Classics and the Western Canon discussion

Having been skewered by the Friar, the Summoner takes great delight in firing back as good as he got. Like Chaucer's Friar, the friar of the Summoner's story is a limiter, which means that he has license to beg within a certain specified geographic area.

This tale seems to me somewhat richer and better developed than the Summoner's tale. Thomas certainly gives back nicely to Friar John for his incessant badgering of Thomas for more and money. And Jankin's proposal for divvying up Thomas's, uh, gift is certainly creative!

Which teller do you think scores the most points in this exchange? Which (if either) tale did you find more amusing?

There also seems a faint echo of the Monk's tale in the inclusion of three short moral tales.

Yes, very funny in a schoolboy sort of way, if you know what I mean:). There is a lot of anality in the story which seems to hark back to the General Prologue's hint that the Summoner and Pardoner might be engaged in a homosexual relationship ('I trowe he were a gelding or a mare'), although the Pardoner could also be a eunoch, with 'A voice he had as small as hath a goat/No beard had he, nor never should have'.

My Notes say: 'The most significant pun in the tale is the most interesting. The friar in the tale berates Thomas, telling him that a “ferthyng” (a farthing coin) is not worth anything split into twelve; and, then, of course, he is paid for the tales he then tells with a farting, which he must split into twelve. The two words were likely homonyms in Middle English, and the punning extends the idea of quitting – which structures this tale and the Friar’s as a pair – down into the fabric of the tale itself.

William Blake's portrait of the Pardoner is amusing:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wil...

Thoughts anyone?

Unfortunately, there was no toleration for homosexuals in Chaucer's day Bill so perhaps Chaucer is deliberately using such subject matter to show such intolerance?

I thought the story was so funny I read it aloud to my wife. Who didn't appreciate the humor at all.
"

I read your comment to my wife, who is very much like yours and very seldom thinks the things I read aloud to her are nearly as funny as I do. She sends he understanding and sympathy to your wife.

Bill wrote: "I'd be surprised if this story is meant to show the summoner as an anally enamored man; homosexual or not. He seems more to be using the most disgusting subject matter he can think of to reflect his anger for the friar.
"

I didn't see it there, either. Maybe we're both dense. Or maybe others like to read into things thoughts which support their view of the times. We'll never know what Chaucer intended, but in this case, I don't see it.

I agree that there is some ambiguity and that a eunoch may also fit the lines often commented upon as referring to homosexuality: 'I trowe he were a gelding or a mare' and 'A voice he had as small as hath a goat/No beard had he, nor never should have', together with the many anal references in the tale. He could also be a hermaphrodite or a transvestite, which Blake's illustration seems to infer. It is difficult to avoid an unusual sexual connotation given Chaucer's description. How do others interpret those lines?

http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl...

Why does the idea support a 'view of the times' since homosexuality was both of their times and ours? Its illegality did not prevent it happening, then or now.

MadgeUK wrote: "Yes, very funny in a schoolboy sort of way, if you know what I mean:). There is a lot of anality in the story which seems to hark back to the General Prologue's hint that the Summoner and Pardoner..."

I thought at first it was a woman! So feminine, and the bottom of the cross on his robe (dress) looks like an arrow pointing to his....bottom. Teehee, as Alison would say

And, looking more closely, it looks like a tail! Very funny.

Yes, and the cross is also upside down and he is facing backwards, both possible allusions, by Blake, to his 'perversity'.

Bill wrote: "Maybe you and I should stop torturing our wives eh?
..."

I don't know -- I think a bit of it is good for them!

Accompanied by suitable sound effects? :)

Not exactly but I find it very 'male' and little boyish:).