Advertisement

Nocturnal Ecologies: Metaphor in the Miller’s and the Reeve’s Tale

  • Shawn Normandin
Chapter
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)

Abstract

This chapter reassesses the Miller’s naturalism. Many critics have praised the Miller for his representation of natural vitality, and readers have often preferred the Miller’s naturalism to the Knight’s gloomy artifice. Yet the Miller’s apparent love of nature is fragile, and his enemy the Reeve knows it. The feud between the Miller and the Reeve is a debate about metaphor. This chapter explains how medieval and classical understandings of figurative language inform Chaucer’s fabliaux. The Miller’s narrative derides metaphor (and simile) as delusions, but he indulges the fantasy that a proper male subject can abstain from these tropes. The Reeve, by contrast, presents metaphorical delusions as unavoidable consequences of human embeddedness in a more-than-human world whose most powerful agent is the sun.

References

  1. Alan of Lille. 2013. Literary works. Translated and edited by Winthrop Wetherbee. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allman, W.W. 2004. Sociolinguistics, literature, and the Reeve’s Tale. English Studies 85 (5): 385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aloni, Gila. 2006. Extimacy in the Miller’s Tale. Chaucer Review 41 (2): 163–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotle. 1982. The “art” of rhetoric. Translated by John Henry Freese. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ashworth, E. Jennifer. 2007. Metaphor and the logicians from Aristotle to Cajetan. Vivarium 45: 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853407X217795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernard of Clairvaux. 1962. The steps of humility. Edited and translated by George Bosworth Burch. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  7. Birney, Earle. 1960. The inhibited and the uninhibited: Ironic structure in the “Miller’s Tale”. Neophilologus 44 (1): 333–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bishop, Louise M. 2002. “Of Goddes pryvetee nor of his wyf”: Confusion of orifices in Chaucer’s Miller’s Tale. Texas Studies in Literature and Language 44 (3): 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blamires, Alcuin. 2007. Philosophical sleaze? The “strok of thought” in the Miller’s Tale and Chaucerian fabliau. Modern Language Review 102 (3): 621–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blum, Martin. 1998. Negotiating masculinities: Erotic triangles in the Miller’s Tale. In Masculinities in Chaucer: Approaches to maleness in the “Canterbury Tales” and “Troilus and Criseyde”, ed. Peter G. Beidler, 37–52. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
  11. Braidotti, Rosi. 2009. Animals, anomalies, and inorganic others. PMLA 124 (2): 526–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Breeze, Andrew. 2009. Chaucer’s Strother and Berwickshire. Notes and Queries 56 (1): 21–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breuer, Heidi. 2008. Being intolerant: Rape is not seduction (in “The Reeve’s Tale” or anywhere else). In The Canterbury Tales revisited: 21st century interpretations, ed. Kathleen A. Bishop, 1–15. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
  14. Bullón-Fernández, María. 2006. Private practices in Chaucer’s Miller’s Tale. Studies in the Age of Chaucer 28: 141–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Calabrese, Michael. 1994. The lover’s cure in Ovid’s Remedia amoris and Chaucer’s Miller’s Tale. English Language Notes 32 (1): 13–18.Google Scholar
  16. Cannon, Christopher. 2006. The Boethianism of the “Miller’s Tale”. In Mittelalterliche Novellistik im europäischen Kontext: Kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, ed. Mark Chinca, Timo Reuvekamp-Felber, and Christopher Young, 326–346. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar
  17. Caplan, Harry, trans. 1964. Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi (rhetorica ad Herennium). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Chaucer, Geoffrey. 1987. The Riverside Chaucer. Edited by Larry D. Benson. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  19. Chickering, Howell. 2001. Comic meter in the Miller’s Tale. In Essays on the art of Chaucer’s verse, ed. Alan T. Gaylord, 379–405. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Cobban, Alan B. 1969. The King’s Hall within the University of Cambridge in the later Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome. 2003. Medieval identity machines. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  22. ———. 2008. Inventing with animals in the Middle Ages. In Engaging with nature: Essays on the natural world in medieval and early Modern Europe, ed. Barbara A. Hanawalt and Lisa J. Kiser, 40–62. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  23. Delasanta, Rodney. 2002. The mill in Chaucer’s Reeve’s Tale. Chaucer Review 36 (3): 270–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. de Lorris, Guillaume, and Jean de Meun. 1992. Le roman de la rose. Edited by Armand Strubel. Paris: Librairie Générale Française.Google Scholar
