Week 4 - Reeve's Tale

[Everyman]

The Reeve gets back at the Miller with another fabliau, this one at the expense of a dishonest miller. But unlike the Miller's tale, this one has some distant echoes of the upper class and romantic love of the Knight's tale.

Of the two bawdy tales, who do you think tells the better tale?

[Everyman]

Mike had discussed under the Miller's Tale the genre of fabliau. Here's a nice, fairly brief discussion of fabliaux and their relevance to the Tales. We have seen two (or three) so far (if you consider the Cook's tale one), and there are several more to come!

[[deleted user]]

I agree that the Reeve tells the tale to get back at the Miller. But the words are a good example of the difficulties of various translations.

When I read mine, I had a very different impression. My edition ends:

And may God upon His heavenly seat,
Save all this company both great and small!
And so I've done the Miller with my tale."

This works well and, but didn't really square with my understanding of the verb in question.

The Middle English is:

And god, that sitteth heighe in magestee,
403 Save al this compaignye, grete and smale!
404 Thus have I quyt the millere in my tale.

The ELF translation is:

And God, Who sits on high in majesty,
403 Save all this company, both strong and frail!
404 Thus have I paid this miller with my tale.

Well now, that sounds much more sarcastic. But a visit to the OED (deciding it might help not to rely on my own usage of the verb reveals that there are fourteen definitions (some with multiples dependent on the usage. These range from the positive and generous ( To absolve or exonerate a person from blame, a crime, sin, etc. In later use with of or from.) to the negative (To free or rid of something undesirable or troublesome; to release from a debt or obligation. Chiefly with person as object. ). The second of the examples still leaves what the Reeve intended ambiguous. (Think of the word "sanction" which means both one thing and its opposite.)

So which is it? A charitable homily to teach a needed lesson to his fellow traveler about cheating? A tale which exonerates the Miller? One that the Reeve intends as his way of saying "Kiss off Pal?"

Or let's think back to the Prologue where we were first introduced to the Reeve. There he is described as follows (without boring you with multiple translations!)

is cottage was a good one, on a heath;
609 By green trees shaded with this dwelling-place.
610 Much better than his lord could he purchase.
611 Right rich he was in his own private right,
612 Seeing he'd pleased his lord, by day or night,
613 By giving him, or lending, of his goods,
614 And so earn thanks besides a coat and hood.

So what we really have is a case of the kettle calling the pot black!

[Thomas]

The Reeve is a bitter old man whose primary concern is to "quite" the Miller, so his tale sort of has a nasty edge to it. It isn't as fun or boisterous as the Miller's, and his female characters are sexual props, more or less.

Now that I think about it, the depiction of women in the first group of stories shifts dramatically, from highly idealized in the Knight's Tale, to a more realistic (though immoral) portrayal in the Miller's Tale, to serving an almost purely sexual role in the Reeve's Tale. At least in the Miller's tale Alisoun is a willing participant in the shenanigans, whereas the miller's wife and daughter in the Reeve's tale are taken as "recompense." It isn't exactly consensual.

[[deleted user]]

Thomas, I noticed the idealizing of women too. It really influences the Sergent-at-Laws tale does it not?

I really liked how you contrasted the idealized Alisoun with the way the wife and daughter are treated as commodities. Isn't there something about a Madonna and Whore complex in certain psyches. When you think about it these are not opposite poles; they are two sides of the same coin--not relating to women as the complex humans they are. The juxtaposition by Chaucer leads me to think maybe he is trying to show us this.

[Everyman]

Zeke wrote: "I agree that the Reeve tells the tale to get back at the Miller. But the words are a good example of the difficulties of various translations.

When I read mine, I had a very different impression. ..."

I took my impression of the Reeve's intention from the prologue to his tale.

Chaucer says that everyone laughed at the tale except one, Oswald the Reeve.

He gan to grucche, and blamed it a lite.
So theek, quod he, ful wel koude I you quite,
With bleryng of a proud milleres eye,
If that me liste speke of ribaudye.

in Elf:
And he began to grouse and blame a bit.
S' help me, said he, full well could I be quit
With blearing of a haughty miller's eye,
If I but chose to speak of ribaldry.

This followed by the tale I took to be a slap back.

[Everyman]

Thomas wrote: "Now that I think about it, the depiction of women in the first group of stories shifts dramatically, from highly idealized in the Knight's Tale, to a more realistic (though immoral) portrayal in the Miller's Tale, to serving an almost purely sexual role in the Reeve's Tale."

Very nice point.

Does it have to do with class? The principle of knightly chivalry requires that women be treated with respect and adoration. But in the working classes, perhaps they are treated more primarily as workers and sex objects?

