UNIT 2 MEDIEVAL AND ELIZABETHAN POETS: CHAUCER – SHAKESPEARE
Objectives
The objectives of this unit are to enable you to:
- Understand
the
- Outline
the various characters of the
- Know
Chaucer’s viewpoint of 14th century
- Identify
Spenser’s Faerie Queene
- Evaluate
Thomas Wyatt’s I Find No Peace
- Analyse
Michael Drayton’s Love’s Farewell
- Assess
Shakespeare as a poet
Introduction
The greatest English poet of the
Middle Ages, Geoffrey Chaucer (1325
– 1400), was called the Father
of English literature. Chaucer is an important figure in developing the
legality of the vernacular, Middle English, during the times when dominant
literary languages in
The Elizabethan poets (16th century
and shortly after) surfaced in
In this unit, you will learn about
the medieval poet Chaucer, and other Elizabethan poets including Shakespeare.
T/S: PLS MAKE STRUCTURE
2.1
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Geoffrey Chaucer was born in
·
A noblewoman's page
·
A courtier
·
A diplomat
·
A civil servant
·
A collector of scrap metal
There are no authoritarian records of his early life and learning. However,
it can be supposed from his works that he had the knowledge of reading French,
Latin and Italian.
In 1359, Chaucer contributed in the English army’s assault on
Chaucer’s initial work is considerably influenced by love poetry of the
French practice, which also comprises the Romaunt of the Rose and Saint
Cecilia, which afterwards became the ‘Second Nun's Tale’ in the Canterbury Tales.
In 1374, Chaucer was employed as the Controller of Customs on wools, skins
and hides for the
His phase of artistic development is known to have started at this time,
marked by the inscription of the General Prologue of the
According to Ralph Waldo Emerson, the US poet and essayist, in his essay ‘The
Poet’ in 1844, ‘...the rich poets, such as Homer, Chaucer, Shakespeare and
Raphael, have obviously no limits to their works, except the limits of their
lifetime, and resemble a mirror carried through the street, ready to render an
image of every created thing’.
Until less than a year prior to his demise, Chaucer was the Clerk of Works
of the
Chaucer died on October 25, 1400.
2.2 Chaucer’s Characters—An Outline
As mentioned
earlier, the Canterbury Tales is a frame story, or in this case,
stories, within another story. In the Prologue, we know the framework of the
plot, which helps weave each tale together: A group of pilgrims come across
each other at the Tabard Inn the night before their trek to the shrine of
Thomas Becket at Canterbury Cathedral.
Travel at the time, was slow and tedious.
Therefore, the innkeeper, namely Harry Bailey, suggests an idea to pass the
hours. The suggestion he comes up with is that each traveller narrate a story
on both their onward and return journey, to the shrine. He will be the judge, and
judge the contest. The one who wins would be receive a feast from others to a banquet
at his inn. All agree, and the journey starts.
Each of Chaucer’s characters is
extremely fascinating. We come across deceitful businessmen like the merchant,
the reeve and the foul-mouthed miller. The merchant is about to go bankrupt,
and the reeve, who steals from his employer. The miller, who sells grain, deceives
his customers by putting his thumb on the scales while the grain is weighed. Obviously,
these were reasonably common practices, and Chaucer clearly shows his contempt at
those who cheat the poor.
Also, we are introduced to nasty
professionals, such as the greedy doctor, who has minimum sympathy for his
patients. He possesses minimal knowledge of healing. Moreover, the lawyer, an extremely
boring person is often outwitted by his uneducated manciple. This provides an
insight on Chaucer’s viewpoint about such ‘professionals’.
The worst of Chaucer’s characters
are the ones who are actually associated with the Church. During medieval
What comes as respite is that not
all the characters we come across are evil. The priest and his brother, the
plowman, are both religious; poor yet upright. Both share a deep concern with
the well being of their fellow man. The Oxford Cleric, one more
‘good guy’, is a poor student. He
loves reading and to help others with their studies: ‘Gladly would he learn,
and gladly teach’. It is also evident that the author has profound regard for
the old knight, an honest warrior who values his horse and his weapons more
external appearance.
The character, who is closest to
reality, is the Wife of Bath. She is a widow from the city of
Chaucer also displays his sense
of humour by making comments on the lack of hygiene during the period by
drawing the characters of the cook, Roger. Poor Roger has an ulcer on his knee from
which oozes a thick white fluid. Immediately after he reveals this reality to
readers, Chaucer makes a mention, that this cook is popular for his blancmange,
a chicken dish prepared from a thick white sauce.
The Prologue to the Canterbury
Tales is an amazing work of literature. It is interesting, humourous and full
of social commentary. It gives readers a factual insight into the culture of
the Middle Ages. Its themes of love, power, lust, greed, compassion, courage,
and corruption are eternal. Meeting the pilgrims brings about a realization in
the readers that the heart and soul of mankind remain the same through the
centuries.
2.2.1 THE PROLOGUE
The ‘Prologue to the Canterbury Tales’ marks the attainment
of Chaucer’s ripeness as a poet. It
is one of the most important pieces of literature ever written. Chaucer takes
us on a beautiful journey of the medieval civilization of
The Canterbury Tales is a master or a frame story, which
means, stories contained by another story. In the Prologue, we are informed about
the structure of the plot that interweaves the character tales together. In Chaucer’s
this work, an assemblage of pilgrims convene at the Tabard Inn the night previous
to their trek to the shrine of Thomas Becket at Canterbury Cathedral.
Whan
that Aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote . . .
The beginning of the General Prologue is
with a wonderful representation of the arrival of spring. The storyteller
gives an account of the April rains, the blossoming flowers and leaves and the tweeting
birds. At this point of time in the year, according to the storyteller, people
feel a tough urge to start a pilgrimage journey. Several devoted English
pilgrims board on a voyage of visiting the shrines in far away holy lands. Nevertheless,
a lot of choose to take on a voyage to
The Knight
The narrator starts the portrayal of his
character with the Knight.
A KNIGHT ther was, and that a worthy man,
That fro the tyme that he first bigan
To ryden out, he loved chivalrye,
Trouthe and honour, fredom and curteisye.
As seen from the storyteller’s eyes, the Knight is the
noblest of the pilgrims. He embodies military know-how, loyalty, honour, openhandedness
and the right etiquettes. The knight’s behaviour is polite and mild fashion. He
is never impolite with anyone and shows greatest courtesy and courtesy. He is a
well-bred gentleman, and has won several combats.
At Alisaundre he was, whan it was wonne;
Ful
ofte tyme he hadde the bord bigonne
The
Knight’s son, who is also travelling with his father is approximately twenty
years old, and acts as his father’s squire, or apprentice.
With
him ther was his sone, a yong SQUYER,
A lovyer, and a lusty bacheler,
With lokkes crulle, as
they were leyd in presse.
Although the Squire has fought in conflicts with great
strength and ability, he like his father, is also devoted to love. A muscular, lovely,
young man with coiled hair, dressed in an outfit that has an embroidery of elegant
flowers, the Squire fights, thinking to succeed in getting the favour of his ‘lady’.
His abilities are those of the courteous lover—singing, playing the flute,
drawing, writing and riding—and he loves so fervently that does not get a great
deal of sleep at night. He is a creditable son satisfying all his
responsibilities toward his father, like carving his meat. Together with the
Knight and Squire, is the Knight’s Yeoman, or freeborn servant.
A YEMAN hadde he, and servaunts namo
At that tyme, for him
liste ryde so;
And he was clad in
cote and hood of grene;
The Yeoman is dressed in green from top to
bottom. He is known to carry a huge bow and beautifully feathered arrows, besides
a sword and small shield. His gear and attire give suggestions of his being a forester.
The Prioress
The storyteller now goes on to give an account of the
Prioress, that is, Madame Eglentyne. Although the Prioress does not belong to
the royal court, she tries her finest to imitate its conducts. She goes to enormous
extent to eat her food in a delicate style. She also tries her best to achieve
food from the table in a subtle manner, and to swab her lip clean of grease prior
to she drinks from her cup. She is smooth at speaking French, but with local
English accent. She demonstrates great sympathy towards animals, which is disclosed
by the fact that she cries on seeing a mouse entrapped, and giving her dogs
roasted meat and milk to eat. The storyteller finds her characteristics beautiful,
including her huge temple. On her arm she wears a set of prayer beads. A gold
brooch hangs from it, on which Latin words are written, which when interpreted denote
‘Love Conquers All’. She has one more nun and three priests with her.
The Monk
The subsequent pilgrim to be portrayed by the storyteller is
the monk. He is fond of hunting and has a lot of horses. He is very handsome
too. He is a motor cyclist riding in
front of cars at his monastery where he takes care of its trade with the outside
world. His horse’s bridle can be heard jingling in the wind clear and as a
church bell. His consciousness that the rule of his monastic order disheartens
monks from engaging in functions such as hunting makes him dismiss such customs
as valueless. The storyteller agrees with the monk as to why the monk should
drive himself wild with study or manual labour. The monk looks like a fat, hairless
and well-dressed wealthy Lord.
A monk ther was, a fair for the maistrie,
An outridere, that lovede venerie,
A manly man, to been an abbot able.
Ful many a deyntee hors hadde he in stable,
And whan he rood, men myghte his brydel heere
Gynglen in a whistlynge wynd als cleere
And eek as loude as dooth the chapel belle.
The Friar is the next component of the group who belongs to
a religious order who live completely by pleading. He is well-spoken, happiness-loving,
cheerful and socially pleasing. He hears confessions and to people who contribute
money he allocates very uncomplicated penance. Because of this he is very well-liked
with rich landowners all over the nation. Even if the patient is unable of
shedding tears he concurs that donating currency to friars is a symbol of true regret
and thereby justifies his clemency.
A frere ther was, a
wantowne and a merye,
A lymytour, a ful
solempne man.
In alle the ordres foure is noon that
So muchel of daliaunce and fair langage.
He hadde maad ful many a mariage
Of yonge wommen at his owene cost.
Unto his ordre he was a noble post.
Ful wel biloved and famulier was he
With frankeleyns over al in his contree,
And eek with worthy wommen of the toun;
For he hadde power of confessioun,
As seyde hymself, moore than a curat,
For of his ordre he was licenciat.
Ful swetely herde he confessioun,
And plesaunt was his absolucioun
He makes himself admired with innkeepers and barmaids who
can give foodstuff and drink. To tramps and lepers he pays no notice as they cannot
help him on his fraternal order. In spite of his vow of scarcity his extracted contributions
permit him to dress richly and live fairly cheerfully. Attired attractively in pleasant
boots and an imported fur hat, the Merchant speaks continuously of his incomes.
At borrowing currency the merchant is very good but intelligent enough to keep
anyone that he is in liability. The storyteller is unidentified with his name.
A thin and ragged student of philosophy at
Analysis
The Canterbury Tales is in excess of an estate’s lampoon
since the characters are completely individualized formations rather than straightforward
good quality or awful examples of some perfect type. Many of them seem conscious
that they obtain a socially distinct role and have made an attempt to redefine
their agreed role on their own terms. For instance, the Squire is training to dwell
in the similar social role as is father, the Knight but contrasting his father
he describes this role in terms of the models of courtly love more willingly
than crusading. The Princess is a nun but seeks to the modes and performance of
a lady of the court and includes the motifs of courteous love, like the Squire,
into her Christian career. More clearly corrupt or distort their social roles;
characters for example the Monk and the Friar, are talented to offer a good
reason and a underlying principle for their performance, showing that they have
cautiously considered how to go about occupying their vocations.
The storyteller admires the character being explained in excellent
terms, within each description promoting him or her as an exceptional example
of his or her kind. At the same time the storyteller indicates a thing about a
lot of the characters that the person who reads would be probable to view as
flawed or dishonest to changing extents. Naïve stance of the storyteller brings
in a lot of dissimilar ironies into the General Prologue. The person who reads
can distinguish dissimilarities between what each personality should be and
what he or she is though it is not forever clear precisely how sarcastic the storyteller
is being.
