Chaucer’s Humour

Q. Chaucer’s Humour?

OR

Q. Chaucer Combines Objectivity with Sympathy?

Definition of Humour

            Humour means that quality of action, speech, and writing which creates amusement.  The true form of humour is that which makes one laugh only for the sake of pleasure and enjoyment. It does not hurt one’s feelings nor it pinches or agonizes.

Chaucer’s characteristics as a great Humorist

            Chaucer is a great humorist because he loves mankind in spite of its or follies and weaknesses. Even while he gently unmasks the roguery of the knaves, he fees grateful to them as they give him pleasure. There is no malice, spite or animosity in his attitude. His attitude is that of benevolence and tolerance. Even his satire is in the form of tender shafts of irony, which neither hurt nor destroys.

            Chaucer may be regarded as the first great English humorist because no English literary work before his, reveals humour in the modern sense. His humour does not simply raise a simile but also relieve us from seriousness and gloom. He is a great master of humour and all his writing abound with its rich variety. Masefield Calls him:

“a great Renaissance gentleman mocking the Middle Ages”

            Chaucer possess all the characteristics of a great humorist. Firstly, he has catholicity and tolerance of spirit which save it from slipping into satire. Secondly, Chaucer has the faculty of humour which is fed by keen and penetrating observation Finally, Chaucer has a healthy interest in this world an in life.

Chaucer’s humour essentially English in Character

            Chaucer’s is an essentially English humour, as we see is qualities in the works of great English humorists like Shakespeare and Fielding. It is not the “wit” of the Frenchman. His humour is chiefly concerned with the people and happenings of everyday life as we see in “The Canterbury Tales”. Some of the facts are quite trivial in themselves but become amusing because of the way in which they are told e.g. the Squir’s locks which as if they were laid in press:

“ With lokkes cruller, as they were leyed in presse”

Similarly, the hat of the Wife of the Bath weighing 10 lbs.

“Hir coverchief ful fine weren ground

I dorste swere they weyeden ten pounds”

The Reeve’s thin legs, the Franklin’s weakness for sharp sauce etc. In these and other instances, we see the comic quality of amused observation.

Chaucer’s humour: Sympathetic and Objective

            Chaucer’s humour is without any sting, he is always sympathetic, except in his handling the Monk and the Friar. He makes us appreciate a character even when laughing at it. His humour is not of satirical kind. As compared to the Langland, who attacks the Church with keen and telling thrust, Chaucer exposes the corruption of the Church with good humoured laugh. Moreover, Chaucer makes fu more of the individual than of the institution. The genial sympathy saves the Chaucer not only from bitterness, but also from bias. Satire is born of indignation.

            Langland’s picture of evil does not reflect the real state of affairs, while on the other hand, it is faithfully mirrored in Chaucer. Therefore, he is an objective humourist, a better realist than an indignant satirist.

Chaucer’s humour for man and humanity

            Chaucer is essentially the poet of man and is intensely interested in his affairs. Chaucer humour leads him to be the poet of man and humanity. He ha large humanity and good-humoured  tolerance for man. He has no disdain for fools and no disgust for rascals. While gently unmasking the roguery of rogues, he is grateful to them for the pleasure they give. He loves to dwell on their funny traits, looks at their pranks and tricks with amused delight –all these make him a great humourist.

Chaucer’s many sided humour

            Chaucer’s humour is many sided. Humour can be used in a broad as well as limited sense. In the narrow sense, it means a gentle mirth. In the broader sense, it stands for boisterous humour, intellectual humour (wit) and bitter humour (satire). Chaucer works reflect all these different types of humour. E.Alber has beautiful expresses the many-sided humour of Chaucer: “In the literature of his time, when so few poets seem to have any perception of the fun in life, the humour of Chaucer is invigorating and delightful” For example, his humour is kind as in the case of the Clerk of Oxford, broad and semi-farcical as in the Wife of the Bath, pointedly satirical as in the Pardoner and the Summoner.