[Thomas]

Zeke wrote: "Isn't there something about a Madonna and Whore complex in certain psyches. When you think about it these are not opposite poles; they are two sides of the same coin--not relating to women as the complex humans they are"

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I think you're right. The first set of tales seems to utilize the stereotype in a way that amounts to satire, though I'm not sure if that was Chaucer's primary intent. (I think the Sergeant at Law's tale goes in a different direction, which makes me curious about the tales that follow in the second set.)

My tendency is to think that Chaucer's primary motivation is to tell us something about the individuals telling the story, and as Everyman points out, part of that has to do with class. The fact that the Reeve is comparatively wealthy but has a meaner view of women than the Miller leads me to think that wealth may have little to do with it. (This may also factor into why the Knight's appearance is so threadbare.)

[MadgeUK]

A visit to my OED did not tell me what 'Kiss off Pal' meant Everyman??:)

I think the Middle English quyt is the telling word: 'Thus have I quyt the millere in my tale'. In the OED to be 'quits' still means to be 'on even terms by retaliation or repayment'. To call it quits is acknowledging that 'things are now even, to agree not to proceed further in a quarrel'. In medieval English quitte was to quit hold of, to loosen.

This Modern English translation of the tales, slang words and all, is great fun!

http://www.richardbrodie.com/Chaucer/...

[[deleted user]]

Sorry Madge. "Kiss off" would be similar to "Take a hike." Is there a British equivalent?

I love listening to BBC and hearing the various British colloquial expressions.

[toria (vikz writes)]

Everyman wrote: "The Reeve gets back at the Miller with another fabliau, this one at the expense of a dishonest miller. But unlike the Miller's tale, this one has some distant echoes of the upper class and romanti..."

I don't know why. But, I definitely preferred this one. .

[toria (vikz writes)]

Not sure if this is the reason why I like this tale. But, I really like how it illustrates how the miller has been seen, and behaved, in British history. I heard somewhere that the miller had a monopoly when it came to grinding corn and often abused that right. It was illegal to grind your own corn He would often over charge and steal some of the corn (as the miller did in this tale).

[MadgeUK]

Zeke wrote: "Sorry Madge. "Kiss off" would be similar to "Take a hike." Is there a British equivalent?

I love listening to BBC and hearing the various British colloquial expressions."

I suppose today's equivalent would be 'F*** off'! 'Get lost' is a polite way of saying it:).

[Everyman]

Vikz wrote: "I don't know why. But, I definitely preferred [the Reeve's tale to the Miller's tale]. "

I did also, but I'm not sure why.

It's less blatantly lewd. It seems somehow more sophisticated as a tale.

On the down side, it isn't as respectful of the Miller's wife and daughter as the Miller's tale was of the Carpenter's wife. She was knowingly desirous of her adultery. With the Reeve's tale, the Miller's wife and daughter do wind up enjoying themselves, but they didn't intend or choose it.

On the up side, the Miller is certainly more deserving of being picked on than the carpenter is. The carpenter is just a fool, and there's no great merit in playing h8im for a fool. The miller is a knave and shrewd, so it's more satisfying to see him being beaten at his own game.

And then, don't we have a certain soft spot in our hearts for college students who are are trying to right a wrong?

[Sasha]

I do have a soft spot for the students, but the tone of the story is just plain mean. I think the general tone has sunk quite low and I hope it picks up again.

I wonder whether millers generally had a bad reputation for short-changing (as it were) their customers?

[Michael]

Like others, to me this story had a more malicious feel to it.

The carpenter in The Miller's Tale was a jealous husband. He was well intentioned but overzealous in his protection of his wife. His reward was self-inflicted physical injury and public ridicule. Of course, being the object of a joke is one of society's ways of correcting behavior. Being able to take such treatment with grace and change behavior is I think a large part of being socially acceptable.

The miller in The Reeve's Tale was brazenly proud and greedy (2 of the 7 deadly sins). Maybe it is fair to say he was gluttonous as well. The relative seriousness of his character faults may have justified the harsher treatment he received.

The two stories and the interactions between the miller and the reeve in the frame narrative remind me of a childish tit-for-tat in which the first person who receives injury seeks to inflict the same amount of pain on the other but is unable to be just and ends up hurting the other more. I think the comment that he has quyt the miller is the reeve's way of saying he has evened the score but I think he hit back a little harder.

[Michael]

As characters, the women in The Reeve's Tale are paper thin. Did someone here call them props? I think that is about right. The daughter did gain some depth however when she told the students where the bread was hidden.

[1.1]

Malicious is the word I would choose to describe this tale, too. EDIT: Fabliau or no there is a dark overtone at play in this tale.

And I agree as well with the notion that women in this tale were almost entirely sexual props, which must reflect something about the Reeve. The daughter telling where the bread is says little about her other than that she appreciated the attention paid to her. The wife is there just to be 'swinked' and mistakenly brain the miller, it seems.

