QUESTION: ‘Chaucer’s satire seems most of the time rather mild and almost playful,
displaying a rather indulgent attitude to its subject.’ (Rosalyn Rossignol). Do you agree?
Your answer can refer to any of Chaucer’s works.
Mark: 71
Satire is intrinsic to the broader moral inquiry that runs through Chaucer’s literary corpus.
The Friar’s Tale and the Pardoner’s Tale are examples of occupational satire, and both tales
adopt the form of the exemplum to critique corrupt ecclesiastical positions. However,
Chaucer’s use of the frame narrative complicates this reading as these critiques are filtered
through narrators with personal agendas for telling their tales. This undermines the gravity of
their satirical portrayals, which can make Chaucer’s clerical satire appear ‘rather mild and
almost playful’ than didactic. Ultimately, Chaucer invites the reader to be sceptical of the
Pilgrim-narrators, and places upon the reader a responsibility to determine whether the effect
of his satire should be read as ‘playful’ or serious moral commentary.
Despite being the subjects of Chaucer’s clerical satire, neither the Pardoner nor the Friar face
meaningful consequences for their vices, which may suggest Chaucer’s satirical treatment of
the pilgrims is marked by an ‘indulgent attitude’. Both pilgrims explicitly admit their
engagement in the vices they condemn in their tales. In his Prologue, the Pardoner’s
admission — ‘I preche agayn that same vice // Which that I use, and that is avarice’ (427–8)
offers a pointedly satirical portrayal of clerical corruption. His confession that ‘myn entente is
nat but for to wynne’ (403) parallels Jean de Meun’s Fals-Semblant in The Roman de la Rose,
who in Chaucer’s translation similarly declares: ‘To wynnen is alwey myn entente’ (6837).
Although the murderers in his tale receive fitting punishment of ‘empoisonyng’, there is a
1
, rupture between the tale’s moral trajectory and the Pardoner’s own continued vice.
Immediately afterwards, he resumes his grift, offering to sell pardons to the pilgrims: ‘If any
of yow wol of devocion / Offren and han myn absolucion’ (923–24). The Host’s
denouncement could indicate sincere disgust for the Pardoner’s antics, but the Knight’s plea
to the Pardoner to ‘be glad and myrie of cheere’ (963) is undoubtedly ‘indulgent’. With the
final line, ‘Anon they kiste, and ryden forth hir weye’ (968), the didactic effect of Chaucer’s
satire is undercut in favour of the resumption of the pilgrimage. Similarly, in The Friar’s
Tale, the corrupt summoner is dragged to the ‘peynes’ (1652) of hell, suggesting that
Chaucer’s satire carries genuine moral weight. As the Friar describes the torments of hell so
excruciating ‘no tonge may it devyse’ (1650), he invokes a punishment grimly suited to
Chaucer’s portrait of him in the General Prologue as a man ‘of daliaunce and fair langage’
(211), as well as the Pardoner who must ‘preche and wel affile his tonge’ (712). Chaucer’s
satire suggests that the torments of hell may be as appropriate for these corrupt clerical
figures with deceitful ‘tonges’ as for the fictional summoner. However, Friar Huberd’s failure
to grasp the moral implications of his own tale is evident in his closing sermon, which
mimics the traditional closure of an exemplum. His warning that the devil waits to ‘sle the
innocent’ (1658), bears little relevance to the tale’s actual critique of clerical corruption.
Hence, the lack of consequences for the narrators in favour of the continuation of the
narrative framework of The Canterbury Tales destabilises the notion that Chaucer’s clerical
satire cannot be ‘playful’.
Chaucer’s positioning of the tales within the broader framework of the pilgrimage
complicates the gravity of his satire. Despite their genres as exemplums, the tales’ moral
gravity is undermined by the personal agendas of their tellers, arguably turning the satire
‘rather mild and almost playful’. Chaucer’s satirical portrayal of his narrators is
compromised: the Pardoner by ‘avarice’, the Friar by petty rivalry with the Summoner. The
2
displaying a rather indulgent attitude to its subject.’ (Rosalyn Rossignol). Do you agree?