The storyteller is also a personality and an extremely complex
one at that. Some of storyteller’s prejudices are disclosed by examining his appearance
of the pilgrims. The clearest instance of this is the Monk’s portrayal in which
the storyteller inserts his own decision of the Monk into the real portrayal.
But the storyteller’s views are more subtly there more often than not. What he
does and doesn’t talk about and the degree to which he traces objective features
of the pilgrims are all vital to our own satirical understanding of the storyteller.
The Knight, the
Squire and the Yeoman
The Knight has fought in crusades all over the world and
comes as close as any of the characters to embodying the ideals of his
vocation. But the narrator suggests a slight separation between the individual
and the role even his case: the Knight doesn’t simply exemptly chivalry truth
honor freedom and courtesy; ‘he loves’ them. His virtues are because of his
self mindful chase of clearly conceived models. The knight’s cubicle is important
moreover. He is a commendable warrior and careful in the representation of
himself that he plans as well. His book is calculated to state humbleness more
willingly than vainglory.
Whereas the Knight is explained by the storyteller in terms
of theoretical ideals and clashes, his son, the Squire is portrayed more often
than not in terms of his aesthetic pleasant appearance. The squire organizes to
dwell in the same role as his father, but he envisages that role in a different
way, supplementing his father’s devotion to armed prowess and the Christian
cause with the models of courtly love. He shows all of the achievements and performances
approved for the courteous lover; he grooms and dresses himself carefully, he
plays and sings, he tries to win goodwill with his lady, and he doesn’t doze at
night because of his irresistible love. It is important to recognize, however,
that the Squire isn’t only in love since he is young and beautiful; he has
picked up all of his actions and poses from his civilization.
The recitation of the Knight’s servant, the Yeoman, is restricted
to an account of his physical look, leaving us with bit upon which to base a ending
about him as an person. He is, however, fairly well attired for someone of his
station, possibly signifying a self-conscious attempt to look the part of a
forester.
The Prioress, the Monk and the Friar
With the account of the Prioress, the Monk and the Friar,
the point of lampoon with which each person is presented slowly increases. Like
the Squire, the Prioress appears to have redefined her own personality,
imitating the performance of a woman of the regal court and supplementing her spiritual
garb with a courteous love motto: Love Conquers All. This does not of necessity
involve that she is corrupt: Chaucer’s lampoon of her is delicate rather than
scathing. More than a individual responsibility, the Prioress’s loyalty to courteous
love shows the universal appeal and power of the courtly love custom in
Chaucer’s time. All through The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer seems to question the
fame of courteous love in his own civilization, and to emphasize the disagreements
between courteous love and Christianity.
The storyteller focuses on the Prioress’s tale manners in tiny
aspect, candidly appreciating her courteous manners. He seems enthralled by her
mouth, as he talks about her smiling, her singing, her French speaking, her
eating and her drinking. As if to say sorry for dwelling so long on what he appears
to see as her erotic manner, he moves to a deliberation of her ‘conscience’,
but his choice to exemplify her great sympathy by concentrating on the manner she
treats her pets and responds to a mouse is almost certainly tongue-in-cheek.
The Prioress appears as a very sensibly portrayed human being, but she appears rather
lacking as a spiritual figure.
The Narrator’s admiring description of the Monk is more
conspicuously ironical than that of Prioress. The storyteller zeroes in on the
Monk with a gaudy image: his jingles as loud and clear as a chapel bell. This picture
is pointedly ironic, since the chapel is where the Monk should be but isn’t. To
superior amount than the squire or the Prioress, the Monk has disappeared from
his stipulated role as termed by the creators of his order. He lives like a noble
sooner than a cleric. Hunting is a tremendously luxurious form of vacation,
there formation of the aristocracies. The storyteller takes pains to demonstrate
that the Monk is conscious of the rules of his order but contempt them.
Just like the Monk, the Friar does not carry out his job as
it was at first conceived. Saint Francis, the example for begging Friars,
ministered specially to beggars and lepers, the Friar scorns. Furthermore, the
Friar doesn’t just abandon his religious duties; he in fact abuses them for his
own advantage. The account of his activities implies that he gives simple compensation
in order to get additional money, so that he can live healthily. Like the Monk,
the Friar is prepared with viewpoints giving good reason for his
reinterpretation of his role: tramps and lepers cannot help Church, and giving currency
is a sure symbol of repentance. The storyteller powerfully hints that the Friar
is lecherous as well as greedy. The indication that he made a lot of marriages
at his own cost proposes that he established husbands for young women he had
made pregnant. His fair neck is a characteristic sign of lecherousness.
The Merchant, the
Clerk and the Man of Law
The Merchant, the Clerk and the Man of Law typify three specialized
types. Though the storyteller bravely keeps up the charade of praising everybody,
the Merchant obviously taxes his aptitude to do so. The Merchant is in amount
overdue, it seems that a regular occurrence and his hypothetical deftness at
hiding his indebtedness is underlined by the information that even the naïve storyteller
knows about it. Although the storyteller would like to praise him, the Merchant
hasn’t even told the group his name.
Sandwiched between two personalities who are obviously
devoted to money, the tattered Clerk materializes noticeably oblivious to experienced
concerns. However, the final reason of his study is not clear. The Man of Law deviates
piercingly with the Clerk in that he has used his studies for financial gain.
The white-bearded
The Physician who is taffeta-clad bases his practice of
medicine and surgery on methodical information of astronomy and the four comedies.
He has a fine system with his apothecaries, since they make each other money.
He is well conscious with antique and contemporary medical authorities, but
reads little Scripture. He is rather careful, and the storyteller jokes that
the doctor’s preferred medicine is gold.
The somewhat deaf wife of bath is explained next by the storyteller.
This obsessive seamstress is forever first to the offering at mass, and if an
important person goes ahead of her she is depressed. She wears head coverings
to Mass that the storyteller wonders must weigh ten pounds. She has taken three
pilgrimages to
Next a calm and poor village Parson is portrayed. Pure of sense
of right and wrong and true to Christ’s lessons, the Parson takes pleasure in
preaching and instructing his parishioners, but he disgusts excommunicating
those who cannot give their tithes. He marches with his squad to visit all his
parishioners, no matter how distant. He considers that a priest must be clean, since
he serves an instance for his people attending worship, his flock. The parson
is dedicated to his rural community and does not seek a better engagement. He
is even caring to sinners, preferring to educate them by instance rather than scorn.
The parson is followed by his brother, a Plowman, who works hard, loves God and
his fellow citizen, toils ‘for Christ’s sake’, and disburses his tithes on
time.
The red-haired Miller loves basic, coarse jokes and
drinking. He is immensely corpulent and strong, able to lift doors off their
hinges or put them down by running at them with his head. He has a mole on his
nose with bright red hairs sticking out of it like bristles, black nostrils,
and a mouth like a furnace. He wears a sword and buckler, and loves to joke
around and narrate dirty stories. He filches from his customers, and plays the
bagpipes.
An inn of court (school of law) with stipulations is stocked
by the Manciple. Although he is unprofessional, this manciple is smarter than
most of the lawyers he serves. The spindly, irritated Reeve has hair so short
that he harks back the storyteller of a priest. He manages his lord’s land so
well that he is clever to save his own cash and property in a stingy fashion.
The Reeve is also a high-quality carpenter, and he travels behind everyone else
always.
The Summoner blames those accused of violating Church rule.
When intoxicated, he pretentiously spurts the few Latin phrases he knows. His countenance
is bright red due to a not mentioned disease. He uses his preeminence immorally
for his own gain. He is tremendously lecherous, and uses his power to control
the young women in his authority. In exchange for a quart of wine, he would let
another man snooze with his girlfriend for a year and then forgive the man wholly.
The Pardoner, who had just been in the court of Rome, negotiates
with the Summoner. He sings with his understanding, and has long, curving
yellow hair. The storyteller cites that the Pardoner believes he rides very stylishly,
with nothing covering his skull. He has brought back many mementos from his fling
to
Analysis
The storyteller again, portrays many of the characters as although
he had in fact witnessed them doing things he has only listened to them talk
about. Other portrayals for example the Miller, are obviously shaped by class typecasts.
The
The
The Shipman and the
Physician
The recitations of the Shipman and the Physician are both
barbed with eagerly satiric turns of expression suggesting deceit and avarice.
The Shipman’s theft of wine is slipped in among accounts of his expert
proficiencies, and his cruelty in encounter is for a short time noted in the
midst of his other nautical accomplishments. The narrator gives a remarkable
catalog of the Physician’s knowledge, but then exclaims the starting comment
that he abandons the Bible, implying that his anxiety for the corpse comes at
the expenditure of the soul. Furthermore, the storyteller’s remarks about the
Doctor’s love of gold suggest that he is out to make cash rather than to assist
others.
The Wife of
The Wife of Bath is maybe Chaucer’s most attractive
character who has gone down in the pages of history. Readers have interpreted
the Wife of Bath as an image either of Chaucer’s proto-feminism or of his
misogyny. This is according to whether they deduce Chaucer’s implied approach
toward this courageous and candid lady as adoring or mocking. Surely, she
exemplifies many of the mannerisms that woman-hating writers of Chaucer time assaulted:
she is vain, bossy and immoral. However, at the same time, Chaucer portrays the
Wife of Bath in such sensible and caring detail that it is hard to see her just
as a satire of a dreadful woman. Minute features of her account, such as the
gap between her teeth and her deafness, are increased upon in the long introduction
to her tale.
‘Experience’, even if no on paper authorities lived in the
world, ‘is right ynogh for me’. This is how the accent of the Wife of Bath sets
out. She has positively had ‘experience’, and is keen to give good reason
against biblical power. She has married five times and authenticates it in the
course of the scripture saying that Christ did not ever in his educations talk
about that people should only be married once. The Bible says ‘go forth and
multiply’, and Solomon had in excess of one wife. The Wife’s husbands, chosen
by their ‘chestes’ and ‘nether purs’,
have been quite polite men. She is now keenly awaiting the sixth. She also affirms
that Jesus has not severely laid down a law for virginity, and highly quotes
that we must utilize our sex organs, ‘they were nat maad for noght’.
The Wife affirms that it is likely to understand the
scriptures as ‘bothe up and doun’— you may discuss that sex organs are for cleansing
of urine, or to distinguish between a male and female, and for not anything
else. The Wife then again states that she will ‘use myn instrument’ as and when
her husband makes a decision he desires to ‘paye his dette’. Her husband, the
Wife goes on, shall be equally her ‘dettour and my thral’ (debtor and slave)
and that she would score it on his flesh.
Three of the Wife’s husbands were polite men while two were awful.
The three were polite, wealthy and old (and impotent!). They handed over the
Wife all their possessions, which led to her not giving them the enjoyment of
sex. She suspended sex from these men so that she would get precisely what she desired.
Women, the Wife goes on, are able of lying and stealing better than any man.
She reveals her ability for controlling her husbands. She manages her husbands
by deliberately assaulting her husband with a whole handful of grievances and many
biblical glossing (for justification). She starts a squabble, resulting in her insists
getting fulfilled. By putting false claims on her husband, that of unfaithfulness,
the Wife disguises her own unfaithfulness—even calling her maid and Jankin in, as
false witnesses, to support her allegations.
The Wife even extorted cash from her husbands by making maintains
that, if she were to sell her ‘bele chose’ (sexual favours), she would be much better-off
than them. So, this is how the Wife took care of her first three husbands, the
three, good, old, rich men. The Wife’s fourth husband, was a reveller. He even maintained a mistress and also had a wife.
He was a ideal match for the Wife of Bath, with both of them having a number of
ordinary qualities, but he soon died.
