#1: Respond to the following prompt using one of the four methods described in your blog handout: Continue our class discussion about the identity of the speaker in The Canterbury Tales assumes. Think about the tone as he comments on particular individuals. Do you pick up on any biases? Does this make him reliable/unreliable?
OR
#2: Choose a character from The Canterbury Tales, and compare him or her to a modern figure. Make your comparisons specific, detailed—and appropriate. Feel free to agree or disagree with your classmates’ comparisons.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
The manciple in many ways resembles one of the richest men in the world, Bill Gates. The narrator speaks of how the manciple is great with not only spending his own money, but also at advising people how to handle their own finances. Bill Gates obviously also knows a thing or two about handling money. The narrator states that the manciple knows all of this despite not being fully educated with the quote, "That an illiterate fellow can outpace/The wisdom of a heap of learned men." Gates isn't exactly illiterate, but he only went to college for one year before dropping out. He then created Microsoft and became much more successful than many people who have gone to college for numerous years. Neither of them had a complete education, but they could still out-think and out-do many of their well trained competitors.
As tempted as I am to discuss discuss and compare the woman of bath to well some figures of today that hold a certain street job, I will refrain and discuss the knight and an army solider. Although the knight was a very humble man the narrator lists every place in which he had battle. Like today when a solider comes back from war most peolp know or find out where he or she was stationed. The knight was spoke of with great honor and a form of respect. Likewise a solider form the army is often honored with certain bages and our counrty has also made songs to honor the men and woman that fight to keep our freedom. Yours in Ridiculous English, Charles Gregory Esquire IV
Did not mean to write discuss twice in that first sentence I was moved from my computer for a moment by a Janice comment and a Joe remark, which was quite humerous. and my verification letters this time were knulhbep. The woman of bath would like those letters from some reason, just because of her five husbands and red stockings.
Hope all is well since my last post,
xoxoxo Charles IIV
One last correction, People is spelled wrong. So is country. There should be a comma after well.
Represent For Elkhart and 574,
Charles Stanley Esquire XXI
Well Charles...just so you know there is one more mistake in your post. Bage is actually spelled badge.
I am reminded of the singularly handsome and self absorbed Tom Cruise when I read of the Doctor from The Canterbury Tales. Both characters are exceedingly confident in their positions yet they are mocked by those around them. Tom is known often for his belief in scientology where as the Doctor is recognized for his study of the planets in relation to medicinal theory. They are each enraptured by a strange cult phenomenon although their vices are not the same. Also, the doctor is dressed in a very provocative manner as if to display his status and wealth. Tom Cruise not only dresses himself in this manner, but his young daughter as well. She is not even given opportunity to decide her own fate. Lastly, the doctor is hailed by his "tribe of apothecaries" who bow to his every whim; while Tom is worshipped by a group of dedicated fans. In conclusion, though Tom Cruise and the Doctor are separated from each other by hundreds of years, it appears plausible that they may have been great friends had they been given the opportunity to discuss their commonalities.
So as i read the Canterbury Tales, I could not help but compare the characters to modern humans. This way of thinking actually helped me to better understand the story as a whole. To me the easy character to describe and compare would be the Woman of Bath. Yes, we are all aware of her life style. In today's world she would be a prositute, whore, hooker, or stripper. Sorry for being so frank, but that's just how it is. She has intimate relations with several different men, and she's not getting paid (well not that I'm aware of). However, the majority of prositutes get paid in today's world. Today's hookers seem to be fairly skinny and look as though they have taken to many drugs, which is very similar to how the Woman of Bath is described. Also, the Woman of Bath wears scarlet reds that set her apart, which was a bad thing back then. Not only do modern hookers wear reds but they were very little clothing, alot of makeup, and very bright colors. In the 12th Century having more than one man that you are involved on was frowned on greatly and it created a terrible name for oneself. Whereas, in today's world, yes, you are frowned upon but alot of women do this as a sort of financial support.
Although these two characters are centuries apart, they seem to have a very similar life style.
While reading Chaucer's observations of the Physician, I find myself chuckling at the similarities to our modern medicine advocates. Chaucer states that while the Physician is strong in his field of work and considerably salubrious, he seems to lack spiritual drive. His indifference and lack of consideration towards the Bible is mentioned by Chaucer. Also discussed in the prologue is the Physician's unsound love for financial gain. Now, by comparing the fictitious Physician to modern-day physicians, my intention is not to stereotype all doctors to a cult of athiest and profit-driven beings. I do, though, feel as if the prominent medicinal figures of our era oftentimes take advantage of hazily-informed patients. The clients of a physician are most likely less informed in the medical field than the physician himself (why else would they be there?). With this comes an advantage to the Physician. If a doctor concluded that his patient was suffering from cancer, the patient would probably refrain from questioning the diagnosis. If the doctor were of poor morality, he or she could very easily convince the client that certain medications or procedures were mandatory, therefore gaining indirectly (or possibly directly?) some form of monetary profit. If, in fact, the physician were to commit such an act of deceit, he or she would not be upholding Christian values. Assuming this sort of business is a frequent happening in society, one may argue that those guilty of this act are not familiar with or do not practice Christian morals, thusly supporting a point of comparison to the Physician.
For this blog I am comparing the squire to a modern day character. The character I have chosen to compare the squire with is the corporate executives of today. While on the surface these two characters do not seem to have much in common, but while the character comparison may be more abstract for some, it is not all that far fetched.
The Squire described within the Canterbury Tales is a rather flamboyant man who is overdressed by day and by night seems to be undressing multitudes of women. He is not a head of a major corporation by any means, and yet being the squire to a knight was an honorable employment for a lower class individual. The squire believes he is a great man, or so it seems, from the way he parades around in overly gaudy attire.
