I must begin this review with a kind of repentance. Many years ago, I made my way through The Canterbury Tales in the original Middle English. I figured myself rather clever and linguistically capable enough to handle the language. Indeed, I even felt no pangs about reading the book before bedtime, fighting through the morass of unusual spellings and unfamiliar words while I was at my drowsiest. Needless to say, I did not have an easy time of it. And this difficulty colored rather unfairly my opinion of Chaucer.
tt
This time around, I opted for a modern “translation”—two, in fact: the first, a print version by Nevill Coghill; the second, an audio version by Gerald J. Davis.* Immediately the error of my first impression was apparent. When the obscurity of Chaucer’s English was stripped away, I encountered a thoroughly enjoyable and wholly interesting book.
tt
Admittedly, the circumstances of my reading were also more propitious. I read The Canterbury Tales this time around while I was, myself, on a pilgrimage—spending a few days on the Camino de Santiago, in the north of Spain. Chaucer made for quite an excellent companion—more entertaining, in fact, than the real pilgrims I encountered. (The conceit of the book struck me as especially fanciful by comparison with my experience. Virtually all conversation between the real-life pilgrims consisted of the most predictable small-talk—where are you from, how many kilometers, what’s your job, etc. Certainly I was no better as a conversationalist.)
tt
I was first struck by Chaucer’s obvious debt to Boccaccio. The basic device is the same: a group of people are stuck together, and must tell stories to pass the time. More than that, several of the stories in this book are taken directly from Boccaccio (who is not credited, though I think that was common practice at the time). However, the differences are important as well, and highlight Chaucer’s strengths. Most obvious is that Chaucer was not just a storyteller, but a poet, and his tales are written in brilliant verse. More important, however, are the characters Chaucer employs to tell his stories. While Boccaccio’s storytellers are all genteel aristocrats, Chaucer’s raconteurs come from all levels of society, the poor and the rich, the lowborn and the noble, the profane and the holy.
tt
In these two great gifts—his poetic suppleness and his all-embracing social vision—Chaucer is a direct forerunner of Shakespeare. But the similarity does not stop there. While Chaucer’s characterizations, like Boccaccio’s, are often fairly superficial, at times he achieves depths worthy of the bard himself. This is most obvious in the acknowledged high point of the poem, the Wife of Bath’s Prologue. Here, it is clear that Chaucer realized he had achieved something of a breakthrough, since he allowed the prologue to run longer than any other—longer, even, than the story that follows. And like any of Shakespeare’s great characters involved in a soliloquy, the Wife of Bath comes wholly alive in a way that, as far as I know, was unprecedented for the time.
tt
The content of the stories is varied, but some major themes stand out for comment. The most striking, I think, is that of women and wives. Chaucer presents several disparate views on the matter. One story, for example, advocates that wives be absolutely subservient and obedient to all their husband’s whims, while the Wife of Bath (among others) believes that marriages only work when the wife is in charge. Related is the question of women’s sexuality: Is it something evil or innocent? Is sex to be free and easy within marriage, or is virginity the ideal state? A secondary theme is that of religion. Chaucer, like Boccaccio, makes fun of monks and clergy outrageously, but this does not stop him from being extremely pious in other moments.
tt
This brings me to the low points in the book, the two prose pieces: the Tale of Melibee and the Parson’s Tale. Both of these are not really tales at all, but moralizing essays, full of Bible quotes and references to Aristotle and Cicero. (Indeed, they are wisely omitted from the Coghill version, but I suffered through the audio.) Here, we see that Chaucer could be dreadfully boring in certain moods. These two pieces have no humor at all, and are full of the stuffiest, most pedantic piety imaginable—solemnly concluding, for example, that temperance is the opposite of gluttony, or that good advice is preferable to bad advice. After the ebullience of the Wife of Bath, it is puzzling that Chaucer could have written such tedious pettifoggery. Did he intend these ironically, or was he protected himself from damaging accusations, or did he undergo a religious awakening halfway through writing the tales?
tt
Whatever the case may be, the rest of the book is good enough to forgive him these trespasses. To state the obvious, this book is a classic in every sense of the word. Perhaps I ought to try the original once more? Or should I not press my luck?
_______________________
*For what it is worth, I liked the Davis version, and noticed no difference in quality from the esteemed Coghill version. However, I find it odd that Davis has translated books from so many different languages: Gilgamesh, Don Quixote, The Divine Comedy, Beowulf… Either he is a linguistic genius or is getting some help.