Chaucer’s humour is spontaneous ( natural )

            Chaucer’s humour is natural and spontaneous. If is because of his peculiar way of looking at things, as the bent of his mind is essentially humorous. His humour is not the result of deliberate, calculated effort, but it is spontaneous expression of his inner self. Therefore, it has unmistakable marks of ease, spontaneity, naturalness and effortlessness. In the words of Walter Raleigh  “his joy is chronic and irrepressible”. The Canterbury Tales radiates with the natural joy that Chaucer felt in writing it.

Impartiality and Tolerance in Chaucer’s humour

            In the whole company of the prologue to the canter bury tales there are those that are good and those others that are bad, the later more in number than former. But Chaucer’s attitude to them is neither that of unruffled and quiet objectivity nor of partnership. Guided by his sense of humour, Chaucer observes everything and records each detail with smiling eyes, slightly emphasizing one aspect here or another there, in order to evoke in the reader that psychological state which makes him laugh without any malice. To quote Legouis : “He is entirely patient with, ney he accepts with a smile the imperfection of humanity”.

            Tolerance, indulgence and capacity for enjoying life are the mainsprings of Chaucer’s humour. The result is that the portraits he draws become true to life, interesting and enjoyable as life always is, to those whose hearts have not been dried up by the apparently dull and boring routine of life.

            Humour for the sake of humour; humour is the medium of Chaucer artistic expressions. Chaucer is never a serious satirist. His aim is primarily to entertain his readers. His aim is never to be a moralist or a preacher. He observes his age sympathetically and humorously. Chaucer does not specifically and directly criticize any institution of his age. He is a poet who explores the theme of the individual’s relation to society.

Conclusion

            Chaucer’s humour is the outcome of a generous sympathy and broad-mindedness. These excellences are imitated by the greatest English humorist like Shakespeare and Fielding. Critics may be divided in opinion as to Chaucer’s right to be called the father of English poetry, but there can be no question that he is first great English humorist.  

Chaucer’s Art or Technique of Characterization

Q. Chaucer’s Art or Technique of Characterization?

OR

Q. Reasons of Chaucer’s being a great Painter of English Literature

         Chaucer outlines his thirty pilgrims in “The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales”.  He is the first great painter of characters in English Literature. He has painted the whole of English nation during the fourteen the century, ranging from knightly class to the order of Clergymen. The Character sketches are brief, yet lucid and comprehensive. Both the in and out of the characters are depicted in such a superb way that the entire personality seems moving before the reader’s eyes. It is infect Chaucer’s unique rich and original art of characterization that has enabled him to delineate memorable portraits. For the purpose he employs several techniques of characterization, some of whom were popular among the contemporaries, while the others are purely his own.

I. Characterization by theory of Humor

One of the major techniques of characterization which was current in the medieval authors was the theory of humor. This theory divided personalities according to the pre-dominance of one of the elements-fire, water, air and earth. For example, his character was dominated by humor of blood, which on its turn was understood to produce a large appetite and pleasure in physical satisfaction. Thus, the entire portrait of the Franklin, is just an elaboration of single phrase “Sanguine”.

2. Characterization by Physiognomy

Similarly, the medieval poets usually described their character through their physiognomy, to expose their inner spiritual health. Chaucer has successfully employed this technique in the case of the Summoner. His. “Fire red cherubim face”, “Pimples”, “Narrow eyes” and “scabby black brows” reflect his inner spiritual corruption. Description through physical features is also employed in the case of The Wife of the Bath and The Prioress. Closely connected with this is Chaucer’s technique of character portrait through dress. It also help the audience in understanding, recognizing and differentiating the pilgrims. The Prioress and the Wife of Bath’s fashionable dresses reveal their materialism and amorous nature. Admittedly, Chaucer varies his presentation from the full length portraits to the thumb nail sketch.

