2018 Reading Challenge: an allegory
The Rory Gilmore Challenge

Ok imma gonna tackle this classic. I’m fairly certain I cheated on this test in high school.

My only regret is that the copy I read had no grand explanatory introduction or any footnotes to help understand the political intrigues Chaucer hid in his writing. My copy did not have a barcode, so I just picked one. I should have bought the one in the photo.

I really love this collection of stories. Who didn't love the Wife of Bath? Or the Friar (a timely parable all Priests and Pastor should read). I loved The Canterbury Tales so much that I memorized the prologue in Old Middle English (and can still partially recite it)...

"Whan that Aprille with his shoures sote
The droghte of Marche hath perced to the rote,
And bathed every veyne in swich licour
Of which vertu engendred is the flour,
Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his half cours y-ronne
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open yë
(So priketh hem nature in hir corages),
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages,
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
To ferne halwes, couthe in sondry londes;
And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond to Caunterbury they wende..."

I've read this book years ago and really enjoyed it but forgot to update after joining GR so I'm adding it now. I can't wait to reread The Canterbury Tales in the future and also try out Geoffry Chaucer's other works.

(Reprinted from the Chicago Center for Literature and Photography [cclapcenter.com:]. I am the original author of this essay, as well as the owner of CCLaP; it is not being reprinted illegally.)

The CCLaP 100: In which I read for the first time a hundred so-called "classics," then write reports on whether or not they deserve the label

Essay #44: The Canterbury Tales (~1380-1400), by Geoffrey Chaucer

The story in a nutshell:
Written in stops and starts from roughly 1380 to 1400, Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales takes as its framing device an event that was common during its Late Medieval times, but that no one had ever thought of doing a story collection about before -- it's set among a group of unrelated tourists, making a pilgrimage from southern London to the Cathedral of Canterbury (one of the most important Christian sites in England, and home of that country's oldest Archbishop), during which the tour organizer suggests a story competition to while away their time, the winner of which will receive a free dinner at the end of their trip, and with the stories themselves bouncing from chivalrous tales by the nobility to pious tales by the clergy, to bawdy tales from the commoners present. (Although be aware that over 80 slightly different handwritten versions of this book exist from the century following Chaucer's death, because of movable type still technically not existing yet, none of which are in Chaucer's original hand, making it impossible to determine the stories' true original order; and in fact we don't even know whether the infamously "unfinished" tales are in that state accidentally, or were done on purpose by Chaucer as a sly joke about how boring they are.)

And indeed, this is what made the Tales so widely reproduced and passionately loved once printing presses did finally make it to England, a century after Chaucer's death, for being clever to the point sometimes of laugh-out-loud funny, and with it not just being a story collection but no less than a grand satire of all the different ways stories were even told back then. Don't forget, before the rise of "Modern English" during the Early Renaissance, there were actually a dozen different types of "Middle English" used throughout the country, each of them with their own idioms and slightly different grammar rules, all of which Chaucer manages to ape at one point or another; and of course don't forget the already mentioned differing expectations among social classes of what stories were even supposed to be about, not to mention the sometimes even different language that existed between the rich and the poor, making this one of the first times in English history that a writer makes fun of specific groups by creating puns out of their local dialect. (Just to cite one good example, among the nobility, to "take pity" meant a selfless act of sympathy, while among the lower classes it was slang for having sex, a double-entrendre that Chaucer makes great use of in his book.) Less an interesting literary story and more an interesting literary exercise, The Canterbury Tales profoundly helped shape not only the modern English language we use today, but how we even think of the proper role and structure of the narrative format in general.

The argument for it being a classic:
The ways that this single volume has had an impact on society is almost innumerable, say its fans, the most important being many of the things already mentioned -- how by being one of the first books to be widely printed and distributed during the Renaissance, for example, it not only became the very first English "bestseller," but profoundly helped spread and normalize the use of so-called "chancery standard," the form of English invented by the government's then-burgeoning civil service, of which Chaucer was a well-paid veteran his entire adult life. (In fact, Chaucer in many ways was a precursor to the fabled "Renaissance Man" just around the historical corner -- he was a well-educated master of not only language but also math and proto-science, even while being an accomplished politician, office manager and sociologist.) Then there's the fact that Chaucer subverted the very way that stories were even told, bypassing the usual pecking order of the Middle Ages (in which it was expected that knights go first in all public endeavors, from telling stories to using the bathroom, then priests, then aristocrats, then merchants, then laborers, etc), mixing up his own story order between high-class and low-class tales and often having them be angry reactions to the story just told, ironically making this an early example of our modern notion of moral relativity; and by consciously inserting witty "fourth wall" references to the act of writing itself -- including the aforementioned "unfinished" stories that may or may not be deliberate jokes, as well as making himself an actual character in his own book, albeit a self-deprecatory version of himself who is often berated by the rest of the group for being a nerdy, unimaginative bookworm -- Chaucer also turns in a fine early example of metafictional postmodernism, only half a millennium before the term was first invented. And on top of all this, say its fans, it's simply an entertaining manuscript, full of fart jokes and pointed barbs at both corrupt clergy and dumb white-trash, the final element in the equation for elevating a book from merely "important" to a full "classic."