  25. de Man, Paul. 1979. Allegories of reading: Figural language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  26. ———. 1996. Aesthetic ideology. Edited by Andrzej Warminski. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  27. Derrida, Jacques. 2008. The animal that therefore I am. Edited by Marie-Louise Mallet. Translated by David Wills. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Dinshaw, Carolyn. 1989. Chaucer’s sexual poetics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  29. Edgar, Swift, and Angela M. Kinney, eds. 2010–13. The Vulgate Bible. 6 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Edwards, Elizabeth B. 2002. The economics of justice in Chaucer’s Miller’s and Reeve’s Tales. Dalhousie Review 82 (1): 91–112.Google Scholar
  31. Emmerson, Richard K. 1992. “Coveitise to konne,” “Goddes pryvetee,” and Will’s ambiguous dream experience in Piers Plowman. In Suche werkis to werche: Essays on Piers Plowman in honor of David C. Fowler, ed. Míceál F. Vaughan, 89–121. East Lansing: Colleagues Press.Google Scholar
  32. Epstein, Robert. 2008. “Fer in the north; I kan nat telle where”: Dialect, regionalism, and philologism. Studies in the Age of Chaucer 30: 95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Estok, Simon C. 2011. Ecocriticism and Shakespeare: Reading ecophobia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Evans, G.R. 1983. The mind of Bernard of Clairvaux. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  35. Feinstein, Sandy. 1991. The Reeve’s Tale: About that horse. Chaucer Review 26 (1): 99–106.Google Scholar
  36. Freedman, Paul H. 2002. The representation of medieval peasants as bestial and as human. In The animal/human boundary: Historical perspectives, ed. Angela N.H. Creager and William Chester Jordan, 29–49. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  37. Geoffrey of Vinsauf. 2010. Poetria nova. Translated by Margaret F. Nims. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
  38. Griffin, Miranda. 1999. Dirty stories: Abjection in the fabliaux. New Medieval Literatures 3: 229–260.Google Scholar
  39. Hansen, Elaine Tuttle. 1992. Chaucer and the fictions of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  40. Harman, Graham. 2005. Guerrilla metaphysics: Phenomenology and the carpentry of things. Chicago, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
  41. Harwood, Britton J. 1981. The “nether ye” and its antitheses: A structuralist reading of “The Miller’s Tale”. Annuale Medievale 21: 5–30.Google Scholar
  42. ———. 2001. Psychoanalytic politics: Chaucer and two peasants. ELH 68 (1): 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2001.0002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heyworth, Gregory. 2009. Ineloquent ends: Simplicitas, proctolalia, and the profane vernacular in the Miller’s Tale. Speculum 84 (4): 956–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Horobin, S.C.P. 2001. J.R.R. Tolkien as a philologist: A reconsideration of the northernisms in Chaucer’s Reeve’s Tale. English Studies 82 (2): 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. ———. 2002. Chaucer’s Norfolk Reeve. Neophilologus 86 (4): 609–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Johnston, Andrew James. 2002. The exegetics of laughter: Religious parody in Chaucer’s Miller’s Tale. In A history of English laughter: Laughter from Beowulf to Beckett and beyond, ed. Manfred Pfister, 17–33. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  47. Knox, Philip. 2014. The “dialect” of Chaucer’s Reeve. Chaucer Review 49 (1): 102–124. https://doi.org/10.1353/cr.2014.0022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kolve, V.A. 1984. Chaucer and the imagery of narrative: The first five Canterbury Tales. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  50. Langland, William. 1995. The vision of Piers Plowman: A critical edition of the B-text based on Trinity College Cambridge MS B.15.17. Edited by A.V.C. Schmidt. London: J.M. Dent.Google Scholar
  51. Leicester, H. Marshall, Jr. 1994. New currents in psychoanalytic criticism, and the difference “it” makes: Gender and desire in the Miller’s Tale. ELH 61 (3): 473–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lochrie, Karma. 1994. Women’s “pryvetees” and fabliau politics in the Miller’s Tale. Exemplaria 6 (2): 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Miller, Mark. 2004. Philosophical Chaucer: Love, sex, and agency in the “Canterbury Tales”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Morey, James H. 1995. The “cultour” in the Miller’s Tale: Alison as Iseult. Chaucer Review 29 (4): 373–381.Google Scholar