Your answer can refer to any of Chaucer’s works.
Mark: 71
Satire is intrinsic to the broader moral inquiry that runs through Chaucer’s literary corpus.
The Friar’s Tale and the Pardoner’s Tale are examples of occupational satire, and both tales
adopt the form of the exemplum to critique corrupt ecclesiastical positions. However,
Chaucer’s use of the frame narrative complicates this reading as these critiques are filtered
through narrators with personal agendas for telling their tales. This undermines the gravity of
their satirical portrayals, which can make Chaucer’s clerical satire appear ‘rather mild and
almost playful’ than didactic. Ultimately, Chaucer invites the reader to be sceptical of the
Pilgrim-narrators, and places upon the reader a responsibility to determine whether the effect
of his satire should be read as ‘playful’ or serious moral commentary.
Despite being the subjects of Chaucer’s clerical satire, neither the Pardoner nor the Friar face
meaningful consequences for their vices, which may suggest Chaucer’s satirical treatment of
the pilgrims is marked by an ‘indulgent attitude’. Both pilgrims explicitly admit their
engagement in the vices they condemn in their tales. In his Prologue, the Pardoner’s
admission — ‘I preche agayn that same vice // Which that I use, and that is avarice’ (427–8)
offers a pointedly satirical portrayal of clerical corruption. His confession that ‘myn entente is
nat but for to wynne’ (403) parallels Jean de Meun’s Fals-Semblant in The Roman de la Rose,
who in Chaucer’s translation similarly declares: ‘To wynnen is alwey myn entente’ (6837).
Although the murderers in his tale receive fitting punishment of ‘empoisonyng’, there is a
1
, rupture between the tale’s moral trajectory and the Pardoner’s own continued vice.
Immediately afterwards, he resumes his grift, offering to sell pardons to the pilgrims: ‘If any
of yow wol of devocion / Offren and han myn absolucion’ (923–24). The Host’s
denouncement could indicate sincere disgust for the Pardoner’s antics, but the Knight’s plea
to the Pardoner to ‘be glad and myrie of cheere’ (963) is undoubtedly ‘indulgent’. With the
final line, ‘Anon they kiste, and ryden forth hir weye’ (968), the didactic effect of Chaucer’s
satire is undercut in favour of the resumption of the pilgrimage. Similarly, in The Friar’s
Tale, the corrupt summoner is dragged to the ‘peynes’ (1652) of hell, suggesting that
Chaucer’s satire carries genuine moral weight. As the Friar describes the torments of hell so
excruciating ‘no tonge may it devyse’ (1650), he invokes a punishment grimly suited to
Chaucer’s portrait of him in the General Prologue as a man ‘of daliaunce and fair langage’
(211), as well as the Pardoner who must ‘preche and wel affile his tonge’ (712). Chaucer’s
satire suggests that the torments of hell may be as appropriate for these corrupt clerical
figures with deceitful ‘tonges’ as for the fictional summoner. However, Friar Huberd’s failure
to grasp the moral implications of his own tale is evident in his closing sermon, which
mimics the traditional closure of an exemplum. His warning that the devil waits to ‘sle the
innocent’ (1658), bears little relevance to the tale’s actual critique of clerical corruption.
Hence, the lack of consequences for the narrators in favour of the continuation of the
narrative framework of The Canterbury Tales destabilises the notion that Chaucer’s clerical
satire cannot be ‘playful’.
Chaucer’s positioning of the tales within the broader framework of the pilgrimage
complicates the gravity of his satire. Despite their genres as exemplums, the tales’ moral
gravity is undermined by the personal agendas of their tellers, arguably turning the satire
‘rather mild and almost playful’. Chaucer’s satirical portrayal of his narrators is
compromised: the Pardoner by ‘avarice’, the Friar by petty rivalry with the Summoner. The
2
