.

Subverting the Fabliau theme in Merchant’s Tale, Miller’s Tale

IRONY

The Merchant’s Tale and the Miller’s Tale both tell the story of a young wife of a much older man,