The fifth husband was the cruelest. He was good in bed but or
else violent, beating her cruelly. He could ‘glose’ (flatter) her hugely well when
he wanted to have sex. She was most fond of him, as he played hard to get with
her. He was a student at
Jankin was habitual in reading his book of ‘wikked wyves’, a
compilation of anti-feminist literature, which contained works from Valerius
and Theophrastus,
Having increased for herself all of the ‘maistrie’ (mastery,
control, dominance), Jankin then begged her to keep all of her own possessions.
After that day they never had a quarrel once more. They were both honest to
each other with her being very kind to him.
The Parson and the
Plowman
Coming after an index of very experienced characters, these
two brothers are noticeable as strange examples of Christian ideals. The
Plowman goes after the Gospel, loving God and his fellow citizen, laboring for
Christ’s sake, and loyally paying tithes to the Church. Their “worth” is thus
of a completely dissimilar kind from that allocated to the courageous Knight or
to the skilled and rich characters. The Parson has more difficult to understand
role than the Plowman, and an additional urbane awareness of his significance.
The Miller, the Manciple
and the Reeve
The Miller, the Manciple and the Reeve are all wardens, in
the wisdom that other people hand over them their assets. All three of them mistreat
that faith. Stewardship plays an indispensable representative role in The Canterbury Tales, just as it does in
the Gospels. In his fables, Jesus used stewardship as a symbol for Christian
life, since God calls the being to account for his or her acts on the Day of
Judgment, just as a warden must show whether he has made a profitable use of
his master’s possessions.
The Miller seems more demonic than Christian, with his aggressive
and terrible habits, his mouth like a furnace, the angry red hairs growing from
his wart, and his black nostrils. His ‘golden thumb’ alludes to his practice of
deceiving his clients. The storyteller paradoxically sustains the Manciple as a
replica of a good warden. The Manciple’s employers are all lawyers, skilled to assist
others to live in their means, but the Manciple is even more shrewd than they
are. The Reeve is depicted as a very skilled thief-one who can swindle his own
auditors, and who knows all the traps of managers, servants, herdsmen, and
millers since he is false himself. Worst of all, he takes enjoyment in his
master’s thanks for lending his master the things he has stolen from him.
The Summoner and the
Pardoner
The Summoner and Pardoner, who voyage together, are the most
deceitful and debased of all the pilgrims. They are not members of heavenly
orders but somewhat lay officers of the Church. Neither considers what he does
for the Church; in its place, they both deform their functions for their own income
and the dishonesty of others. The Summoner is a lecher and an inebriate, forever
looking for an inducement. His unhealthy face implies an unhealthy soul. The
Pardoner is a more multifaceted figure. He intones wonderfully in church and
has an aptitude for beguiling his rather aghast audience. Longhaired and
beardless, the Pardoner’s sexuality is unsure. The storyteller mentions that he
thought the Pardoner to be gelding or a mare, perhaps proposing that he is
either a eunuch or a homosexual. His homosexuality is further suggested by his
harmonizing with the Summoner’s ‘stiff burdoun’, which denotes the bass line of
a tune but also hints at the male genitalia (673). The Pardoner will further upset
the agreed-upon arrangement of the journey (friendly tale-telling) by launching
into his indulgence-selling tradition, turning his tale into lecture he regularly
uses to dupe people into feeding his voracity. The storyteller’s scorn of the
Pardoner may in part owe to greed of the Pardoner’s skill at mesmerizing spectators for financial reward-after all;
this is a poet’s purpose as well.
After all of the pilgrims are initiated, the storyteller
apologizes for any likely offense the person who reads may take from his tales,
clarifying that he senses that he must be realistic in replicating the
characters’ words, even if they are impolite or revolting. He quotes Christ and
Plato as support for his case that it is supreme to speak plainly and tell the fact
rather than to lie. Then he returns to his tale of the first night he spent
with the company of pilgrims. The Host of tavern speaks to the company after
serving the pilgrims a feast and settling the invoice with them. He balances
and welcomes the group, telling them they are the happiest assembly of pilgrims
to pass through his inn all year. He puts in that he would like to donate to
their excitement, free of charge. He says that he is certain they will be
telling stories as they travel, since it would be tiresome to travel in stillness.
So, he advocates inventing some activity for them if they will commonly agree
to do as he says. He directs the collection to vote, and the storyteller states
that the group didn’t believe it would be valuable to argue or on purpose over
the Host’s proposal and approved right away.
The Host cheers the assemblage on its good decree. He puts
down his plan: each pilgrim will tell two stories on the way to
The assemblage agrees and makes the Host its director,
judge, and record keeper. They settle on a worth for the dinner prize and go
back to drinking wine. The next morning, the Host wakes up everyone and gathers,
the pilgrims mutually. After they have begun, he repeats the group of the accord
they made. He also repeats them that whoever resists him must pay for the whole
lot spent along the way. He counsels the group members to draw straw to make a
decision who tells the first tale. The Knight triumphs and prepares to begin
his story.
Analysis
The Host shows himself to be astute businessman. Once he has
taken the pilgrims’ cash for their dinners, he takes their brains away from
what they have just spent by cajoling them, complimenting them for their amusement.
Evenly quickly, he modifies the center of the pilgrimage. In the opening lines
of the General Prologue, the storyteller states that people go on pilgrimages
to thank the martyr, who has helped them when they were in want. But Balley (as
the Host is later called) tells the group, ‘Ye goon to Canterbury-God yow
speede, / the blissful martir quite yow youre meede’! he watches the pilgrimage
as an economic deal: the pilgrims voyage to the martyr and in return the martyr
recompenses them. The word ‘quite’ means ‘repay’, and it will become a leader
motif throughout the tales, as each person is put in a sort of debt by the preceding
character’s tale, and must repay him or her with a new story. In place of
traveling to reach at a destination (the shrine of Saint Thomas Becket), the
traveling turns out to be a contest, and the pilgrimage becomes about the journey
itself rather than the purpose, Bailey also stands to benefit from the competition;
the victor of the contest wins a free meal at his tavern, to be paid for by the
rest of the members, all of whom will in fact eat with the winner and thus purchase
more meals from Bailey.
After crafting the storytelling competition, Bailey rapidly allocates
himself its moderator. Once the pilgrims have voted to participate in the
contest, Bailey attaches himself as their ruler, and anybody who resists him
faces a severe financial punishment. Some have construed Bailey’s quick
takeover of the pilgrimage as a parable for the beginning of total monarchy.
The storyteller refers to the Host as the group’s ‘governor’, ‘judge’, and
‘reportour [record- keeper]’—all extremely legalistic conditions.
2.3 Thomas Wyatt–I Find No
Peace
Sir Thomas
Wyatt was an English
lyrical poet of the 16th century. He is known for introducing the
sonnet into English. He was borne at
Wyatt’s did acknowledge the object
of experimenting with the English language. He desired to civilize it, to raise
its powers to those of its neighbours. Though a majority of his literary output
is known to consist of translations of sonnets by the Italian poet Petrarch, he
wrote sonnets of his own. Wyatt's sonnets made their first appearance in
Tottle's Miscellany. It is presently on display in the British Library in
Besides imitating the works of the classical writers Seneca
and Horace, he carried out trials in stanza forms. These comprise the rondeau,
epigrams, terza rima, ottava rima songs and satires. He also tried with
monorime, triplets with refrains, quatrains with special length of line and
rhyme schemes, quatrains with codas, and the French forms of douzaine and
treizaine. In addition, he also initiated his existing writers to his poulter's
measure form (Alexandrine couplets of twelve syllable iambic lines that
alternated with a fourteener, fourteen syllable line). He is known as a master
in the iambic tetrameter.
Wyatt’s poetry is an indication of classical and Italian
models. He also welcomed the writing of Chaucer. His terminology reflects
Chaucer’s (for instance, his use of Chaucer’s word newfangleness, meaning
fickle, in They flee from me that sometime did me seek). His well-known poems
are those that handle the experiments of romantic love. His other poems were
scathing, satirical indictments of the hypocrisies and flat-out pandering needed
of courtiers ambitious to advance at the Tudor court.
If the present times readers go through few lines from
The Petrarchan sonnet offers the English poet with an outline
and emotions. The whole nature of the tie between the poet and his beloved had come
out conventionalized in terms of a romanticized courteous love outlook, that
Petrarch had made obvious toward Laura in his love sonnets. The concept of the
lover as the modest servant of the fair lady, wounded by her glance,
tempest-tossed in seas of unhappiness in rejection, changing in frame of mind
as per the attendance or nonattendance of his beloved—was obtained from the
medieval concept of courteous love, an idea of love which came out from the altering
attitude towards women, based around Virgin Mary as a the perfect instance. It
should now be brought to note that the imported poetic subject had also become significant
to please the mental needs and cultural tastes of the English gentlemen brought
about by the Renaissance. That is the motive for us finding the historical survival
of the English counterparts of Laura almost for all the 16th century
sonneteers.
2.3.1 I FIND NO PEACE
Wyatt’s ‘I Find No Peace’ is a sonnet with a characteristic
setting in the Petrarchan meeting; it has alike five rhymes—abcde, and can be separated
into two parts—octave and sestet. Though, it requires to be brought into note
here that Wyatt deviates from the Petrarchan model in more than a few ways.
While in the previous, the poem’s subject is introduced in the octave and
developed in the sestet, Wyatt’s poem does not uphold the partition and allocation
of thought. The poet begins by describing the conflicting states of intellect
brought about by the beginning of love:
“I find no peace and all my war is done,
I fear and hope, I burn and freeze like
ice…”
These carefully selected monosyllabic utterances
consist enough information to notify the
persona who read, about that which has gone before. His ‘peace’ of mind has
been wrecked by the ‘war’ he has been waging aligned with himself and his
ladylove to win her love. It may be inferred here whether after discovering
that his ‘war is done’, namely, his game is finished, he acquires to writing
this sonnet. This is in an effort to converse to her the words of his wish;
for, all other lines in the poem are set approximately as masked pleas, as frantic
cries to the mistress. This is nowhere as exceptional as in the second line,
where the poet talks about experiencing opposing considerations and feelings.
He fears being refused by her, and thus gets petrified at this contemplation. Though,
at the same time he expects to win her favor. This leads to a ‘burn’ in wish
for her. It is notable here that Wyatt’s clarification of the consequence of
love, which has not been won, minds the rules of the commencement of love produced
by the first discharge of the hormones in the human body. Quite reliable with
this the poet discovers himself carelessness about an ideal situation: ‘I fly
above the wind…’; but the next instant the reverie breaks down and he discovers
himself pitiful heavy with the thoughts of breakdown and fails to ‘arise’ out
of the state of affairs.
In the fourth line, the poet has actually come
down on the most leading aspect of love in his acknowledgment, namely its
possessive feature. Love is a possessive nature and it decides the passageway
of passion. When Wyatt believes that he has not protected his beloved’s love,
he senses ‘naught I have’, but the subsequent moment when he expects he might
win her, it appears to him that ‘all the world I seize on’. The idea is that
for him the physical ownership of the beloved is the physical ownership of the
world, that is to say, it says the terms for his survival in time and liberty.
Conjoined with this, nevertheless, another feature love also comes out in the
next two lines. It was a widespread thought throughout the Renaissance that the
passionate gaze or momentary look of the beloved, like the one of a sorceress,
might cast a magic charm, which may act as a catch for the powerless lover. The
words—‘yet can I ’scape nowise’—inform on this kind of logic.