Το αν είναι ωραίο ή όχι το παρόν βιβλίο είναι καθαρά θέμα προσωπικής άποψης. Κανείς όμως δεν μπορεί να αμφισβητήσει την ιστορική του -και όχι- μόνο αξία.
Προσωπικά το βρήκα ευφυέστατο!

Μοναδικό το συναίσθημα που ένιωσα σε μερικές από τις ιστορίες, όταν στην μέση της διήγησης καταλάβαινα ότι πρόκειται για ιστορίες όπου με έχει πει η γιαγιά και η μητέρα μου όταν ήμουν μικρότερος, χωρίς φυσικά να ξέρουν ότι ανήκουν σε αυτό το βιβλίο. Πόσο μάλλον, χωρίς να ξέρουν το πραγματικό τέλος από πολλές από αυτές. Είμαι σίγουρος ότι θα σοκαριστούν αν διαβάσουν το πρωτότυπο.

Προτείνεται σε όσους δεν βαριούνται εύκολα και έχουν πολύ καλές γνώσεις αγγλικής γλώσσας. Επίσης προτείνω να το διαβάσετε φωναχτά (ή έστω να δοκιμάσετε για λίγο) καθώς η ομοιοκαταληξία και ο ρυθμός του κειμένου έχουν αρκετά εύηχο αποτέλεσμα.

I need to get back to this half-read book - don't know why haven't I finished it, as it's quite entertaining....

Update Jan 2011: Finished! There's little that I can add to the appreciative reviews of this charming work, apart from observing that you you don't need to know anything about the historical context (late 14th-century England) to enjoy the collection.

Anyone who loves stories and the whole idea of storytelling will get a buzz from the Tales - they are packaged within the framework of a story-telling contest among a diverse group of pilgrims on the road to Canterbury, and there's quite a bit of (cheeky) attention to these narrators. Lively exchanges/responses of the pilgrims between the stories (and narratorial intrusions during them) lift their characters off the page, and because they represent many different walks of life and different social classes, there's a lot of voices to hear, each with its own pre-occupations and (fairly) fitting stylistic level, giving the whole a very multi-layered, and sometimes humorous, effect.

To those better acquainted with contemporary history, or with literary influences on Chaucer, the Tales would probably tell a great deal more, but to very uninformed me they still resonated and offered fascinating and informative glimpses into Chaucer's times, from attitudes to various aspects of life (the Church, the chivalric code, love, foreigners) to detail about every-day life and work.

I read Coghill's (highly-regarded) translation, and though I'm in no position to make judgements (not having looked at the original in Middle English) I can say it reads brilliantly and vividly, and retains rhythm and rhyme (many of Chaucer's Tales were composed in metre)which propels the stories on a pace. No sluggish tempos here!

Highly recommended to all story lovers!

Look out, Bocaccio -- there's a new author of clever, bawdy rhyming tales, and his name is Geoffrey Chaucer! Whether you're a reeve, abbot, or just a simple canon's yeoman, you're sure to find something delightful in this witty, incisive collection. My personal favorites were the one about Chaunticleer the rooster and the one where the dude gets a red-hot poker shoved up his butt. I read it while I was laid up with the plague, and Chaucer's insouciant descriptions and intricate plotting helped immeasurably in my recuperation. The frequent bloodlettings prescribed by my barber-surgeon helped, too.

Quick note: If you're illiterate, like nine-tenths of the population, this might not be the book for you.