  55. Morrison, Susan Signe. 2008. Excrement in the late Middle Ages: Sacred filth and Chaucer’s fecopoetics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Muscatine, Charles. 1957. Chaucer and the French tradition: A study in style and meaning. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  57. Nims, Margaret F. 1974. Translatio: “Difficult statement” in medieval poetic theory. University of Toronto Quarterly 43 (3): 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Novelli, Cornelius. 1998. Sin, sight, and sanctity in the Miller’s Tale: Why Chaucer’s blacksmith works at night. Chaucer Review 33 (2): 168–175.Google Scholar
  59. O’Brien, Timothy D. 1998. Fire and blood: “Queynte” imaginings in Diana’s temple. Chaucer Review 33 (2): 157–167.Google Scholar
  60. Olson, Paul A. 1962. The Reeve’s Tale: Chaucer’s Measure for Measure. Studies in Philology 59 (1): 1–17.Google Scholar
  61. Pappano, Margaret Aziza. 2005. “Leve brother”: Fraternalism and craft identity in the Miller’s Prologue and Tale. In Reading medieval culture: Essays in honor of Robert W. Hanning, ed. Robert M. Stein and Sandra Pierson Prior, 248–270. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  62. Parry, Joseph D. 2001. Interpreting female agency and responsibility in The Miller’s Tale and The Merchant’s Tale. Philological Quarterly 80 (2): 133–167.Google Scholar
  63. Patterson, Lee. 1991. Chaucer and the subject of history. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  64. Rudat, Wolfgang E.H. 1995. Gender-crossing in the Miller’s Tale—And a new Chaucerian crux. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 16 (1–2): 134–146.Google Scholar
  65. Rudd, Gillian. 2007. Greenery: Ecocritical readings of late medieval English literature. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sidhu, Nicole Nolan. 2014. Teaching Chaucer’s obscene comedy in Fragment I. In Approaches to teaching Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales”, ed. Peter W. Travis and Frank Grady, 2nd ed., 80–83. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.Google Scholar
  67. Smith, Charles R. 1995. Chaucer’s Reeve and St. Paul’s old man. Chaucer Review 30 (1): 101–106.Google Scholar
  68. Stanbury, Sarah. 2004. EcoChaucer: Green ethics and medieval literature. Chaucer Review 39 (1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. ———. 2010. Derrida’s cat and Nicholas’s study. New Medieval Literatures 12: 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. ———. 2011. Posthumanist theory and the premodern animal sign. Postmedieval 2 (1): 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Taylor, Joseph. 2010. Chaucer’s uncanny regionalism: Rereading the north in The Reeve’s Tale. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 109 (4): 468–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Twomey, Michael W., and Scott D. Stull. 2016. Architectural satire in the tales of the Miller and Reeve. Chaucer Review 51 (3): 310–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Vaszily, Scott. 1997. Fabliau plotting against romance in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale. Style 31 (3): 523–542.Google Scholar
  74. Walker, Greg. 2002. Rough girls and squeamish boys: The trouble with Absolon in The Miller’s Tale. In Writing gender and genre in medieval literature: Approaches to Old and Middle English texts, ed. Elaine Treharne, 61–92. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
  75. Wallace, David. 1997. Chaucerian polity: Absolutist lineages and associational forms in England and Italy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  76. White, Hugh. 2000. Nature, sex, and goodness in a medieval literary tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Williams, Jeni. 2000. Competing spaces: Dialectology and the place of dialect in Chaucer’s “Reeve’s Tale”. In Debating dialect: Essays on the philosophy of dialect study, ed. Robert Penhallurick, 46–65. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
  78. Woods, William F. 1994. Private and public space in the Miller’s Tale. Chaucer Review 29 (2): 166–178.Google Scholar
  79. ———. 1995. The logic of deprivation in the Reeve’s Tale. Chaucer Review 30 (2): 150–163.Google Scholar
  80. ———. 2004. Symkyn’s place in the Reeve’s Tale. Chaucer Review 39 (1): 17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yager, Susan. 1994. “A whit thyng in hir ye”: Perception and error in the Reeve’s Tale. Chaucer Review 28 (4): 393–404.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shawn Normandin
    • 1
  1. 1.Sungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulKorea (Republic of)

Personalised recommendations