The defenselessness of the lover reaches
its high point at the very core, in the seventh line, when the poet talks about
death. It is expressively plausible that a frustrated may imagine of death as
the last way-out of the sufferings of love. For the Renaissance poets the word
‘death’, still, operated more on the metaphorical level as an tremendous
thought, as an tremendous threat to induce the reader of the authenticity of
his claim than on the plain of realism as an act. The consequence of
The subject of death has been carried on
to the sestet, and here it signifies putting an end to physical continuation,
which loses meaning if he fails in securing the beloved’s favour. But dissimilar
the speaker of a Petrarchan sonnet the subject of the octave has not been talked
about here to make your mind up about the conflicts. Again, it is only in the
twelfth line of the poem that we are told about his mental agitation, that the
poet has plunged in love. But it is not, as he says, that he disgusts himself since
he loves her. He may hate himself at the consideration of being refused for
failing to become commendable of her. Again, he himself spoils in self-pity and
finds nourishment and matter for his thoughts in his mourning. This leads him
sometimes to pessimism and he laughs in his soreness.
In the final couplet Wyatt tries to place
an end to the opposing and antithetical considerations and feelings by stating
in a self-important fashion that he appreciates that his ‘delight’, that is,
the thing of his delight or ladylove is the reason of all these sufferings. It
must be said here that by providing a final couplet, like Shakespeare later on,
Wyatt diverges from the Petrarchan form. Again the poem is marked by the nonattendance
of Neo-Platonic idea of love, the seal of a Petrarchan sonnet, an idea in which
a speaker like Petrarch would admit the ultimate divine beauty through the
idealisation and adoration of the religious beauty of a beloved like Laura.
The
sonnet is a discussion between what Wyatt senses and what he knows he should believe.
Though he knows that his lover reasons all of his pain, he is inconsistent and
still wants to become commendable of her. His enturnal disagreement causes him
to even think of death, not out of mourning but out of knowing he is not sufficient
for her.
Wyatt, along with
2.4 EDMUND SPENSER
Edmund Spenser was an English Elizabethan poet, most famous for
The Faerie Queene, an epic poem and fantastical allegory that rejoices the
Tudor dynasty and Elizabeth I. He is known as one of the ruling artists of
Modern English verse in its childhood, and one of the remarkable poets in the
English language.
He was born in
By his poetry Spenser expected to get a place at court,
which he visited in
2.4.1 THE FAERIE
QUEENE
The Faerie Queene is an unfinished English epic poem by
Edmund Spenser. The first part was published in 1590, while the second part was
published in 1596. The Faerie Queene is striking for its form. It was the first
job written in Spenserian stanza and is one of the lengthiest poetries in the
English. It is a representative work. Spenser wrote it in approval of Queen
Elizabeth I. In a completely figurative background, the poem is known to pursue
many knights, examining their numerous virtues. In Spenser's ‘A Letter of the
Authors’, he states that the total epic poem is ‘cloudily enwrapped in
allegorical devises’. He also excerpts that ‘The Faerie Queene’ was published mostly
to ‘fashion a gentleman or noble person in virtuous and gentle discipline’.
The Faerie Queene gained political favour with Elizabeth I
and was therefore a great hit, so much so that it became Spenser's defining
work. So much did the poem become a favourite with the monarch that it led to
her granting Spenser a pension for life. The pension amounted to 50 pounds a
year, although there is nothing to suggest that
A Celebration of the
Virtues
Spenser wrote a letter to Sir Walter Raleigh in 1589 containing
a preface for The Faerie Queene. In it Spenser gives a description of the symbolic
appearance of high merits by the Arthurian knights in the mythical ‘Faerieland’.
Its appearance is as a preface to the epic in a bulk of the published editions,
this letter lays a summarized plan for 24 books: 12 based each on a diverse
knight who exemplified one of 12 ‘private virtues’, and a likely 12 more based on
King Arthur representing twelve "public virtues". Spenser acknowledges
Aristotle as his foundation for these assets, though the authority of Thomas
Aquinas can be examined as well. It is not possible to forecast what the work
would have looked like had Spenser lived to comprehensively write it, because the
dependability of the predictions made in his letter to
As it was published in 1596, the epic presented the
following virtues:
- Book
I: Holiness
- Book
II: Temperance
- Book
III: Chastity
- Book
IV: Friendship
- Book
V: Justice
- Book
VI: Courtesy
In addition to these six virtues, the Letter to
The Poem and Politics
The poem rejoices, remembers and also disapproves of the
Tudor dynasty (to which
Furthermore, maybe also, she comes into view more seriously,
in Book I as Lucifera, the ‘maiden queen’ whose brightly-lit Court of Pride pretenses
a dungeon full of prisoners.
The poem also demonstrates Spenser’s being totally recognizable
with literary record. The world of The Faerie Queene is positioned on English
Arthurian legend. A bulk of the language, spirit and style of the piece portray
a lot on the Italian epic, specially Ludovico Ariosto's Orlando Furioso and
Torquato Tasso's Jerusalem Delivered. The fifth Book of The Faerie Queene, the
Book of Justice, is the one in which Spenser most unswervingly discusses
political hypothesis. In the book, Spenser both tries to touch the difficulty
of policy toward
Language
In The Faerie Queene, the verbal communication Spenser uses
is comparable to The Shepheardes Calender. It is deliberately ancient, though
the overstatement of its extent has been done by censors following Ben Jonson's
dictum, that ‘in affecting the ancients Spenser writ no language’. Agreeing
that Jonson's comment may be only appropriate to the Calendar, Bruce Robert
McElderry, Jr., states that a detailed probe hence, of the FQ's diction, that
Jonson's declaration ‘is a skillful epigram; but it seriously misrepresents the
truth if taken at anything like its face value’. McElderry states that language
does not explanation for the poem's archaic tenor. In his own words ‘The subject-matter
of The Faerie Queene is itself the most powerful factor in creating the
impression of archaism’.
Samuel Johnson also made an important comment on Spenser’s
diction, with which he got intimately acclimatized to while his work on A
Dictionary of the English Language was going on. He ‘found it a useful source
for obsolete and archaic words’; Johnson, though, primarily took into thought
Spenser’s (early) pastoral poems, a type which he did not actually like.
The pronunciation and atmosphere of The Faerie Queene was
based on much more than only Middle English. For instance, traditional
allusions and classical proper names thrive—mostly in the later books—and he
coined definite names on Greeks, like ‘Poris’ and ‘Phao lilly white’. Classical
content is also alluded to or reworked by Spenser, for example ‘The Rape of
Lucretia’, which was revised into the tale of the character Amavia in Book Two.
Medieval subject matter
The praise for the character of Faerie Queene, Arthur, goes to
a medieval writer, that is, Geoffrey of Monmouth. In his Prophetiae Merlini (‘Prophecies
of Merlin’), Geoffrey’s Merlin creates a public statement that the Saxons will
rule over the Britons. They will be ruled until the ‘Boar of Cornwall’ (Arthur)
again reinstates them to their appropriate position as rulers. This prediction
was accepted by the British and in the end made use of by the Tudors. Via their
ancestor, Owen Tudor, the Tudors had Welsh blood. It was by this that they made
asserts to be the descendants of Arthur and legal rulers of
Each part of the book will now be talked about in detail.
Book I, Cantos i & ii
Book I narrates the story of the
knight of Holiness, the Redcrosse Knight. He gets his name from the blood-red
cross emblazoned on his shield. Gloriana has given him a task, ‘that greatest
Glorious Queen of Faerie lond’, to fight a terrible dragon (I.i.3). He is on
his journey accompanied by a pretty, simple, young lady and a dwarf as servant.
Soon after the three travellers are joined by us, a storm breaks upon them which
makes them hurry to search for a shelter in a forest closeby. After the skies clear,
they discover that they have gone astray. This makes them reach a cave, which
the lady identifies as the ‘Den of Error’. Without paying any heed to her admonitions,
Redcrosse goes inside the cave. The dangerous beast Error, and her young,
attack him. He gets wrapped in her tail, but he ultimately succeeds in strangling
her and chopping off her head. Her blood is drunk by her young until they burst
and die. Jubilant, the knight and his companions start out again, in search of
the right path. As night approaches, they come across an old hermit who gives
them lodging in his inn. While the travellers are sleeping, the hermit takes on
his true identity—he is Archimago, the black sorcerer. He invokes two spirits
to worry Redcrosse.
One of the spirits procures an untrue
dream from Morpheus, the god of sleep; the other assumes the shape of Una, the
lady with Redcrosse. These spirits then reach the knight; one shows him the
dream of love and lust. On waking up Redcrosse who is in passion, the other spirit
(who has assumed the shape of Una) is lying next to him, with the offer of a
kiss. The knight, in any case, puts up a stiff resistance to her temptations
and goes back to sleep. Archimago then attempts a new way of deceiving
Redcrosse. He puts the spirit who is in the disguise of Una in a bed and changes
the other spirit into a young man, lying next to the unreal Una. Archimago then
waking up Redcrosse shows him the two lovers in bed. Redcrosse is enraged that ‘Una’
would defile her virtue with an unknown man. Therefore, in the morning he
leaves without her. The true Una on waking finds her knight gone, and in grief
rides off in his search. Archimago, pleased with the results of his wicked
designs, now assumes the shape of Redcrosse and goes after Una.
As Redcrosse continues to wander on, he goes
on to approach another knight—Sansfoy, a traveller accompanied by his lady. He
challenges Redcrosse, leading to a fierce fighting between the two. However,
the shield bearing the blood-red cross shields our protagonist; finally,
Sansfoy gets killed. He the offers to be a caretaker of the woman who calls herself
Fidessa. She claims to be the daughter of the Emperor of the West. Redcrosse takes
an oath to shield her, fascinated by her attractive looks. Both continue on
their journey, but shortly the sun begins to get really hot. This forces them
to take rest under the shade of some trees. Redcrosse then goes on to break a
branch off of a tree. He is astonished to see blood dripping from it, with a
voice crying out in pain. The tree then goes on to speak and narrates its
story. Once upon a time, it was a man, called Fradubio. He had an attractive
lady called Fraelissa—presently the tree beside him. One day, Fradubio chanced
to win over a knight thereby winning his lady (similar to what Redcrosse did).That
lady was in reality Duessa—a wicked witch. Duessa transformed Fraelissa into a
tree, to have Fradubio completely to herself. But Fradubio could see the witch
in her real, evil form while she was taking bath. When he made an attempt to escape,
she transformed him also into a tree. Once Fradubio’s story is complete,
Fidessa is known to have fainted—since it is she who in reality is Duessa. She
feels afraid that her true identity will be discovered. She soon recovers, and
Redcrosse fails to connect the events. They then continue with their journey.
Comments
Redcrosse is the protagonist of Book I. Moreover,
when Canto I begins, he is known as the ‘knight of Holiness’. He will face big
trials and battle ferocious monsters all through the Book. This in itself
entertains, as a story of a heroic ‘knight errant’. However, what is more
crucial about Faerie Queene is its allegory, the significance of its characters
and incidents. The story is set in a whimsical ‘faerie land’, which only stresses
on the way its allegory is meant for a land extremely near to home: Spenser’s
The first of
these is Error. When Redcrosse strangles the beast, Spenser writes, ‘Her vomit
full of bookes and papers was (I.i.20)’. These papers signify the Roman
Catholic propaganda that was put out in Spenser’s time, against Queen Elizabeth
and Anglicanism. The Christian (Redcrosse) may succeed in defeating these evident
and ridiculous mistakes, but before he becomes one with the truth he continues
to remain lost and may be cheated without much efforts. It is Archimago who
arranges for this deception. The meaning of his name is ‘arch-image’—the Protestants
blamed the Catholics for idol-worship, due to their proliferate use of images.