✩ 2.5/3 stars
~
[read for high school ‘freshmen year’ great books class]

There is a reason that this has survived for centuries, but it's not anything that made me consistently enjoy these tales. To be sure, did like some of them, but honestly much of the humour was too bawdy for my tastes. There were some brilliant moments of farce, some funny witticims and references (in one of the last tales he had a funny anachronistic bit where quotes Plato referring to Jesus Christ, even though Plato lived several hundred years prior to Jesus, and if you've read enough Plato, you will appreciate the jest more.

There is comedy, tragedy, parable telling and much more. I have to agree with the person who wrote the blurb on the back cover of the copy I read, that this is "Drawn from all lovels of society and all walks of life...a picture of English life in the fourteenth century..." However, it's also evident that many forms of humour prevail throughout the centuries, once you get past the poetry (not all in the couplets you see so much of, especially in the first part of this), then language (even in the English translation I read) and the overly-long (to contemporary readers) speeches, and that human nature remains much the same. To be sure, we are less likely to refer to Greek and Roman gods, not as many of us follow astrology, we are well past knowing anyone who seriously contemplates alchemy as a science. We are also far less likely to paint the portraits of very nearly perfect people to hold up as examples of excellent behaviour.

As you can see, overall I didn't like this.

Read for my English 201 class in university. I recall how many upperclassmen warned me how terrible Chaucer was going to be. I never admitted it at the time, but I really enjoyed it.

The major themes of the book are the critique of the church, the problem of predestination and foreknowledge, themes of the inherent corruptness of human nature and decline of moral values, the problem of the position of women and marriage relationships, themes of honor and truth, and themes of Christian virtue and chivalry.

Boccacio’nun başyapıtı "Decameron"un izinden giderek 24 hikayeyi okuyucuya sunan Geoffrey Chaucer’ın efsanevi eseri "The Canterbury Tales / Canterbury Hikayeleri", son hikayeye kadar okuyucuyu eğlendirmesini bilen kesinlikle okunması gereken edebi eserlerin başında geliyor. İngiliz edebiyatının “babası” kabul edilmesinin yanında Chaucer’ın hikayeleri aynı Homeros ve Virgil gibi destansı şiir yoluyla okuyucuya sunmasıyla bir nevi saygı duruşunu andıran eserde Canterbury’e giden 24 yolcunun yolculuk sırasında birbirlerine anlattığı hikayeler bulunuyor. Chaucer’ın yalın ama bir o kadar süslü diliyle anlattığı hikayelerin esin kaynaklarından birkaçını İncil’de anlatılan hikayeler ve Ezop Masalları, Ovidius’un "Metamorfoz" başyapıtı ve Boccacio’nun "Decameron" hikayeleri oluşturuyor. Bu yüzden "Canterbury Hikayeleri"ni okumadan bu eserli okumanın kesinlikle önemli olduğuna inanıyorum. Eserin en sevdiğim bölümü ise Chaucer’ın karakterinin anlattığı Melivee Hikayesi oldu. Öte yandan, kitabın son kısmını oluşturan Vaiz’in Hikayesi bölümündeki oldukça uzun vaaz kısmı kitabın o muhteşem havasının bir anda kaybolmasına neden oluyor. Açıkçası tamamiyle dinsel öğütlerden oluşan son bölümü okurken oldukça zorlandığımı belirtmeliyim. Buna rağmen her edebiyat severin kesinlikle okumasını önerdiğim kitaptan sonra öncesinde yaşanan Haçlı Seferleri döneminde yaşananlar okuyucuya daha anlaşılır geliyor. Son bölümü bir kenara bırakırsak başyapıt olarak adlandırabileğim kitabı okuduktan sonra mutlaka Pier Pasolini’nin aynı adlı uyarlamasını izlemeyi unutmayın. Tam notum: 4,5/5.

28.01.2018
İstanbul, Türkiye

Alp Turgut

http://www.filmdoktoru.com/kitap-labo...

Entire literary journals are dedicated to the works of Chaucer, so it's hard to know how to say anything worthwhile about his most famous book. I'll settle for making some simple observations about a couple of the facets of the work I personally enjoyed: its form and authorial voice.