The argument against:
There's really only one main argument against this book that you see online, a huge problem that stops its haters from even reading it and coming up with other criticisms, which is the dense, obtuse Middle English that the original is written in, an outdated form of the language that literally hasn't been used in 600 years now; and indeed, you are in for a chore if you try to read the book this way yourself, despite your pretentious friend's insistence that Middle English is easy to follow once you "get the hang of it." (Liars! LIARS!) But I myself happened to read a modern translation of the book, making this criticism not really applicable to my specific review.

My verdict:
So yes, it's important to know that I read a modern translation of The Canterbury Tales, which I'm sure has purists foaming at the mouth even as we speak; and I gotta plainly admit, I highly recommend that you do the same unless you're specifically studying Middle English, in that otherwise you won't even have a chance of getting the full gist of what Chaucer is trying to say. If you do read the modern version, then, like me you'll realize that its fans are correct, that this is a much smarter and more contemporary book than what you thought could ever be accomplished during its time period, which as a side benefit offers a treasure trove of supplemental information about such period events as the 1381 Peasant's Revolt, the Great Schism of the Catholic Church, the Hundred Years' War and the invention of tree-based paper. (Of course, this then brings up the question we often seem to be debating among older titles here, of whether a book can truly be called a "classic" if it requires a week of homework beforehand to even understand what's going on; and along those lines, I highly recommend doing a close reading of this book's long Wikipedia entry before tackling the manuscript itself.) It really is surprising to see how readable and sometimes even lowbrow filthy this book actually gets at points; and although a little of this stuff goes a long way (I only read about half the book myself, then read simple recaps of the second half as a way of "finishing"), it's also an unexpected delight, and about the closest you'll get to a book this old still feeling fresh and relatable. Like most pre-Victorian books being reviewed in this series, it comes with a limited recommendation only, and I'll warn you that you need to strongly be in the mood to read this book in order to actually read this book; but certainly I think it's safe to call The Canterbury Tales a classic, a designation I don't envision it losing for a long, long time.

Is it a classic? Yes

(And don't forget that the first 33 essays in this series are now available in book form!)

I first read the Coghill translation. Then I struggled through the original text, slowly at first enjoying the colour and richness of the original language, then reading it again and again, enjoying more each time.

If you have a little French or German from school and can be flexible enough to understand that 'sonne' is 'sun', then give it a go. Once you're comfortable with it the language becomes a rich pleasure of it's own. The shift from modern to middle English might be daunting, but I feel it is also one of the attractions and delights of the original text.

It's become a book that I like to return to and reread. There's lots to enjoy, the variety of stories and the different styles they are told in, the different regional voices (that are different to those we hear in William Langland or in Gawaine) and Chaucer's interpretation of stories from Boccaccio. Langland's Piers Plowman has the power of a sustained allegorical vision while Chaucer offers a bizarrely over ambitious programme, we are told in the general prologue that all the pilgrims will tell two stories each on the way to Canterbury and two on the way back, a modern complete edition isn't a slim book and even so not all the pilgrims even get to tell one story. Each story is of a different type: chivalric romance,moral fable, bawdy story, animal fable and so on told by a different pilgrim who has a distinct social status and character, a nun, an innkeeper, a knight, an alchemist assistant, so incomplete as it is, abandoned at the point of death or due to the demands of everyday life the poem offers tremendous variety - something for everyreader.

One of the questions that people ask is why do we still read old books? What's so great about them anyway? My brother asked me this after I was shocked that he hadn't read Canterbury Tales. I undoubtably get the same shocked expression when I hear someone hasn't read over a dozen other things.

So why should we read Canterbury Tales? Well, I suppose the technical answer would be because each tale represents a style or type of writing. The collection is different forms that were popular in the day, making it some type of historical document (at least, according to my local bookstores if their shelving is anything to go by).

Okay, I hear the no name complainer say, that's good for you English people, but I only take English because they make me. Why should I read it?

Because it is the funniest thing in the whole world! You have farting! You think The BFG started it? You're wrong! Chaucer used the funny fart long before. It has sex! There's lots of sex! Everything is having sex! Okay, not everything, but even the chickens. There's chickens! There's marriage! There's love! There's fighting! There's the Wife of Bath! She is awesome. Who doesn't like the Wife? Even Shrek! knows the Wife of Bath. There's the second flood (maybe)! There's a knight, who to believe Terry Jones, isn't as honorable as he thinks he is. See, there is a Monty python connection! There's May/December romance!

Canterbury Tales is one of those works of literature that is going to last simply because it is about the truth. True, you have very dated tales, such as the Nun, but there are also tales that are still current today, that would make good television even. Chaucer, like Shakespeare and Dickens, speaks to the human condition. He shows use that such speaking isn't a late idea, but started well before we think it did.

I also think people should read it aloud so we can all sound like the Swedish Chef.