The sorcerer succeeds in separating Redcrosse and Una, by deceit and lust. This
signifies the separation of Holiness from Truth. On separation, Holiness is prone
to the contrary of truth, or falsehood. Redcrosse may succeed in defeating the power
of Sansfoy (literal meaning ‘without faith’ or ‘faithlessness’) by his own original
virtue, but he becomes an easy victim to the wicked devices of Falsehood
herself—Duessa. Duessa to is a representation of the Roman Catholic Church. This
because, she is ‘false faith’. Moreover, she is clothed in rich, violet
and gold clothing, which, for Spenser, stands for the gluttonous richness and self-important
vanity of
The Faerie Queene, though, also has a lot of sources outside
of the Bible. Spenser thinks himself an epic poet in the traditional tradition
and so he makes use of the great epics of ancient times: Homer's Iliad and
Odyssey and Virgil's Aeneid. This is mainly obvious at the opening of Book I, in
which Spenser calls on one of the Muses to direct his poetry--Homer and Virgil set
this form as the "proper" starting to an epic poem. The outlook with
the "human tree," in which a broken down branch drips blood, similarly
remembers an alike episode in the Aeneid. Though, while these antique poets mostly
wrote to tell a story, we have by now seen that Spenser has another idea in
mind. In the letter that initiates the Faerie Queene, he says that he followed
Homer and Virgil and the Italian poets Ariosto and Tasso since they all have
"ensampled a good governour and a vertuous man." Spenser means to enlarge
on this instance by defining the traits of a good, virtuous, Christian man.
Book I, Cantos iii, iv & v
Summary
Canto iii chases Una, still meandering, searching for her friend,
the Redcrosse knight. When she discontinues for relaxing under a tree, a lion \
unexpectedly confronts her. The animal is on the threshold of attacking her, however
when it sees her squashy beauty and feels her virtue, he remembers his rage no
more. Relatively, he follows her around as a custodian and friend. In a while,
Una meets a damsel carrying a vessel of water. The damsel gets scared when she
sees the lion. She is deaf and dumb, and charges home to her mother, who is
blind. Una goes after the girl to her home and demands for a place to sleep. When
the women inside the house refuses to unlock the door for her, the lion smashes
it open. During the night, a church thief, who frequently gives his spoil to
Abessa (the daughter) and Corceca (the mother), ends by with his latest spoils.
However, on entering the home he is assaulted by the lion and is tattered into
pieces. The morning observers Una boarding on her journey again. Riding along,
she unexpectedly imagines that she is seeing her knight on a mount close-by. It
is not in realism Redcrosse but the camouflaged Archimago. Though, Una is tricked
and obtains back her knight with tears of delight. They now journey together. Soon,
though, they chance upon the knight Sansloy, who is keen to take vengeance of the
bereavement of his brother Sansfoy. He also mistakes Archimago to be Redcrosse.
He accuses, knocks down Archimago. When he is just about to murder him the
sorcerer’s camouflage gives way. When he sees that it is not actually
Redcrosse, he is out of danger by Sansloy. He takes Una as his prize and kills
the lion, which makes an effort to save her.
In the meantime, the real Redcrosse has been taken by Duessa
to a good-looking palace—the House of Pride. It is magnificent and generously
decorated, with a broad entry. Though, its base is weak. Redcrosse and Duessa
are brought in and speculate at the splendor. The whole court welcomes them, especially
Lucifera, the Queen of the palace. Filled with arrogance, Lucifera shows off
for the knight by calling her couch, pulled by six beasts upon which journey
her six counsellors, namely, Idleness, Gluttony, Lechery, Avarice, Envy and
Wrath; their outer forms matching their names. The procession has brusquely
gone by when unexpectedly Sansjoy reaches. When he sees Redcrosse, he confronts
him to a contest to take vengeance for the death of Sansfoy. Redcrosse concurs,
but the Queen commands that they wait in anticipation of the next morning.
At the crack of dawn, the two knights come through before
the palace, and in the view of the whole court, their fight starts. It is a
bloody contest, but Redcrosse comes out the stronger—he is about to murder
Sansjoy when the latter rapidly disappears in a black obscure. Redcrosse is
then put to bed for his injuries to be curded, but Duessa, grieving the defeat
of Sansjoy, goes to wake up Night. Together, they recover the body of Sansjoy, thereby
moving down into Hell itself. It is here that they find Aesculapius, a doctor
of medicine who was thrown into Hell because of his having the skill of restoring
men back to living. It was a control that Jove did not want humans to possess.
Duessa and Night compel him to try and reinstate Sansjoy's life. Meanwhile,
Redcrosse’s dwarf finds out an offensive fact. The finding is that in the prisons
of the palace lie the bodies of more than a few who were taken in by arrogance
and could never depart this House. To defend himself from meeting a comparable
fate, Redcrosse understands that he must leave right away, and with the dwarf,
he flees from the house as dawn ruptures.
Comments
The lion, though without a name, belongs to Spenser's parable.
Being a fraction of wild environment, it indicates natural law, which may be atrocious
at times but is thoughtful to Christian truth. As per Christian religion,
natural law shapes a part of God’s wonderful law. So, the Christian is not an opponent
of nature but does something in agreement with it—thus, the lion of course help
Una. But, it shows to be no equal for Sansloy (‘without the law of God’), who functions
exterior to the area of heavenly law. The lion which embodies natural law, is intimately
linked with the Christian Truth, and works out no powers over Sansloy. Not
subjected to the rules of nature or religion, he has the ability to obliterate
the lion. The lion, though has the aptitude of defeating the robber, who severs
the natural law by robbing from others. (This too is an infringement of the
divine law, but Spenser would have detained that man’s own natural sense of
right and wrong forbids theft.) The two women who in fact yield from Kirkrapine
(‘church robber’) indicate monasticism; Abessa’s name recalls ‘Abbess’, the chief
of an abbey. Monasticism is a feature of the Catholic Church, and in Spenser’s era,
monasteries often faced allegations of believing donations to the deprived for
themselves. Abessa’s deafness and dumbness, and Corceca’s blindness, symbolize Spenser’s
belief that monasteries (monks, friars, and nuns) are ignorant of the obligations
of the world as they live in separation.
The ‘House of Pride’ is a collection of antique and medieval
thought viewing sin and evil. Christian religion considers that Pride is the utmost
sin, and is the source of all other vices. Pride was the sin of Satan, which resulted
in his fall from Heaven; then, the ‘Queen of Pride’ is linked with Lucifer by
her person's name. The procession of the seven chief vices, each carrying a meticulous
prop or set of clothes indicating their nature (Pride holds a mirror, as she is
filled with arrogance), was a common feature of medieval morality plays—Spenser
uses it for this picture in Canto iv. The Queen, nevertheless, is not just a parable
for Pride; she yet has a political importance. Spenser deliberately contrasts
her with the real Queen, to whom the poem is offered—Queen Elizabeth. The poet reminders
that Lucifera ‘made her selfe a Queene, and crowned to be, / Yet rightfull
kingdome she had none at all, / Ne heritage of native soveraintie / But did
usurpe with wrong and tyrannie / Upon the scepter (I.iv.12)’. This is in difference
to Elizabeth, who held her authority lawfully, ruled with fairness and ‘true
religion’, and was a successor of a noble pursuit (as Spenser will further ascertain).
Again, Spenser employs a variety of sources in structuring his
description. The House of Pride, the poet writes, ‘Did on...weak foundation
ever sit: / For on a sandie hill, that still did flit, / And fall away, it
mounted was full hie (I.iv.5)’. This remembers the Gospel of Matthew, in which
Jesus states that those who do not keep His words ‘shall be likened to a
foolish man who built his house on sand (Mt.7.26)’. The house will plummet, as
Redcrosse discovers on finding out the bodies of those damaged by arrogance.
The features of the castle, though, for example the periphery wall that a gold
foil covers (outside beauty concealing internal weakness) have been taken from
Orlando Furioso, by the Italian poet Arisoto, whom Spenser welcomed. Finally,
in explaining the drop into Hell by Duessa and Night, the poet takes from
Virgil, who in the Aeneid offers an account of Aeneas’ journey through Hell to meet
up his father. We must keep in mind that to a late medieval/in the early Renaissance
audience, this kind of content being scrounged from other writers with no quotation
was by no means thought plagiarism. Somewhat, it was recognized to be the sign
of a well-educated poet who was able of controlling diverse sources and unite different
styles. The medieval style was one of amalgamation, not innovation, and this persists
from Dante to Spenser to
2.5 MICHAEL DRAYTON
The
English poet Michael Drayton (1563–1631) made an effort at creating a influential
nationwide culture by turning for motivation to English history in place of
foreign sources.
Alike his contemporary William Shakespeare,
Michael Drayton’s father was a rich Warwickshire businnessman. He got good
education as a page in the house of Sir Henry Goodere, though there is no evidence
to prove that he ever went to an institution of higher education.
Drayton’s first publication, The Harmony of the
Church, a quite awkward understanding of the Bible, made its first manifestation
in 1591, when he was 28. Following publications show a broad range of types. Idea,
the Shepherd's
By 1593, Drayton had even created his first chronological
romance in poetry, Piers Gaveston. Two heroic poems followed this, which
drew on events in English history: Robert, Duke of
Drayton took to the fashionable genre of satirical
verse in two rather incomprehensible works, The Owl (1604) and The
Man in the Moon (1606). A few of his
most popular shorter works were published in Poems Lyric and Pastoral
(1606), which included the patriotic ‘Battle of Agincourt’ and the ‘Ode to the
Virginian Voyage’, which celebrate English findings in
Despite Drayton often lacking dramatic power and thinker’s
depth, he has been suitably appreciated for his adaptable, story-telling skill
as well as imminent into character. He died in
2.5.1 Love’s Farewell
‘Love’s Farewell’ is a Shakespearean sonnet, written by
Michael
Drayton. It provides an account of an association between a man and a woman.
The man in the poem is about to end the association. Drayton rose to fame in
the Elizabethan era. During that era, a style of following Shakespeare’s techniques
of writing existed because it got along very well with the Queen. Drayton wrote
‘Love’s Farewell’
in 1619. The poem starts on a sour note which provides a proposal that it is
not a gracious finish to an association. The disposition in the poem alters and
lastly there is a soft and hopeful feeling to it, which offers suggestions that
the association may recover. The words and the verbal communication brought
into use in Drayton’s poem reproduce his feelings at the time. There
is no news about Drayton’s love life other than it can be gathered that he did
have a significantly popular love.
Drayton’s sonnet ‘Love’s
Farewell’, deals with the topic of reconcilement between two lovers.
They are on the edge of breaking up and parting everlastingly, but it is at the
last moment that they take a choice to settle with each other and stay put
lovers.
Since
ther's not help, come let us kiss and part;
Nay, I am done, you get no more of me;
And I am glad, yea, glad with all my heart,
That thus so cleanly I myself can free;
In the first eight lines, (the
octave) emphasizes the notion that nothing more remains to be done to rekindle
the love between them. All that they can now do is to ‘shake hands forever,
cancel all our vows’.
In the next four lines, Drayton
draws a comparison of their love to a person on his deathbed who is about to
die: ‘the last gasp of Love's latest breath’.
In the ending couplet, (the gemmel) Drayton turns upside
down the whole situation. He does this by pleading sincerely and genuinely to
his lover that there is tranquil hope that the love between them which is now deceased
can be renewed. So, they must stay lovers everlastingly: ‘now if thou wouldst,
when all have given him over/From death to life thou mightst him yet recover!
The poem is about two lovers who
fight due to their impulsive nature. They take a decision to reconcile with
each other immediately after they had decided to go their separate ways
forever.
2.5.2 LOVE’S
FAREWELL—A SONNET
A sonnet’s aim is
taking, exploring, developing and containing a particular thought in
words. A thought is an extremely
abstract thing. These 14 lines appear to be absolutely perfect for containing a
state of mind. To capture your state of mind in words is not possible; you
cannot actually convey your thoughts exactly to another person. However, the sonnet has helped
a lot of poets, particularly Shakespeare, to come very close.