The Tales' format, famously modeled on Boccaccio's Decameron, has a frame narrative into which the discrete tales fit. Instead of plague-fleers, Chaucer's storytellers are a motley crew of pilgrims on their way to Canterbury Cathedral. With no authoritative original manuscript, The Tales have been transmitted down to us through various sources and compiled in various ways. Certain individual tales are unfinished, and the work as a whole seems incomplete as tales for a return journey back from Canterbury are intimated, but never told. But the benefit of the disjointed nature of these diverse stories, and the loose, basic construction of the frame means one doesn't feel too keenly the undone-ness.

This format allowed Chaucer to include tales that vary broadly as to source material, convention and style. He includes bawdy, hilarious stories (e.g., of course, The Wife of Bath's Tale), preachy and ponderous prose selections (e.g., The Parson's Tale), satiric cautionary tales (e.g., The Summoner's Tale), adventurous romances (e.g., The Knight's Tale), and so forth. The variety alone is highly entertaining and, for those interested in 14th-century daily life, social structures, et al., incidentally informative.

But for this reader the most interesting thing about the book is the slippery frame narrator, the ultimate teller of all the tales: a fictive Chaucer who is on the pilgrimage and relaying the journey as well as all of the stories. He even tells his own tales - first in poetry, Sir Thopas, which is humorously cut short for its terribleness, and then The Tale of Melibee, a dour moralizing tale in prose that reads more as a collection of aphorisms, quotes and bons mots than an actual story.

Fictively reproducing himself in his own pages, in addition to the multiplicity of in-frame narrative voices, destabilizes the narration and disallows any easy reading of what it is the real Chaucer may have believed, which attitudes on display he may have supported or decried. It's charming and so unexpectedly "meta" to hear a character of real Chaucer's tell fictive Chaucer:

"By God...to put it in a word,
Your awful rhyming isn't worth a turd!"

I've been struck of late how "post-modern" so much pre-modern literature can seem. When you aren't busy worrying about what is fiction and non-fiction - as we moderns tend to - the implications of authorial voice and narrativity perhaps seem obvious, and you don't have to create entire modes of linguistic and historical criticism (Hayden White, Jacques Derrida, I'm looking at you) to arrive at conclusions a writer 700 years ago arrived at quite naturally.

Having a slippery narrator, not being able to peg what is "true" and "untrue" with regards to what your author is thinking/feeling v. saying, is an incredibly fertile creative ground to tread upon. Introducing a series of stories, many with external sources, mimicking well-established literary conventions, placed in the mouths of fictional characters who represent a multiplicity of class, gender and social critiques and who include a novelistic version of yourself...it's simply a great way to explore tensions, irresolutions and contradictions, to convey complex commentary and, if the need should arise, to disavow it.

People who study this stuff for a living will be able to tell me how off base this observation is. I have only a well-informed amateur's knowledge of medieval literary tropes, habits of authorship and post-modern criticism. And it seems to me some scholar somewhere has surely written a dissertation upon Chaucer's authorial voice and post-modern thought.

Hopefully this person could also tell me where I can find the following:
A modern English translation of The Canterbury Tales as good as Raffel's, with facing-page Middle English text, and relatively extensive footnotes/annotation. That I would like to read.