The Canterbury Tales is preachy, hard to read, and for the most part, pretty boring. I feel like I've been in the iambic pentameter wave pool. This is a book that I have wanted to knock off my reading bucket list. I wish I had enjoyed this more but most of it failed to hold my attention and I mainly just wanted it to be over while I was reading it.

Chaucer is considered to be maybe the 2nd best English poet behind Shakespeare, and he did have some moments of brilliance in this collection. The Prioress's Tale was absolutely wonderful, The Miller's Tale is memorable for its bawdiness, but the rest for me just honestly weren't that great.

I wanted to like this more and I'm disappointed in myself for not getting it.

P.S. Pay attention in English class kids! The Canterbury Tales is primarily written in iambic pentameter. There is some prose toward the end which was a nice change of pace.

What’s to say? The must-read medieval tales to be under one’s belt. A vast array of humanity and the human condition in the Middle Ages. But oh, the Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale are the best, and the Canon’s Yeoman’s Tale of alchemy struck me as very funny, poetic and enjoyable.

It’s strange that we don’t think of this book as a collection of short stories, and yet having recently finished a collection of Raymond Carver, I gotta say, I’m Team Carver! Overall, I loved Carver’s work way more.

Everyone knows about this book, right? A collection of stories, told in rhyme, some bawdy, some chivalrous, a lot of preachy and religious sermons, written long long ago in a far away land in the archaic language.

So, this is the thing: I think I enjoyed this on the level of Decameron, although it’s not very fair, because Boccaccio had to produce 100 of them and Chaucer didn’t. And also there’s nothing as hilariously bawdy in this one as Day 3 Tale 10.

Definitely enjoyed less than The Arabian Nights and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, both of which are filled with magic, gods and strange creatures from the far away lands.

And much, much less than Orlando Furioso. Not even close. For me, Ariosto is a much better storyteller and it helps that Orlando Furioso is a surprisingly very nonreligious work even though it’s about literal religious war. But my boy Ludovico just doesn't care about religion and I can relate. Chaucer is not so. And one of the consequences is that this work is antisemitic. The Prioress's Tale, do I have to say more? Vile hateful tale I prefer to ignore completely.

Also, just like others, who wrote for wealthy patrons, Chaucer has his fun at the expense of the lower classes, nobility is beyond reproach, after all, these stories are for John of Gaunt to chuckle at the bawdy ones and for Kathrine to sigh at chivalric ones.

I read Coghill's translation while having an original at hand to check passages, and if you aren’t a snob or an experienced in French, Germanic language, I would recommend this translation. My idea was if I would fall in love with tales in translation, I would return to Chaucer. After all, when I finished Ariosto, I went to Gutenberg just to stare at his lovely Italian that I don’t understand. But alas no magic happened here. Sigh

One of the rare moments when I enjoyed this was when the Host was struggling, listening to Chaucer’s (the character) simple rhymes (the author is a character in the book) and asked him to never write poetry again, you have no talent, Geoff! It was funny.

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)

(Thoughts on the Modern English translation by Nevill Coghill - I haven't read the original yet)

------‐--------------------------------------------

Come my friends, step right in!
There is plenty of room at the Tabard Inn;
We offer you the finest wines and ales,
In preparation for a cornucopia of tales!

---------------------------------------------------

The Canterbury Tales is a selection of 24 stories shared between a group of people on a pilgrimage to the Cathedral of Saint Thomas à Becket (56 miles from London), and its magnificence relies on three main elements which I will attempt to explicate as follows:

The manifold characters contained in this work is the first remarkable feat of Chaucer's genius; right at the Prologue, with its stream of introductions, we become acquainted with a whole compendium of English medieval life: knight, cook, monk, merchant, shipman, nuns, among many others. They all meet at The Tabard Inn, and their host promises to serve them as a guide on their voyage, even telling them that the one who tells the best tale will win a free meal on their way back. This section sets the tone to which the stories will eventually follow.

Once our journey begins, a myriad of genres gets covered throughout - from enticing romances,  thoughtful moral tales, harrowing tragedies to side-splitting satires and comedies. As the poet John Dryden pointed out, "Here is God's plenty", and right he was. Chaucer undoubtedly used The Decameron (1353) as his main inspiration for framing his stories, but I dare say that he went one step further here, as the witty irony that pervades this work shows - the fruit of his acute observation of the human mind/body in the late 1300's.

Paired with his intellect, we can also point at a wide amount of sources which he used, and they can be noticed on almost every page of the Tales. We are sometimes even bombarded with references ranging from the Biblical, Historical, Mythical, Philosophical, Poetical  and even Astrological/Alchemical knowledge of those days. It is worth noting that he was the first author to mention two of his contemporaries from the Continent: Dante and Petrarch. Nevill's notes (Penguin Classics edition) are a treasure trove when it comes to uncovering obscure references and allusions, and provides us with a panoply of details that any modern reader would find quite difficult to understand and/or uncover. Suffice to say, Geoff my good old chap was a very well-read man.

In conclusion: Be it for its social commentary, its smartness or its exuberance - not to mention its extravagance - one has to acknowledge the grandeur of such a book. A timeless work of art indeed.