This ties into the corporate executive in multitude of ways. This, however, is not to say that all corporate executives behave in, shall we say, less than admirable ways, but unfortunately our society is one that seems fixated upon the negative images of corporate America, propounded upon by the media. This is to say one seldom hears of an executive behaving in a morally straight manner, but there are a myriad of stories exploiting the misdoings of a notable executives; in such a manner is the stereotype of a big city corporate executive derived. When I think of of a corporate executive I see a morally corrupt person who dresses in over priced suits and possibly have extra marital affairs, or a multitude of so called girlfriends. Unfortunately, such negative images are associated with these people and also the image of a money hungry person who would sell their closest friends down the river for the all mighty dollar. While they are not the head of a corporation they are in power and power has a tendency to corrupt. I say again, however, that I am not saying that such stereotypes are indicative of all corporate executives, but again I am writing this thoroughly based upon the negative stereotypes propagated by a modern media that thrives upon the pain and misdoings of a morally bankrupt subculture of the United States that views itself as above the ideals of morality within the structure of our society. To say that this would work if people did not absorb such slanderous writings would be a lie. So maybe in a way we are all the Squire in one way or another.
Like Tyler, I wish to compare the Squire to a modern day stereotype. However his comparison is a little different than mine. I feel the Squire could best be compared to a Hollywood figure. Someone who is always terribly overdressed, spends his nights at parties, and has affairs and charades with woman is easily comparable to any Hollywood star in general. Both figures (the Squire and Hollywood stars) feel they have a certain superiority over most of the country, and that they are somehow special. They are truly irrelevant with the rest of the world but feel they have a good understanding of what goes on around them. I feel this is the best representation of this character.
Since Chaz did not talk about the woman of bath I will speak about her for him. The woman of bath I believe can be compared to Brittany Spears in today's world of pop culture. I don't know if I can say this on here but she is a whore and has many comparisons to to Mrs. Spears or Ms. Spears wait I have no clue if she is actually married or not she has had so many different boyfriends and husbands and whatever else you can name. I want to say that I am sick of Elysia being right all the time and reading all the way through Chaz's post to look for mistakes so she can sit in front of her computer and laugh at all of our comments that don't rank up next to hers.
I think the Plowman in the story shares many characteristics with a typical American farmer. Hard working, loyal, true, and humble are just a few to mention. It talks about the Plowman waking early in the morning to haul dung which indicates his long hours and tedious workload. It also mentions his clothing which sounds rather humble favoring funtionality over fashion. It says that he was honest and hardworking never slacking off and always eager to help his neighbors which many farmers are quick to do. The tight knit farm communities are described when it says he treated his neighbors like himself and wouldn't take a penny if he could help it. I know not all farmers embody these characteristics but many smaller operations around here operate on similar principles.
***I spelled "atheist" wrong. I forgot the i before e rule. Forgive me.
Big thanks to Derek and Kaley for stating my thoughts on that great woman of bath. I also would like to thank Derek for having Ms. Right worry about her own blog posts that just use a bunch of big words for extra credit. I think Derek and I should just start turning in blank papers cause as soon as we put our name on something it is wrong and points are removed quickly.
Dear Tori,
Mistakes are ok! We all forgive you. Cause we all make them (With the excpetion of my mother and El..) Anyway, Just hope Elysia does not see it! I love a good laugh before bed time and a warm glass of milk!!
Today my goal was to see how close I could get to missing the time for the posts to be finished. Not really, but I am just getting finished with a busy and quite exciting day of observing and analyzing “The Canterbury Tales”. After looking over many of the stories, I have decided to compare a character that few people problem even realized was in the book. This character is the Franklin.
The book notes a Franklin as a class of landowner, a freeholder, who is also free by birth, but not noble. It is noteworthy that his self-conscious chatter about gentility when he politely interrupts the squire is contemptuously interrupted by the Host. In the Prologue the Franklin is described slightly different than it is in his book definition.
When I look at the character that is explained in the Prologue as the Franklin, I think of a very specific character from one of America’s greatest movies, “O Brother Where Art Thou?” The Franklin reminds me of Bible salesman Big Dan Teague played by John Goodman. Instead of talking about being a sheriff and the characteristics of the Franklin, the narrator talks about his eating habits. In the movie Goodman portrays a heavyset man who enjoys eating food. The movie portrays Big Dan as a southern man who likes food which is like Franklin who likes to eat meat pies and fish. Eating food is not the only similarity that the Franklin and Big Dan share though.
In the movie we are introduced to Big Dan Teague as a Bible salesman, which appears to be a good role model. The Prologue of “The Canterbury Tales” shows us the Franklin as another good role model as he is a member of the Shire and is also a Sheriff. With both of the characters you are able to feel safe with your life in their hands. Are they role models with good morals though? The Franklin turns out to be a simple man with a dagger who loves to eat. Big Dan’s actual personality turns out to be a Klu Klux Klan member which is very obviously different from a Bible salesman. In the end, we look at two individuals that should be role models, but would not actually be beneficial to anyone’s life.
When I read of the different attributes of the young squire many figures come to mind. Main ones that do would be big time athletes that are getting paid big bucks. The Tom Brady, Tony Romo, big names like that always seem to have a pretty boy kind of character with a girl on each arm and a new 'heroic' story each week. These guys somehow think they are the greatest ever. In some cases, yes, they can boast a bit. But there is a fine line that tends not to just be crossed, but at times snapped in half. Austin's Hollywood figure and my figure could coincide once thought about. Another figure that comes to mind is Robin. This may be because it seems to me that the squire to the knight is like Robin to Batman. His little... well. I think we all know what i mean here
Post a Comment