How
does the depiction of outer qualities reveal the inner side of characters?
Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales is one of the most
highly regarded works in English literature. It is a collection of stories of
thirty pilgrims in one framed narration. Chaucer uses the general prologue to
set the scene for his reader, starting by familiarizing the reader by the
pleasant April weather and the conditions and then by introducing the characters
one by one. He wishes to make his readers
aware of each of the pilgrims hence he gives great details about their appearances,
manners and background. He does this mainly for two purposes: he wants the reader
to foreshadow the tales that the pilgrims are going to tell, by knowing who
they are and to which social class they belong and secondly he wants them to
analyze the inner qualities of the characters by understanding the outer
appearances and manners. We are going to discuss the later.
Among the thirty pilgrims
one of the first travelers that Chaucer talks about is a nun, a Prioress, whose
harshest curse was “by St. Loy”, and she was named madam Eglantine. She is told
to be very well dainty, healthy and courtly mannered. Chaucer satirizes the prioress by having the
reader praise the very characteristics that are not representative of nuns.
When we think of nuns, we think of women who have taken vows of chastity,
poverty, and faithfulness to God. The narrator praises none of these
qualities. Instead we hear that she sings through her nose; she speaks
French (but not in the Paris style--in other words, not very well); she has
nice table manners in that she never spills sauce on her bosom; she gives her
animals the finest foods; and she is rather large. She wears a gold
trinket that says “Amour vincit omnia” which
means,"love conquers all." All of these characteristics reveal
that she is not at all interested in her religious responsibilities.
At first Chaucer names
the nun “Eglantine” which symbolizes the flower Virgin Mary which is an
embodiment of love and mercy. This is very ironic because as we proceed reading
about the habits of the nun it becomes evident that the name given to her is in
odds with her actual character. She sings the praise of Almighty in a nasal
voice and smiles in a coy manner which makes her attractive at certain points.
She is a little too well dressed for a nun and has bright gray glass eyes.
Then the narrator
explains her extremely perfect table manners, she allowed no crumb to fall from
her lips, nor did she wet her fingers deeply in the sauce, she knew exactly how
to carry food to her mouth and made sure that no drops of food get spilled on
her breast. In short she was very much interested in etiquette. This reveals
her desire to be regarded as a member of higher class. This shows us that the
Prioress is concerned more with being ladylike and gentle, two affectations of
the aristocratic class, than with being pious and a religious figure. She spoke
French fluently, but not in the accent common in Paris, which indicates that
she has learned it from books merely to portray that she belongs to a higher
class, as in the medieval times French was considered the language of upper class
and courtly people. She should be speaking Latin if she was truly a religious
person because Latin in those times was considered to be the language of
church. Chaucer throws light on her manners and ways in order to question the
validity of her character as areligious figure.
Her feelings for
animals also clarify her hypercritical nature. According to Chaucer she was so
kind and so full of pity that she would weep if she saw a dead or bleeding rat
in a trap. Which is ironical because people in those medieval times were dying
because of plague which was caused by rats. This reveals her indifference to
human life and heedlessness ofcommon people which she should be caring for. She
had hounds whom she fed fine bread and meat and if one of her dogs was scolded
or beaten by someone she at once became sad and started crying. She should be
feeding people instead of animals. The Prioress’s kindness to her pet dogs is
seen as a weakness. Her charity should extend towards needy people rather than
animals. Moreover, in the medieval world animals were not thought to possess
souls and were as such outside the scheme of salvation. As a nun she cannot
strictly follow the rules of simplicity and poverty. Also she is imitating the
practice of courtly people here, as rich and upper class people used to keep
hounds and dogs as their pets. The poet criticizes her moral virtues as a
religious figure by praising her outer tenderness. She should be feeding the
poor instead of wasting “fine bread and meat’ on hounds.The fact that there is
no mention of her pitying or feeding the poor starving destitute in her parish
is ample proof of her hypocrisy. Chaucer emphasizes her hypocrisy by not
mentioning a single charitable deed of hers towards human beings.
There is a detailed
description of her clothing and facial features too. Her wimple was very neatly
pleated, her nose shapely, her eyes blue, and her mouth very small, soft and
red. She had a fair forehead, almost a hand’s-breadth wide (at Chaucer’s time
this trait was considered as the symbol of beauty), and she was certainly not
underfed. Her cloak was very well made and she also wore ornamental rosary
beads. All of these characteristics are at odds with the portrait of a true
prioress. Upon imagining a prioress one imagines a kind woman of simple
appearance, on the contrary when we think about our character it becomes clear
that Chaucer is mocking her “fine’ or “beautiful’ looks. Her way of wearing the
headscarf is not at all religious, her cape is made of fine cloth, she should
be wearing something simple and humble, this indicates that she is wasting the
church money on herself and is using it to beautify herself instead of spending
it on poor.The poet is trying to make the reader realize that the nun we are
concerned about is not mindless of her outer looks, though she should be more
concerned about her virtues she only gives importance to how she looks like.
This is the evidence of her distorted inner character. In seeming to
praise the nun's apparent beauty, the narrator instead exposes her lack of
commitment to her religious responsibilities and vows, her inner integrity and
uprightness.
The golden broach she
is wearing saying “Amour vincit omnia”(love
conquers all) also seems out of character for a nun since one can clearly
interpret that the ‘love’ is not the love of God but of the worldly nature. In
French “Amour” is not usually used for the divine love its interpretation is
generally the human love for each other. This also gives insight to the fact
that she gives more importance to the worldly matters rather than the divine
connection with God. In short the poet gives us an impression of the
‘religious’ character of this prioress by telling us about her priorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment