Out of all the stories in The Canterbury Tales my least favorite has been “The Miller’s
Tale”. The story has humor, and I can enjoy it from that angle, but there is so
much that is either mean or doesn’t make sense, that I cannot make myself like
it. Every story so far in the tales I have been able to immerse my self in, and
try to look at the different perspectives of the characters, but I cannot in
“the Miller’s Tale” because I don’t understand them, and not only that, but I
don’t want to.
I cannot think of one of the four characters that has a
redeeming quality about them.
Nicholas is very capable of being the cause of all trouble.
He’s persistent and sexually motivated. I also find him to be a narcissist believing
that the people around are there for his purpose, which is proven by his
insistence in being in control of Alison’s body. He is clearly manipulative and
mischievous, which he demonstrates with his relationship with John.
Next we have, Absolon, who is part of the church, and is
also pursuing Alison. Forget the fact that he was not supposed to pursue her
because he probably took a vow of chastity, but she is a married woman. His
behavior is terrible, especially when considering his role with the church.
Then after Alison and Nicholas humiliate him, he seeks revenge and physically
hurts Nicholas intending to hurt her even though his actions were wrong.
John is an idiot, and clearly clueless to anything that is
going on in his own house. While Alison and Nicholas are having sex in his
house, and Absolon is trying to pursue John’s wife, he’s asleep in tub worried
about a flood because Nicholas told him one was coming. There is nothing
respectable about a man who follows other men blindly, which makes me feel no
sympathy for John.
Finally, Alison, who I think is a little bit of the puppet
master in this story because when things fall apart, she remains untouched. She
has so much control over the men around her. In the two pranks that played on
John and Absolon, she was there and in the action, but came out unharmed, with
only the men punished for her behavior. All the bad that happened to them came
from her. John broke his arm based on a lie that was told, so Nicholas could
sleep with her. Absolon was farted on by Alison because he came to pursue her,
and as result Absolon seeks revenge on her, but instead brands Nicholas. She is
the only one who is not punished for her actions.
None of these characters demonstrate that they have any good
traits at all. The other aspect of this tale that really bothers me is the
amount of effort it takes for Nicholas to have sex with her. Was it really
worth all the work he had to go through to be with her? The trickery is very
elaborate in regards to tricking John into thinking there is a floods, and
convincing his to sleep in a tub. I just think that if they were as determined
as they were to have the affair, there had to be a simpler plan to accomplish
their goal.
http://ishali.deviantart.com/art/The-Miller-s-Tale-283798186
This is interesting, and quite true for the most part. My question for you though is, are affairs ever something truly simple though? Maybe Chaucer was trying to make the point that affairs can never be something simple. They all involve some depth of lying and elaborate plans of trying to figure out how to have sex with someone. Sure, it could be simpler in this story because Nicholas lives in the same house, but in most cases of affairs, the suitor is not going to be living that close. It could be a way of Chaucer emphasizes the complexity of affairs, and just using the most awful character to do so.
ReplyDelete