Geoffrey Chaucer used sarcasm to describe his characters in “The Canterbury Tales. ” It will point out details that are seen in the book that help explain how he used this sarcasm to prove a point and to teach life lessons sometimes. I will also point out how this sarcasm was aimed at telling the reader his point of view about how corrupt the Catholic Church was. Chaucer uses an abundance of sarcasm, as opposed to seriousness, to describe his characters in “The Canterbury Tales. ” Chaucer did not begin working on “The Canterbury Tales” until he was in his early 40s.
Chaucer took his narrative inspiration for his works from several sources but still remained an entirely individual poet, gradually developing his personal style and techniques. (Wallace 293) “The Canterbury Tales” was written by Chaucer during the late fourteen hundreds. This book tells about a pilgrimage by around thirty people, who are going, in April, to the shrine of the martyr, St. Thomas Becket. On the way, they amuse themselves by telling stories. These stories are called tales. Chaucer never really got to finish the book because he died about five or six years after starting it.
So as you read this report and maybe the book, you can see that he probably would have went along with Martin Luther and criticized the Catholic Church in the same ninety eight or so on years. So maybe, just maybe, this book isn’t even half way done, even though it is like a stab in the back of the Catholic Church. (Morrison 41) Chaucer uses sarcasm to describe Phoebus, in the Manciple’s tale. “Phoebus had a wife, whom he loved more dearly than his own life, and guarded her with the greatest protection possible.
He knew that he must let a free spirit fly like any other caged animal, but he made sure to keep her closed in and guarded at all times. ” (187) However Phoebus’ wife had a secret lover. One day when Phoebus went out of town on business, his wife sent for her lover and made passionate love with him. The crow witnessed this event but kept quiet. (188) When Phoebus returned home the crow revealed that his wife had betrayed him and gave ample proof to substantiate the charge. Phoebus was heart-broken and in a fury killed his wife.
Now, you can see the sarcasm in this tale already by looking at the way he said “free spirit” and then “caged animal” to describe her. One of these statements is not true and is just another sarcastic remark. At first, the reader can’t tell if Phoebus really cares and watches over her or if he just doesn’t care at all. But, as you read on, you can obviously tell that he did really care and probably tried to watch over her as much as he could. But Chaucer once again uses sarcasm to get his point across.
And that point is that no matter how much we try to control a person, who has free will, they will always have their own thoughts and opinions, or in this case, feelings. So Chaucer used a sarcastic way of saying that Phoebus tried to guard her like she was a caged animal, and keep her locked up, but she still found a way to do what she wanted to do because nobody can be watched and controlled like a caged animal. Their will always be free will. Chaucer uses sarcasm, once again, this time to describe the Summoner.
There lived a limiter in Holderness, a marshy region in Yorkshire, who used to go around preaching to people and begging for alms. (95) “He was a drunkard who did nothing but scream in Latin and kids were scared of him. ” (95) “There was no better fellow in all the lands” (96) The sarcasm in this tale is not hard to see either, when you see that the narrarator said that he was a drunkard and that kids hated him, but then says that there was no better guy in the world. Chaucer is saying that he was a drunk and that he probably hit or raped little kids.
And he also says that this man was a preacher, who begged. Obviously Chaucer is taking a shot at the Church rite there and is trying to make a point that the Catholic Church, which was looked at so highly, and its preachers were corrupt and did not even think about practicing what they preached. The sarcasm continues throughout the whole tale and is aimed at the corruption in the preacher. Chaucer wrote for and may have read his works aloud to a select audience of fellow courtiers and officials, which doubtless sometimes included members of the royal family.
Adams 2) So, as you see, he really didn’t care who heard his opinions on the Church, even the royal family, and he was going to tell everybody exactly what he thought. Chaucer uses some sarcasm in The Man of Laws tale. Once upon a time a group of wise, sober, and honest traders lived in Syria. They exported spices, gold, satins, etc far and wide. It so happened that the leading traders of this prosperous group made up their minds to go to Rome for business purposes. (141) It came to pass, the masters of this sort decided to go to Rome for business or rather for sport.
