week 11: The Merchant's Tale - genre, narrator and the context of the Canterbury Tales

After my reading, I found different topics that can remind us of our previous texts. Firstly, I would like to talk about the “moral aspect”. First of all, this text offers a reflection on marriage. The narrator uses a variety of ways to make the reader think: he uses examples from the Bible, sets the scene for a discussion between Januarie and his brothers, and of course tells us a colorful love story. The “good” and “bad” aspects of being married, and of the women, are debated. The moral dimension is thus clearly present, as it has been in all our all our texts. It is also in this light that the influence of courtly love can be studied. Indeed, in his reflections on love, it seems that it is a matter of an “elevated” love, insofar as it affects the soul and not just the body. Mere pleasure is not the goal, and the love experience seems ennobling. However, as soon as the narrator stops debating, the story of Januarie and May seems much less noble, to the extent that Januarie seems above all to expect pleasure, and May cheats on her husband without consequence. But in this, too, the moral aspect is present, in that the reader, as a spectator of May's actions, is nonetheless invited to be offended by her conduct.
Regarding the fabliau. The fabliau is a short narrative, with a simple and entertaining plot. The main goal is to entertain the reader, however, they can have a more moral part. I saw the influence of this genre in two different moments. Firstly, the story often has some kind of comical-sexual aspect. The scenes in which Januarie and May are in bed are relatively detailed, particularly in terms of Januarie's impatience and desire for pleasure. Some of the descriptions seem to use a different tone than in the texts we have read previously. Secondly, there is also some situational comedy at times, in that the reader, if led to disapprove of May's attitude when she cheats on her husband, can also laugh at the situation of the cheated husband.
The construction of the text is also interesting, with this kind of epilogue and prologue, and with some frequent interventions and commentary by the author. We have encountered this kind of construction quite often.
Lastly, as it reminds me of our previous texts, I noticed the presence of the fantastic, as we saw quite often. Some elements remain without explanation: why does January suddenly become blind ? Why, at the tensest moment, Pluton and Proserpine appear? It helps the story to go on, adds some interest for the reader, but remains quite strange.

I find it interesting, that in The Merchant's Tale we get to see a variation on the knightly romance with an elderly, somewhat machist, knight who idealises marriage, only to have Chaucer dismantle his romanticised ideas completely. I would like to argue that the parody of courtly love lies not predominantly in the tale's events, but begins with January's ridiculous expectations of marriage and is further subverted, as expected, by the complete opposite of his young wife's traits than he envisioned. This is reinforced through the fabliau elements of the plot, which expose the gap between January's ideals and reality that he was warned of. I'm not sure whether the reader is meant to condemn her actions – definitely according to the Merchant, but Chaucer, perhaps not so much, and the outcome of the tale, in my opinion, is that the joke's on January.

To talk about Pluto and Proserpine - I think they function as a plot device reinforcing the central theme of lust. Their interlude amplifies the tension between the two sexes (January vs May, Pluton vs Proserpine) as it elevates the issue to a mythological level, both May and January literally get support from a God. I think introducing this classical element also creates a sense of irony (so it adds to entertainment value), given the rather physical, human themes the tale concerns itself with. Also, they’re not particularly put-together, they squabble, which sort of ruins the image of the refined classical - parodies the classical as much as it parodies medieval romance.

To me, the entire tale has an almost satirical undertone. The characterization of the knight is very different in comparison to previous texts, where the idea of courtly romance is very much idealized. Instead of a young and chivalric knight we are introduced to a knight characterized by "He'd lived there very prosperously for more than sixty years and was a bachelor". If my knowledge is correct, during that period if one was unmarried in their late twenties it was considered strange and unusual, especially given his position. Similar ironic tone is present throughout the tale, where the narrators cynicism takes center stage, sometimes with additions by Chaucer. Damian’s infatuation with May similarly echoes noble love present in courtly romance, however his pursuit is of a more carnal nature. The divine intervention also becomes farcical, further adding to the fabliau trickery and humor. I would say that the romance is most present in January's expectations of marriage, which clash with the narrators cynicism.