The Shakespearean, or English as it is also usually known as,
holds three different opinions, one per verse. The first usually provides a foreword
of a thought, considering it over. The second supposes an unusual opinion or outlook
to that consideration while the third fetch it to its conclusion; often back to
where it began. The rhyming couplet in the end establishes the final finish summing
it up in a few words. The Petrarchan conversely, only has two verses. The first
shows a notion, and argues it from one common viewpoint for eight lines. The sextet
will usually take the counter to that consideration or another slant on the
matter, bringing the sonnet to its finish. That alteration
in verses is prime turning point of the sonnet. The difference appears subtly
but in
poems like ‘Upon
Westminster Bridge by William Wordsworth’ the form
brings about a major difference. That sonnet only works with the Petrarchan
model,
with continuous development in one first octet, and not as 2 quartets, as the
Shakespearean would have it.
The
inherent capability of capturing a concept and expressing it as words to share with
others, is so popular, that several poet use it for expressing a broad range of themes.
The sonnet is a prototype of dramatic poem exhibiting several
characteristics of great drama. It is one of the most famous of all sonnets in
the English Literature.
The sonnet experiences fighting and separating in annoyance. It feels as if
saying ‘i don’t want to see my beloved again’. The speaker bids a bitter adieu
to his love, making a promise of forgetting her forever.
In the first quatrain, Drayton states that due to there being no help, he and
his beloved must ‘kiss and part’. He cannot get her back her any more, and it
would bring him much gladness since it is a decent parting.(The tone in the
octave is the tone of anger and bitterness.) However, there is a hint that the
speaker does not intend to part forever. To say ‘let us kiss and part’ indicates
that they are not leaving. Therefore, it not a quarrel.
In the second quatrain, the speaker asks his beloved to
shake hands, canceling all the love promises they made. But in the second line,
he appears to be unsure of their parting, by saying that ‘And when we meet
again’.
In the third quatrain, the speaker makes use of the allegory to clarify his
point. One actually sees a dying image. The speaker’s pulse is failing. He is
about to breath his last breath, closing up his eyes. Allegorically, this denotes
the dying love between the two lovers. A priest kneeling besides the man during
his death, denotes that death is close.
In the couplet, when everyone starts believing that he is about
to die, and death is inevitable, the speaker says that his beloved can bring
him from death to life. Even then, even at the time of departing, while the
speaker is shaking hands with his beloved, a little word or sigh of love from
her would be sufficient to bring softness in the speaker (The Love:
Allegorically) resulting in them being reconciled.
The tone in the sonnet moves from impatience to lyrical hope which turns around
all that has been said before, leaving the road open to possess a solution.
The
sonnet in the starting emerges to be a short, simple poem, or ‘little
sonnet’ since it
denotes in Italian, 14 lines that comply with one of a few rhyming prototypes
and are
musically sound. The two most well-known forms are the Petrarchan (or Italian)
and the Shakespearean (or English). They call their names from their most
important poets, usually hailed as the discoverers of these forms. The
‘invention’ of the sonnet structure was done in the early 13th century in the
Sicilian courtyard. Though, gradually the
idea worked its way, developing, into the hands of the well-known poet
Petrarch. The
Petrarchan sonnet form has two verses that run the rhyming pattern
[ABBAABBA | CDDE CE]. The conduit indicates the separation between the first
octave and the second sextet. The Shakespearean conversely, is categorized
into 3 verses of 4 lines or quatrains with a rhyming couplet at the finish.
This has
a rather dissimilar rhyming pattern [ABAB | CDCD | EFEF | GG]. One can think
that his small dissimilarity in form would not make much disparity. Though,
slight differentiations do subsist that can alter the whole tone and message
of a sonnet if the form was swapped.
2.6 WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
William Shakespeare (baptized 26 April 1564 and died on 23
April 1616) was an English poet and dramatist, popularly known as the greatest
writer in the English language and a prominent playwright of the world. He is considered
as
Shakespeare birth
took place in
Shakespeare created most of his well-liked work between 1589
and 1613. His first dramas were chiefly comedies and histories. These were the types
he hoisted to the heights of superiority and creativity by the end of the 16th
century. He is then recognized to have written mostly tragedies until about
1608. His vocations of this time comprise Hamlet, King Lear, Othello, and
Macbeth. These were observed as some of the most excellent works in the
English. In his concluding phase, he created tragicomedies, also known as romances
and also formed partnerships with other dramatists.
In the subsequent sections, you
will study about three of Shakespearean sonnets. The sonnets prove Shakespeare’s
versatility in writing different kinds of literature.
2.6.1 SHAKESPEARE’S
SONNET—TO ME, FAIR FRIEND
The poet in his sonnet, which is
sonnet number 104, makes a statement of the unending nature and eternity of the
art that he generates. He has employed the seasons to sensationalize his assert.
First Quatrain: ‘To me, fair friend, you never can be old’
The inventor of the Shakespeare sonnets frequently
addresses his poem in a straight line, and offers a close epitome. In sonnet
104, the orator refers to his poem as ‘fair friend’, but then right away
clarifies that this ‘fair friend’ is not a person. He does this by making declarations
that ‘you never can be old’. This kind of a statement about a usual human being
cannot be made. Furthermore, as the person who reads has seen many times, while
this orator often makes an overstatement, he never lets his eye and hand meander
from realism.
The orator concentrates on a poem written by him
three years back. He also gives a statement that the loveliness of this poem is
as obvious as when he first ‘ey’d’ it. Even following ‘three winters cold’
which brought alterations in the ‘forests’ that shone with ‘summer’s arrogance,
the poem is fresh with the enthusiasm of youth.
Second Quatrain: ‘Three beauteous springs to yellow autumn turn’d’
The orator then again lays pressure on the fact that
the poem is three years old: three springs have altered into ‘yellow autumn’,
and the sweet aroma of ‘three April[s]’ has been annihilated by ‘three hot
Junes’. Though, not like other seasons that absorb other seasons, the sparkle
and ‘green’ of the poem persevere.
The orator, as the person who reads has seen, carries
on in to be in fascination with the aging procedure. He feels let down with the
fact that the human being’s body has to experience decay and disintegration. This
is the cause for, the poet/speaker remaining very fascinated with his poems
that are not subject to the human ill-health of change. The poem carries on to
be ever striking. It glows with youth and passion.
Third Quatrain: ‘Ah! yet doth beauty, like a dial-hand’
The orator then avoids somewhat in making conjectures
that his ‘eye may be deceiv’d’ by loveliness alone. This is for the reason that
beauty, as it lies in the eye of the beholder, can work ‘like a dial-hand’, and
‘steal from his figure’. The poet may be not capable to create predictions as
to how language may alter down through the centuries. His ‘figures’ that work very
well during his own life may exhaust or change meaning eventually, despite the dexterous
talent of the poet.
The Couplet: “For fear of which, hear this, thou age unbred”
Since the poet/orator regards himself as being contaminated
with this ‘fear’, he springs back with an influential statement that despite
this changeability before his writing the poem, there was no occurrence of any
height of loveliness. Even though the authority of his poem is overstated in
order that beauty can be exuded, he can assuage any lack of enthusiasm being
aware of particular qualities. These will be contributed by his own poem for
the formation of loveliness, since he is aware of the fact that the poem lives
in eternity, ‘thou age unbred’.
PARAPHRASING OF THE SONNET
The literal paraphrasing of the
sonnet is as follows:
In my eyes, you can by no means grow old, for you seem to be the same
now as you did when for the first occasion I saw you. Your loveliness is still intact.
Since then, three cold winters have shaken the leaves of three summers off the
trees. Three beautiful springs have changed into the yellow colour of autumn. Throughout
those three years, the fresh smell of three Aprils got overcooked in the hot
sun of three Junes. But you carry on to stay young and unaffected. The hands of
the clock may be taking your loveliness, but the hands must be moving very gradually
as I see totally no alteration in you. Your sweet facial appearance persists to
look the similar, although it is aging, I understand that almost certainly I am
getting deceived by time. In fear that I am being deceived, I beseech you, who are
up till now to be born, all of you of the prospective generations, to be helpful
to this surveillance. It is not possible for you to grow up to be truthfully good-looking.
This is for the reason that beauty—which has been totally and primarily
realized in the young man I am writing about—will expire when he expires. In
him, loveliness has devoured itself.
The time of the writing
of Shakespeare’s sonnets is not actually known, though it is very likely that they
were composed over a period of many years, beginning maybe, in 1592 or 1593. A
few of them were even in distribution in text form among his pals as
early as 1598. In 1599 two of them—138 and 144—were printed in The Passionate
Pilgrim, a collection of verses by dissimilar authors. The sonnets as we know
them were for sure written not after 1609, the year they were printed by Thomas
Thorpe, under the title Shake-speares Sonnets. Many academics believe that
Thorpe got the script, which formed the foundation of his edition from an
important person but the writer. Some are of the faith that the periodical of
this script went through Shakespeare’s direction. This is for the reason that
the text is filled with errors. Yet, Thorpe’s 1609 version is the foundation for
all contemporary texts of the sonnets.
With just a small number of exceptions—Sonnets 99, 126, and
145—Shakespeare’s poetries follow the English form of the sonnet. All sonnets are
a fourteen-line poem in iambic pentameter, differentiated into four parts:
three quatrains, or groups of four lines, pursued by a couplet of two lines. Characteristically,
a dissimilar—though linked—idea finds its look in every quatrain. The reasoning
or subject of the poem is summarized or generalized in the concluding couplet.
It is of note, that more than a few of Shakespeare’s couplets are with no this typical
consequence. Shakespeare did, in any case bring the conservative English sonnet
rhyme-scheme: abab, cdcd, efef, gg into exercise.
Shakespeare’s 154 sonnets, in grouping, are frequently explained
as a series. This is frequently categorized into two parts. Sonnets 1–126 think
about a young man and the speaker’s friendship with him. Sonnets 127– 52 think about
the speaker’s friendship with a woman. Though, in only some of the poems in the
first collection are it clear that the human being referred to is a gentleman. Furthermore,
a preponderance of the poems in the series taken in its whole is not straight
addresses to another human being. The two concluding sonnets, 153 and 154, are open
translations or versions of traditional verses about Cupid; specific critics
are of the conviction that they meet a scrupulous objective—although they do
not have the same opinion about what this may be—but more than a few others see
them as being non-considerate.
The English sonnet series touched the climax of its fame in
the 1590s. This was the occasion when the posthumous journal, Astrophel and
Stella (1591) by Sir Philip Sidney was commonly celebrated foremost other
English poets into creating their own sonnet compilations. All these which also
contained Shakespeare’s sonnets, are obligated to fairly an extent to the
literary conferences established by the Canzoniere— a sonnet series created by
the 14th century Italian poet Petrarch. By the time Shakespeare composing of
sonnets began, an anti-Petrarchan conference had begun. It passed satirical comments
or was known to make use of conventinal motifs and methods. Critics of Shakespeare's
sonnets often draw contrasts between them and those of his precursors and
contemporaries. They consist of Sidney, Sir Thomas Wyatt, Henry Howard, Earl of
Surrey, Samuel Daniel and Edmund Spenser.
The major topics of the 20th century critical remarks on the
sonnets, in any case, are their subjects and poetic method. Analyses of official
elements in the poems comprise surveys of the rhetorical tools, syntax and
diction that Shakespeare employed here. The many and imprecise friendships of
his words and phrases have proved to be particularly fascinating and challenging—both
for academics and common readers. The impediment and indecision of Shakespeare’s
metaphorical language is also a main critical issue, as is the hard to believe variety
of tone and mood in the series. Shakespeare’s divergences from or alterations
of the poetic styles employed by other sonneteers have been a theme of critical
concentration.
More than a few of Shakespeare’s themes are customary sonnet
topics, like love and loveliness, and the connected motifs of time and variableness.
Though, Shakespeare takes care of these subjects in his unique, unique
fashion—most distinguished of these being his poems of love and admire being
addressed not to a fair maiden; somewhat to a young man. Another notable point
is that of him including another theme of fervor: a righteous and nice-looking
woman. Reviewers have often drawn consideration to Shakespeare’s complex and opposing
representation of love in the sonnets. Long conversations have been carried out
about the poet-speaker’s declaration that through his poetries he will make the
youthful man’s loveliness immortal, leading to his contrasting the critical
nature of time. The subjects of friendship and its disloyalty are also critical
topics worth deliberation, similar to the nature of the relationship between
the orator and the youth. The indistinct eroticism of the sonnets has extracted
differing replies. This has been accompanied with the declaration of some critics
that the friendship between the two men is asexual and others saying that it is
sexual.
The fervor, passion and emotional vibrancy of the lyrics
have induced a lot of readers and critics along the centuries that they must certainly
be based on memoirs. In any condition, no proof survives to in fact prove that
this is so. However, people over the centuries have been continually speculating
the substance of these sonnets what they tell us about their inventor. Furthermore,
researchers have tried recognizing identify the individuals who were the real
or earliest prototype for the individuals the orator refers to and addresses. Though,
the fact that persists to continue is that we have no plan about the degree to
which Shakespeare’s own knowledge is depicted in his sonnets. We do not even discern
with any quantity of surety if the people depicted in these poems are grounded
on specific individuals or are the sole creation of Shakespeare’s study, fantasy
and understanding of the human spirit.
Inconsistency and uncertainties can be seen unreservedly in
Shakespeare’s sonnets. These poems proffer a stiff confrontation to
generalizations and summing up both in the characteristic and collective forms.
Their complex language and many viewpoints have led to more than a few varied understandings,
all of which may at times emerge relevant—even as they are disagreeing with each
other. Some reviewers even in the show times read the sonnets as personal parable.
Certainly, lots of commentators maintain that speculating about what these
verses may indicate about Shakespeare’s life, morals and sexuality is an unprofitable
work. The orator is intimately identified with every person who reads as he is
with the writer accountable for his formation. His indistinct and vague looks
of thought and sentiment take our own undecided feelings regarding questions
that concern us all, to the climax: love, friendship, jealousy, hope and dissatisfaction.
2.6.2 SHALL I COMPARE THEE TO A SUMMER’S DAY
‘Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day’ which is sonnet 18,
is the mainly well-liked and well-loved of all 154 sonnets. It is also one of
the most straight in language and meaning. The faithfulness of love and its
power to remember the poetry and its subject is the subject.
Sonnet 18 is a typical English or
Shakespearean sonnet. It contains three quatrains followed by a couplet, and
has the different rhyme scheme: abab cdcd efef gg. The sonnet is known
to have the meaning of an Italian or Petrarchan Sonnet. Petrarchan sonnets characteristically
articulated about the beauty and loveliness of a beloved, usually a love that
cannot be achieved, but not everytimme. It also comprises a
The poem is a fraction of the Fair Youth series (which comprises
sonnets 1–126 in the received numbering that stems from the first edition in
1609). It is also the beginning of the cycle subsequent to the opening series currently
described as the Procreation sonnets. Some academics see it as a fraction of
the Procreation sonnets, as still it addresses the idea of arriving at everlasting
life through the printed word, a subject of sonnets 15 – 17. Along with this point
of view, it can be viewed as a feature of a change to sonnet 20’s time subject.
There are more than a few theories regarding the factual identity of the 1609
Quarto’s unexplained dedicatee, Mr. W.H. Some scholars advocate that this poem
might almost certainly be expressing a hope that the Procreation sonnets desolated
of: the hope of symbolical copy in a homosexual association. Other academics
have notified that the arrangement of the assignment of the sonnets could have
been the choice of publishers and not of Shakespeare. This brings in the option
that Sonnet 18 was at first meant for a woman.
The poet starts the eulogy of his dear buddy with no affectation,
but he slowly builds the picture of his pal into that of an ideal being. His
friend is first contrasted to summer in the octave, other than, at the launch
of the third quatrain (9), he is summer, and therefore, he has metamorphosed
into the regular by which true loveliness can and should be judged.
The poet’s sole answer to this type of profound joy and loveliness
is ensuring that his buddy be for time without end a part of human reminiscence,
saved from the annul that comes with bereavement. He achieves this through his poetry,
in the conviction that, as history replicates itself, his buddy will be united
with time. The concluding couplet repeats the poet’s expectation that until
there is breath in humankind, his verse also will carry on to live, ensuring
the immortality of his thought.
Astonishingly, not everybody is ready to believe the role of
Sonnet 18 as the eventual English love poem. As James Boyd-White places it:
‘What kind of love
does 'this' in fact give to 'thee'? We know nothing of the beloved’s form or
height or hair or eyes or bearing, nothing of her character or mind, nothing of
her at all, really. This 'love poem' is actually written not in praise of the
beloved, as it seems, but in praise of itself. Death shall not brag, says the
poet; the poet shall brag. This famous sonnet is on this view one long exercise
in self-glorification, not a love poem at all; surely not suitable for earnest
recitation at a wedding or anniversary party, or in a Valentine (142)’.
Note that James Boyd-White calls the beloved as ‘her’, however
it is almost internationally known by academics that the poet’s love interest
is a young man in sonnets 1–126.
The poem begins
with a pleasing question to the beloved—‘Shall I compare thee to a summer's
day?’ The beloved is both ‘more lovely and more temperate’ as
compared to a
summer’s day. The
orator makes a list of some difficulties about summer: it is short—‘summer's
lease hath all too short a date’—and at times the sun is too hot—‘Sometime too
hot the eye of heaven shines’. Though, the darling’s beauty is such that it will
last everlastingly, nothing like the vanishing loveliness of a summer’s day. By
clarifying his love’s loveliness in the form of poetry, the poet expects to protect
it everlastingly. ‘So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see, So long lives
this, and this gives life to thee’. The lover’s loveliness will carry on to
live, through the poem which will stay put until the time it can be comprehended.
‘Complexion’ in line six, may
have two meanings, such as:
1. The outside
appearance of the face as contrasted with the sun (‘the eye of heaven’) in the preceding
line; the older sense of the word in comparison to the four humours.
During Shakespeare’s times, ‘complexion’ symbolized both external
and inner loveliness, similar to the word ‘temperate’ (outside meaning, ‘a
weather condition’; interior meaning,‘ a balance of humours’).
2. The next meaning of ‘complexion’ may indicate that the darling’s
interior, enjoyable and temperate nature is a little bit blotched out like the
sun on an overcast day. The first meaning is more obvious, meaning of a unenthusiastic
change in his external look.
The word, ‘untrimmed’ in line eight, can be taken in two
ways, such as:
- In the
wisdom of loss of beautification and frills
- In the wisdom of untrimmed sails on a
ship
In the first conversion, the poem indicates that good-looking
things of course lose their loveliness with time. In the following, it indicates
that nature is a ship with sails not acclimatized to wind alterations to
correct route. This, with the words ‘nature's altering course’, results in the formation
of an oxymoron: the permanent alteration of nature, or the realism that the one
thing that stays unchanged is alteration. This line in the poem brings about a change
from the unpredictability of the first eight lines, into the perpetuity of the
last six. The final lines both admit and confront change and eternity.
‘Ow’st’ in line ten many also
have two meanings equally common at the time: ‘ownest’ and ‘owest’. It is
interpreted by a lot of persons who read as ‘ownest’, alike several
Shakespearean glosses (‘owe’ in Shakespeare’s day, was at times employed as a
synonym for ‘own’). Though, ‘owest’ brings an interesting view on the manuscript.
It puts forth the idea that loveliness is something lent by nature—that it must
be given back as time goes on. In this conversion, ‘fair’ can be a witticism on
‘fare’, or the fare required by nature for life’s trip. Other scholars have citied
that this borrowing and lending subject in the poem is real of both nature and humankind.
Summer, for instance, is said to have a ‘lease’ with ‘all too short a date’.
This financial theme is widespread in several of Shakespeare’s sonnets, because
it was a every day theme in his imminent capitalistic culture.
2.6.3 WHEN IN DISGRACE WITH FORTUNE
According to Philip
Stubbes in his The Anatomie of Abuses 1583:
This sonnet, which brings in notes of nervousness and despair,
follows on from two which remember the pain of division. It is to lead on gradually
to a group of supposed ‘estrangement’ sonnets, 33 – 36, in which some basis of negative
response or some breach of a pact by one of the two is implicit. How precisely
we are to believe the words of parting, disgrace and blame is something which
we will perhaps never be able to make a decision about. It cannot be done
without the aid of some providential biographical finding, which in the nature
of things is not probable to happen. Certainly this sonnet demonstrates the orator
as a pariah. He is one who has faced negative response by society, who, because
of his severe separation, is known to envy almost every second individual in
the world as being luckier. Although, there is no hint at all of to show the logic
for this condition.
It would certainly be of aid if we could realize for sure
when the sonnets were printed and to whom. As it is, there are several suggested
dates, and not anything which even comes near reasonable certainty, either of
the characters engaged, or the time of inscription. It was usually believed
that the sonnets were the preliminary, youthful and silly creation of a young
man’s thoughts, best suited to be vanquished by his more grown-up work. That
was the only method of dealing at the time with the unsure sexual and fervent
nature of the admissions contained in them.
There is yet another difficulty facing us, in the nonattendance
of enough biographical information. It is that we cannot be convinced about the
type of ‘disgrace’ in the civilization
of the time that might have been accountable for the poet sensing himself to be
an outsider and lower to all those who were known to him and seen around him.
Was it just the straightforward truth that he did not fit in to the same stage
socially as the Earl of Southampton, for instance, to whom two of his works
were offered? In that situation, the verbal communication does emerge to be tremendous
and emotive for this type of a moderately minor problem. Maybe he transgressed
the restraints of social good behavior in a convinced way, for example by expressing
his love for the adolescence too frankly. It would barely have been thought
suitable that just a player should turn out to be the most-favoured of an Earl,
or an aristocratic person, if certainly the gorgeous youth was this type of an individual.
Though, even for this type of a tremendous social reaction, if that is what it
was though to be, does one in fact have to think oneself as the equal of an outsider.
Would the civilization of time be in a situation to malign an individual so really
that all their hopes of continuing in their present state of affairs of life
get lost?
In the universal course of events, with evidence of humanity
all about him, life cannot have been a simple one for Shakespeare in
Elizabethan London. Lots of the despair found in this and the subsequent
sonnet might be owing to sorrow for ‘precious friends hid in death's dateless
night’, and that in itself might guide him to ‘look upon himself and curse his
fate’. These could be buddies he had made while he was in the dramatic vocation,
and through his friendship with other authors.
In addition, we know that his single son Hamnet died in
August 1596 at the age of eleven, and his father in 1601. His brother Edmund
also expired in late 1607, while in
Therefore it must be interpret that this sonnet is a more universal
sense as being conjoined to humanity and to those states which cause all of us sometimes
to ‘beweep our outcast state’. There need not be a meticulous reason for being hopeless,
but there are a lot of general practices which predispose us to the faith that
the world is a pungent place to live in.
The conditions which give rise in the subsequent sonnets (33
– 36) to the talk about of sins, faults, offence, stain, intrude and shame appear
to be more precise and not pertain to universal causes. In 40 – 42 the grievance
is obviously the stealing of a mistress, but for 33 – 36 and the previous
sonnets, with their remaining malaise, nothing particular is named. We have no extra
source of knowledge that can provide this shortage in our knowledge and
therefore, we must believe that, for whatever reasons, for sonnets 27 – 32, the
poet undergoes a spell of hopelessness, which is lightened rather by his
thoughts of the adolescence. From 33 – 36 there is confirmation of negative
response and disloyalty, smoothed over by literalism on the poet’s part. But we
are not in a situation to know what those offences might be which caused the
fall from elegance. Then 40 – 42 narrate infidelity by the youth in the substance
of stealing a mistress. (Although one might ask how the poet could give good
reason for his attachment to a mistress when he has declared his love for the
youth to be unqualified). After that the series becomes multifaceted and more envied.
This sonnet is explained as one of the grand ones, maybe
because persons who read find it easy to recognize with, and it has the magnificently
exhilarating finale of the strength rising from the sodden ground. The final
couplet does guide us on into the prospect, when a similar finish shows us that
the contrast with a kingly state is possibly not as attractive as it apparently
appears to be:
Thus have I had thee, as a dream doth flatter,
In sleep a king, but waking no such matter. (87)
It is obvious that the world of courteous love, if the
tradition was ever to be considered, can be intensely flawed. This love between
the bard and the young man, to the extent that it mirrors the courteous
tradition, threatens to be far more multifaceted and reclused than no matter
which has gone before.
Following is a opening which exemplifies the deep Puritan revulsion
with the theatre. From this viewpoint (no doubt overstated) one sees that it
might well be looked upon as a social squalor to belong to such circles.
‘Do they not maintain bawdry, insinuate foolery, and renew
the remembrance of heathen idolatry? Do they not induce whoredom and
uncleanness? Nay, are they not rather plain devourers of maidenly virginity and
chastity? For proof whereof but mark the flocking and running to Theaters and
Curtains, daily and hourly, night and day, time and tide, to see plays and
interludes where such wanton gestures, such bawdy speeches, such laughing and
fleering, such kissing and bussing, such clipping and culling, such winking and
glancing of wanton eyes, and the like is used, is wonderful to behold. Then these
goodly pageants being ended, every mate sorts to his mate, every one brings
another homeward of their way very friendly, and in their secret conclaves
(covertly) they play the sodomites, or worse. And these be the fruits of plays
and interludes, for the most part. And whereas, you say, there are good
examples to be learnt in them : truly, so there are ; if you will learn
falsehood; if you will learn cozenage, if you will learn to deceive; if you
will learn to play the hypocrite, to cog, to lie and falsify; if you will learn
to jest, laugh and fleer, to grin, to nod and mow; if you will learn to play
the Vice, to swear, tear and blaspheme both heaven and earth; if you will learn
to become a bawd, unclean, and to devirginate maids, to deflower honest wives;
if you will learn to murder, flay, kill, pick, steal, rob and rove; if you will
learn to rebel against princes, to commit treasons, to consume treasures, to
practice idleness, to sing and talk of bawdy love and venery; if you will learn
to deride, scoff, mock and flout, to flatter and smooth; if you will learn to
play the whoremaster, the glutton, drunkard, or incestuous person; if you will
learn to become proud, haughty and arrogant; and finally, if you will learn to
contemn God and all His laws, to care neither for Heaven nor Hell, and to
commit all kinds of sin and mischief, you need to go to no other school, for
all these good examples may you see painted before your eyes in interludes and
plays.’
PARAPHRASE
When my luck has failed and I do not get any understanding,
I sit all by myself and weep about being a pariah. My unnecessary cries become
a basis of worry for the deaf ears of paradise. I repeatedly look at myself and
blight my fate, and desire that I was just like someone with bright hopes. I desire
I looked like someone else, or had buddies like yet another, being envious
about this man’s skill, and that man’s variety— completely dissatisfied with
the things I more often than not enjoy. Though, as I’m occupied with these considerations,
almost believing myself appalling, I suddenly turn out to think of you. Then my
spirit, similar to the lark rising from the glum earth at daybreak, sings songs
at heaven’s gate. This is since when I think of your lovable love, the contemplation
brings such wealth that I’d then refuse to change places with kings.
Reason for the poet’s cries
The speaker in this sonnet,
which is Sonnet 29, is emotionally depressed: in the first line, he imagines
himself to be ‘in disgrace with fortune’, denoting that he has been meeting with
a lot of bad luck. He even feels in disgrace with ‘men's eyes’, which implies
that the common public does not look at him favourably. There is a possibility
of this being ‘real’ or ‘imagined’, but it is reiterated in line 2, when he wails
his ‘outcast state’. Here, ‘state’ refers to a state of being, and in this
case, he is cast out from society.
Lines 3 – 4 make references to
Job of the Old Testament in the Bible. Job was thrown out onto a dung heap and
cried out to a God who did not hear his prayers. The poet realizes that he too
is in a similar circumstance. The personification of Heaven is God. Moreover,
here he is ‘deaf’, rendering the poet’s cries ‘bootless’, or useless. The notion
of uttering curses on one’s fate also refers to Job. He too uttered curses on himself
after losing God's favour.
The speaker sees himself coveting
others possessions, and in lines 5 – 9 he finds almost everybody as possessing
the thing he is lacking. He desires to be like ‘one more rich in hope’,
probably valuable hope or actually rich; ‘featured like him’, denotes someone
who is good-looking, with attractive features; and another is ‘with friends
possessed’, or famous unlike the poet (as has been affirmed in the first two
lines). In line 7, he is taken with feelings of envy for the artistic capability
of a man, and the prospects offered to someone else.
The simile of a lark is evolved
in lines 10–12. It is in these lines that the speaker gives a description of
the effect that a feeling of his love bears on his ‘state’, or emotional
well-being. The reality that the lark comes from the ‘sullen earth’ at ‘break
of day’ denotes that the day is happier than the night; day break is compared
to the breaking of a thought of the beloved. As the lark ‘sings hymns at
heaven's gate’, so the poet's soul is revitalized with the thought of the fair
lord, and appears to sing to the sky with revived hope.
The concluding couplet of
Sonnet 29 announces that this joyfulness which is a result of a thought of the
fair lord is sufficient for convincing the speaker that he is much better as
compared to royalty. Here, ‘state’ is a pun: it bears the meaning of emotional
well-being, as it did earlier in the poem. It recommends that the love of the
fair lord gives to the speaker so much happiness that all the wealth of a king
would not be better. However, it also denotes a nation, or a kingdom.
2.7 SUMMARY
In this unit, you have learned that:
Geoffrey Chaucer was born in
The Canterbury
Tales is a frame story, or in this case, stories, within another story. In the
Prologue, we know the framework of the plot, which helps weave each tale
together: A group of pilgrims come across each other at the Tabard Inn the
night before their trek to the shrine of Thomas Becket at Canterbury Cathedral.
The worst of
Chaucer’s characters are the ones who are actually associated with the Church.
During medieval
The Wife of Bath is perhaps Chaucer’s most interesting
character who has gone down in the pages of history. Readers have interpreted
the Wife of Bath as an illustration either of Chaucer’s proto-feminism or of
his misogyny.
Sir Thomas Wyatt was an
English lyrical poet of the 16th century. He is credited for
introducing the sonnet into English. His birthplace was
Wyatt’s ‘I Find No Peace’ is a
sonnet with a classic setting in the Petrarchan convention; it has similar five
rhymes—abcde, and can be divided into two parts—octave and sestet.
However, it needs to be brought into notice here that Wyatt digresses from the
Petrarchan model in several ways.
Edmund Spenser was an
English poet, most popular for The Faerie Queene, an epic poem and
fantastical allegory that celebrates the Tudor dynasty and Elizabeth I.The Faerie Queene
is an incomplete English epic poem by Edmund Spenser. The first half was
published in 1590, while the second half was published in 1596. The Faerie Queene is noteworthy for
its form.
The
English poet Michael Drayton (1563–1631) made an attempt at creating a powerful
national culture by turning for inspiration to English history instead of
foreign sources.
‘Love’s Farewell’ is a Shakespearean sonnet, by Michael
Drayton. It gives a description of a relationship between a man and a woman.
The man in the poem is about to end the relationship. A sonnet’s aim is taking, exploring,
developing and containing a particular thought in words. A thought is an extremely abstract thing.
William Shakespeare
(baptized 26 April 1564 and died on 23 April 1616) was an English poet and
dramatist, popularly known as the greatest writer in the English language and a
prominent playwright of the world.
The poet in his poem in sonnet
104, ‘To me, fair friend’ makes a declaration of the unending nature and
agelessness of the art that he creates. He has employed the seasons to
dramatize his claim.
Sonnet 18 ‘Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day’ is the
most popular and most well-loved of all 154 sonnets. It is also one of the most
direct in language and intention. The constancy of love and its power to
commemorate the poetry and its subject is the theme.
‘When in disgrace with fortune’ is a sonnet in which Shakespeare
introduces notes of anxiety and hopelessness, follows on from two which
recollect the pain of separation.
2.8 GLOSSARY
The
Sir Thomas
Wyatt: He was an English
lyrical poet of the 16th century. He is credited for introducing the
sonnet into English.
I find no peace:
It is a sonnet with a classic setting in the Petrarchan convention.
The Faerie Queene: It is an incomplete English epic poem by
Edmund Spenser.
Love’s Farewell: It is a Shakespearean sonnet,
by Michael Drayton which gives a description of a relationship between a man
and a woman.
William
Shakespeare: He was an
English poet and dramatist, popularly known as the greatest writer in the
English language and a prominent playwright of the world.
2.9 SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS (SAQs)
A) Multiple-choice
Questions (MCQs)
Objective Type
1. What
was Chaucer’s early work significantly influenced by?
(a) Love
poetry of the French tradition
(b) Tragic
poetry
(c) Comic
poetry
(d) Epic
poetry
2. What
or who is the squire, like his father, dedicated to?
(a) Wars
(b) Victory
(c) Love
(d) Beauty
3. How
does the Friar live?
(a) Earns
his own money
(b) Has
his own business
(c) Paid
by the church
(d) By
begging
4. What
is Wyatt’s poetry a reflection of?
(a) Sadness
(b) Renaissance
literature
(c) Classical and Italian models
(d) Love and beauty
5. What
is the Faerie Queene noteworthy for?
(a) Beauty
(b) Form
(c) Flow
(d) Characters
6. When
did Michael Drayton rise to prominence?
(a) Medieval
era
(b) Elizabethan
era
(c) Modern
era
(d) Dark
ages
7. What
is Shakespeare known as?
(a)
(b) A
mediocre poet
(c) A
well-to-do dramatist
(d) A
controversial figure
B) True or False
8. The ‘Prologue to the Canterbury Tales’ marks the
achievement of Chaucer’s maturity as a poet. [T/F]
8. Each of
Chaucer’s characters is extremely boring. [T/F]
10. The
white-bearded
11. Wyatt’s ‘I Find No Peace’ is a sonnet with a classic
setting in the Petrarchan convention. [T/F]
12. The Faerie Queene was unpopular with Elizabeth I. [T/F]
13. Michael
Drayton’s sonnet ‘Love’s Farewell’, handles the theme of reconcilement between
two lovers. [T/F]
14. The poet in the sonnet, ‘To me, fair friend’ makes a
declaration of the ending nature and agelessness of the art that he creates.
[T/F]
15. Sonnet 18 is a characteristic English or
Shakespearean sonnet.[T/F]
16. The speaker in ‘When in disgrace with fortune’ (Sonnet 29)
is extremely happy and at peace with himself. [T/F]
C) Short-Answer Questions
17.
Write a short note on the ‘Wife of Bath’.
18.
Write a brief note on Sir Thomas Wyatt.
19.
What can you say about the language used in Faerie Queene?
20.
What do the different quatrains of ‘Love’s Farewell’ state?
21.
Why is sonnet 18 the most loved and most popular of all of
Shakespeare’s sonnets?
D) Descriptive-type Questions
19.
Chaucer’s characters represent the society of medieval
20.
Write short notes the Prioress, monk and friar? What do they
signify?
21.
Give the paraphrasing for Wyatt’s ‘I find no peace’.
22.
How does Faerie Queene link politics and the poem? Comment
23.
Paraphrase Shakespeare’s sonnet, ‘To me fair friend’.
No comments:
Post a Comment