On their visit they stayed at the nearest inn. During their stay in Rome the Syrian traders came to know about the incredible beauty of Constance, the daughter of Roman Emperor Tiberius Constantinus. (141) The Sultan was captivated by Lady Constance’s description and resolved to make her his wife. The Roman emperor made magnificent preparations for his daughter’s wedding. But the councilors foresaw that no Christian ruler would be willing to let his heir marry a Muslim. The Sultan was so much in love with Constance that he dismissed this religious objection and declared that he would convert.
Soon all his Syrian subjects also converted Christianity. (144) In the meanwhile the Sultan’s mother, who was very angry at her son’s renunciation of the teachings of the holy Koran for the sake of Constance, summoned some of her counselors and made them pledge that they would rather die than renounce their Muslim faith. Then She told them to make a pretense of accepting and to kill all the Christians at the end of the banquet. After the wedding ceremony, the Sultan, Constance and all the Christians went to the banquet hosted by the Sultan’s mother.
Suddenly her conspirators entered and hacked all the Christians including the Sultan to pieces. Even the Syrian subjects who had converted to Christianity were not spared. Only Lady Constance was left alive. (157-159) There isn’t as much sarcasm in this tale as the other ones and most of it is in the beginning of the tale. Chaucer starts off by saying that these traders are wise and true. Well, as you read on, you can see that he was being sarcastic because he was not true to his religion and was also not very wise either.
If he was true then he would have never sold out his religion for a girl that he never even knew. And it wasn’t very wise to do all of this for a girl that he never met before, and only knew of her beauty. And the second sarcastic thing said was about their soberness. It said that they were sober and that they went to Rome for a business trip but then it says that it was most probably for sport, which, if guessing from reading the sarcasm of Chaucer previously, meant probably drinking and partying if one was to guess.
So you can see a hint of sarcasm in this tale too even though it wasn’t as much as the other stories. This proves that Chaucer uses sarcasm in almost all of his stories. Since the founding of the Chaucer Society in England in 1868, which led to the first reliable editions of his works, Chaucer’s reputation has been securely established as the English poet best loved after Shakespeare for his wisdom, humor, and humanity.
Bloom 21) That passage gives you a brief outlook on how Chaucer was looked at by his generation and how he does, in fact, gets some of his point across through his work. Chaucer used his sarcasm to teach life learned lessons and, sometimes, just plain common sense. But his first intention is believed to be the criticism of the Catholic Church and how corrupt it really was. He was a man of faith and believed in doing right and practicing what you preach, as some would say. “The Canterbury Tales” was left unfinished, which may well have been a matter of choice, not fate.
It is likely that Chaucer abandoned his great literary work in the last years of his life and turned his thoughts to the salvation of his soul, as the Retraction suggests. He not only abandoned the tales but also expressed regret for having ever written them, except those explicitly religious and moral” (Chute 25) These fragmented stories commented not only on the people of the time, but bringing in Christianity, perhaps primeval feminism with the Wife of Bath, anti-Semitism, sexuality, and unfaithfulness.
Although not all of the tales are finished, Chaucer’s wit stands strong. He was a Catholic during the end of Catholicism in England, he was chivalric, he was English, and he was part of the Bourgeois. This combination of characteristics yielded what is now considered one of the most important manuscripts in the English language. (Rossignol 14) That statement pretty much explains what Chaucer meant to his time period and the situations that his religion and people were going through.
Even though he took sides with Martin Luther and condemned the Catholic Church in a way, he still saw some good also. Now it is very obvious that Chaucer used an abundance of sarcasm to describe his characters in “The Canterbury Tales” and, for the most part, this sarcasm was thrown out to condemn the Catholic Church for all of the wrong that they were doing at this time in his eyes. But, either way you look at it, Chaucers sarcasm and way of putting things was brilliant, in its own unique way, and surpassed its time.