I feel that the Reeve's 'quyt'ing is done so overbearingly that the Miller is still more or less victorious, because while his tale may have been meant as a poke at the Reeve, it has more of mischief than viciousness.

The Reeve's tale is told somewhat jollily, but if you think about two people abusing hospitality to this extent, it is essentially about a home invasion with all the fixtures that entails – it isn't so harmless.

The more I think about it, though, it's just one of those stories that gives vent to negativity, as the Reeve admits in his prologue. The Miller was too drunk to be discrete in his telling, and the Reeve was too angry to be discrete in his, and I suppose it is that simple in the end, which makes the situation funnier than the tale itself.

[Galicius]

Vikz wrote: "Not sure if this is the reason why I like this tale. But, I really like how it illustrates how the miller has been seen, and behaved, in British history. I heard somewhere that the miller had a mo..."

Millers’ customers usually suspected that they came back from a miller with less then they brought in to grind. This suspicion was as old as the trade and persisted even to modern times when small grain mills still operated in Europe in the last century. It was a cat and a mouse game and millers had different ways of cheating—usually at the weighting. I know this from my early memories when my father would take me in winter to a mill to grind our family’s small farm harvest. We would stop afterwards to a tavern by the road for a mug of beer. I would get a glass too sweetened with some raspberry or sour cherry syrup.

[MadgeUK]

That's a lovely memory Galicius.

[Evalyn]

Chaucer delved into such a variety of characters from so many different walks or stations in life. Is this why the Tales are still being read today, I wonder. I definitely think that it is one of the main attractions of the Tales.

[Everyman]

Evalyn wrote: "Chaucer delved into such a variety of characters from so many different walks or stations in life. Is this why the Tales are still being read today, I wonder. I definitely think that it is one of ..."

I agree. But is there also some guilty pleasure in getting to read bawdy tales that you can feel good about reading because they're classics? Might this be why, for example, the Thousand and one Nights is also still read?

[MadgeUK]

Naughty Everyman:). I had a schoolmaster friend years ago who had a very religious and narrow minded wife. He told me that whenever he borrowed or bought a book with maybe a slightly suggestive title or cover, he covered it with brown paper before he got home but, he said, she let him read Chaucer and Shakespeare with impunity:).

[Jennifer]

Thomas wrote: "The Reeve is a bitter old man whose primary concern is to "quite" the Miller, so his tale sort of has a nasty edge to it. It isn't as fun or boisterous as the Miller's, and his female characters ar..."

Thomas, I have to agree with you on that. It's also interesting that when Alan goes to sleep with the daughter, in my translation she cannot cry out because he is too close, but by the end she seems to like what have happened. I think this also puts women in a negative light, or at least for those times shows that they will do whatever a man wishes and be happy with it. That's certainly seen in the Knight's Tale with Emily. She does not want to be married, but when Diana tells her she doesn't really have a choice, she goes along with it and cries when her husband dies.

There is another comparision here in the women when the Cook's Tale is read, but I'll carry that over to that thread.

[Everyman]

Jennifer wrote: "I think this also puts women in a negative light, or at least for those times shows that they will do whatever a man wishes and be happy with it. That's certainly seen in the Knight's Tale with Emily. She does not want to be married, but when Diana tells her she doesn't really have a choice, she goes along with it and cries when her husband dies. "

Doesn't this show Chaucer pretty much as a product of his times when it comes to his presentation of women? Which makes the Shipman's tale more interesting as showing a woman in control of her situation and the men in her life. And we may see other attitudes toward women emerge as we get deeper into the tales.

I'm sure somebody has written a thesis or book, or probably more than one, on Chaucer and his views of women. They seem, at least so far, to already be fairly diverse.

[Jennifer]

Everyman wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "I think this also puts women in a negative light, or at least for those times shows that they will do whatever a man wishes and be happy with it. That's certainly seen in the Knigh..."

Yes it does, and it also shows the different classes views of women as well. So in a way it's hard to tell which - so far - which view is Chaucer's.

[MadgeUK]

I'm sure somebody has written a thesis or book, or probably more than one, on chaucer and his views of women...

Here is at least one:-

http://is.muni.cz/th/74590/ff_m/chauc...

And here is a BBC broadcast on Chaucer's women:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshou...

[Rosemary]

I liked this one better than the Miller's tale, too, even though I also found it to be a less acceptable treatment of women.

I think I liked that the Miller here was much more deserving of being tormented (as others pointed out) and I enjoyed the little clever tricks, like moving the cradle. I laughed, I admit it.

[Evalyn]

Everyman wrote: ..."is there also some guilty pleasure because you get to read some bawdy tales you feel good about because they're classics..."

I don't know but, if that's the case, it's time to hit the plays of Shakespeare again. :)