An ancient book from over 600 years in the past still famous, and relevant which is the reasons it's a classic undoubtedly. Geoffrey Chaucer wrote these bawdy tales with confidence working for the royal family sure helps. If you think fart jokes are a modern invention you're wrong and this proves this fact . The British have a quirky sense of humor and Nevill Goghill new translation captures the essence without losing the flavor intended by the author. Readers now may enjoy the amusing stories, incomprehensible words become clear . The simple plot about thirty ordinary people in long ago medieval England on a pilgrim to the shrine (tomb ) of Saint Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. 23 engrossing tales Chaucer wrote he never quite finished all, too busy working for the King and maybe losing interest or failing health we will never know but what is left is a precious jewel. I don't usually like short stories most people today feel the same way, but everything has exceptions. The prologue is thoroughly remarkable , showing how talent raises the ordinary above the Earth, reaching not the Moon but the Stars. My favorite is the Miller's Tale, mistaken identity becomes even after the passage of many centuries, yet tickles the funny bone to be honest, brakes it. Nothing new under the Sun is quite apparent as we the grateful reader follow the narratives of these strange fables of drunks, sex addicts and gullible morons searching for the eternal get rich quick scheme of the Canon's Yeoman 's Tale, a little disguised Chaucer falling for an alchemy con man. Intelligent people's greed tricks them like anyone else. The Knight's Tale looks like just another love story, rival cousins enamored with the same woman, new then but common now yet aspects are still memorable. Another yarn very hilarious, The Summoner's Tale about an ailing man named Thomas known for being generous with funding the Church , is asked by a friar for the gold the sick gentleman said he had. To be delicate while reaching for the prize Thomas in bed lets go of bad gas instead. Not happy indeed the angry friar flees in disgust. There are certain books which become more than famous or even just a classic, these admittedly rare phenomenon like snow in San Diego or gardens on the Moon, nevertheless things bounce in ways unknown and where they fall surprises. Canterbury Tales is one and deserves to be.

I read a modern English translation, and I think it's a good choice if you don't want to spend your time pondering what certain words mean :) Written in the 14th c. towards the end of the author's life (and seems to be a bit unfinished still, but not so much as to leave the reader unsatisfied). Chaucer was a booklover and quite intelligent (knowledge of astronomy and chemistry, as well as a bunch of tales fitting in, what was known at the time of course), and got a nice Westminster 5Abbey burial. Some tales are from earlier times, fitted in, but proper work seems to begun around 1386/7.

The story follows a pilgrimage group (about 29 people) on a 5-day travel to Canterbury (for St Thomas Becket), in a springtime, starting from a high-class hostelry place in Southwark (The Tabard, established 1307, destroyed by fire in 1676, rebuilt in 18th c. but finally converted into stores before being demolished in 1873). The host who prompts people to tell tales is the owner of the place, and also makes in-between comments.
The tales' origins are from all over Europe, some ancient empires, and even the Orient, with wisdom and things even from author's own experiences perhaps. Often there is talk and feedback to the stories in-between, but not always (after all, the book is slightly unfinished). The lengths of the tales vary, and not all tales have an ending because of interruptions or author just hadn't finished them.

Some tales were familiar to me (at least the legend of St Cecilia, and the part about the reign of Queen Zenobia of Palmyra (who really existed), which I'd learned about at Pinterest), unfortunately also the Prioress's tale that is similar to the *very* anti-semitic tale of (nearly-St.) Little St Hugh of Lincoln, in which a child is killed by Jews... here also eerie because the child keeps singing while his throat remains cut open, during the funeral too. This is why my rating is 3 stars.
Of course, there is also plenty of sexism, but one does understand that that was how things were at the time, and there is plenty of women being awesome-stories too. I needed to look up some of the meaning of some of the professions (manciple, pardoner (indulgence seller-conman), summoner, squire, franklin, yeoman (what he is here)...

Some of the stories also amuse because they are pairs of two teller dissing each other. Some tales are uplifting, some sad, some a bit WTF... Chaucer himself is included among the teller, but he's not a clever storyteller in the story, even has to tell another tale when the first is not good enough. Tales may be set in other places or times, but include 14th c. elements/English stuff in them (like, in the Knight's tale, the main female character is Emily, which as a name doesn't quite fit in Ancient Greek setting). Still, my favorites were Monk's tale, Nun's Priest's tale, Franklin's tale, Canon's Yeoman's tale, and the Person's tale - the last also mentioned in the movie 'Se7en'.

I didn't feel afterwards that this could be in my 'essential books' list, but no matter how uneven (or not), and with values different (or not) the book felt, I do feel that it felt like essential-to-know/read book. And I think reading it in modern translation is the best for getting through it in normal pace (and it's a thick book). Worth it. 8)