3. Characterization by Individual and Type Method

            Chaucer’s most superb technique is his presentation of Characters as individuals and types. The Characters are not only representatives of their respective classes and professions but also at the same time they possess individual traits. For example, the Friar is a typical representative of his class in the 14^th century; he is corrupt, hypocritical, greedy and callous. But his good voice, his twinkling eyes, his white neck and above all his name “Brother Hubert” all have individualistic touches. The Old Knight, stands for heroism and manliness that good knight would always show on the battlefield. But he has been individualized by his prudence and his weakness of behavior. The Prioress is the type of a woman who is an epicure but she is portrayed as an individual, with her meticulous care in eating and her courtly manners as well as care in eating and her courtly manners as well as her tenderness of heart. The Monk is the type of Monks of those-times interested not in religion and the study of holy books, but in hunting. But Chaucer’s Monk is and individual with bald head and rolling eyes, glowing like the fire under a cauldron. The Oxford Church is the type of good scholars, not interested in worldly glory, but in the advancement of knowledge and learning. But Chaucer’s Oxford Clerk comes as a figure of individual, by his learning, his hollow-cheeks, grave look and his threadbare cloak. In short Chaucer’s characters are types as well as individuals.

4. Characters are real and universal

            Chaucer’s characters are real and universal because no one is like them, and they are real and universal because they are so like us. His people are always on move. Never do they become shadowy or lifeless. They shout and swear, laugh and weep, interrupt the story teller, pass compliments and in general behave themselves, as we might expect the to be.

5. Characterization by profession of Characters

            Another portrait delineations technique which Chaucer uses is to define the characters to a great or lesser extent by the job or profession, they do. The deferent pilgrims represent different professions. The War-like Elements is represented by the Knight, The Square, and Yeoman. The Ploughman, The Miller, the Reeve, and The Franklin typify agriculture. The Sargent of Law, the Doctor, The Oxford Clerk represent liberal professions. The Wife of Bath, The weaver, The Dyer and The Tapicer, embody industry and trade, the Merchant and the Shipman personate commerce. The poor Village person and the Summoner represent the secular clergy, while the monastic order are represented by the Monk, The Prioress and the Pardoner.

6. Characterization by vices of Characters

            Chaucer also presents a vivid picture of his characters by their vices and presents the fourteenth century in “The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales”, Firstly, the prevalent corruption of the Church is mirrored in most of his ecclesiastical figures, like The Friar, The Monk, The Pardoner. Secondly, the greed of doctors is typified in his Doctor of Physic, who loves gold. Thirdly his Sargeant of Law is as shrewd hard-boiled as other members of his profession. Fourthly, the dishonesty of the Reeve and the Miller is also typical. Finally, their traditional enmity is reflected between the Reeve and the Miller. This technique enriches his art of characterization

7. Characterization by Irony and Satire

             Irony and Satire are undoubtedly Chaucer’s most prominent techniques of characterization. Chaucer treats noble fellows with sympathy and love but his treatment of knaves, rogues and rascals either humorous or ironical or satirical. For example, Chaucer call the Wife of Bath “worthy woman” and then in the very next line ironically qualifies the word “worthy” by commenting

“She was worthy woman all her lyve

Husbands at church door she had five”

But it remains to be noted that though he depicts most of his characters ironically and humorously yet tolerance and sympathy never lose Chaucer’s attention. The characters whom he detests and censures are the two corrupts church offices, the Summoner and The Pardoner . It is in case o these two characters that Chaucer employs satire as a technique of characterization. The goodness of the “Gentle rascal” becomes clear when Chaucer comments that just for a quart of wine he would allow a sinner to keep on committing sins.

8. Chaucer’s use of Contrast

            Chaucer utilizes the technique of contrast in drawing the portraits of the pilgrims. The good and the bad rub shoulders together. We have paragon of virtue in the characters of the Parson  and The Ploughman, we have monsters of vice in the characters of the Reeve,The Miller and the Summoner.  The knight, is foil to his son, the lusty Squire; the Oxford Clerk, is the very opposite of the merrymaking Monk. In this way Chaucer distinguishes the characters through the exhibition of dissimilar qualities.

Chaucer a detached Observer

            Chaucer’s art of characterization is free from personal bias. He portrays his characters, objectively, impartially and disinterestedly. He depicts what he sees personally. He has the seeing eye, the memory, the judgment to select and the capacity to expound.

Conclusion

            Lastly, two conclusions may be drawn from the above discussion of Chaucer’s art of Characterization. His world of man is varied and wide. In the words of Dryden . “There is God’s plenty” and secondly, it is through the depiction of his characters, Chaucer has managed to give an expression to his vision of life which is both joyous and realistic.