Pierse The Plowman

May 30, 2012December 13, 2012 / kaitlinbevis / Leave a comment

I’d never heard of Pierse the Plowman before, but it was in the Kaplan list of books to read for the GRE subject test. I soon learned why I’d never heard of it, it was impossible to find. I finally managed to track down a copy of this book on amazon, but there were not many versions to choose from. My library hadn’t heard of it, neither had sparksnotes, and the Wikipedia article was so vague it might as well not exist.

Piers the Plowman was written by William Langland around the same time as the canterbury tales. It is written in unrhymed alliterative verse and divided into sections called passus (steps). The story follows a narcoleptic man named Will who randomly falls asleep and has visions. His visions have a heavy catholic slant as he is guided though his dreams on a quest for Dowel, Dobet, and Dobet (do well, do better, and do best) though the allegorical land of Piers the Plowman. Piers, who is sometimes an allegorical representation of Jesus, teaches that life is best lived poor and pious. They come up against people like Fee, faith, thought, old age, and the good Samaritan. The dreamer is frequently yelled at for misinterpreting the visions. My favorite quote is

“Judge not, that he be not judged.”
“what would be the use if moral law,” replied Good Faith, “if no one stood out against fraud and falsehood.”
(14)

My version is obviously in modern verse. I like that quote, not because I agree with it (I’m pretty anti-judgement), but because that is the first time I’ve ever seen Judge less thou shall be judge NOT be a conversation killer. I’ve never heard a rebuttal for that argument.

Canterbury Tales

May 20, 2012December 13, 2012 / kaitlinbevis / Leave a comment

I had this teacher in high school that made my whole class memorize the general prologue to the Canterbury Tales. I complained about it at the time, but when it came time to re-read it for the GRE subject test, I was grateful. I fell right into the rhythm right away. It made reading the story a hundred percent easier, and much less daunting.

There’s no denying Chaucer was brilliant, but what we glossed over a lot in High school was that he was a pervert. The premise of the tales is that a group of pilgrims are journeying to Canterbury and decide to pass the time engaging in a story telling competition. The tales don’t end. So spoiler alert. you’ll never figure out who won, but I’m rooting for the Nun’s priest.

Some of the more notable tales are the Knights Tale (nothing like the movie), the Wife of Bath’s Tale, The Miller’s Tale, The Merchants Tale, The Reeves tale, and the Nun’s Priests tale.

Cynical One line summaries:
Knights tale: Two guys fight to the death over a girl that doesn’t want to marry either of them. Also be really careful how to phrase your prayers. “I wish to win AND live” would be good.
The Miller’s Tale: Woman cheats on husband while he takes a bath to wait out the second flood. Open your eyes when you kiss.
The Reeve’s Tale: Students screw over a dishonest miller in more ways than one.
The Cooks tale: unfinished. But lots of drinking and revelry
The Man of Law’s Tale: people at a feast get killed, woman gets set adrift in the ocean, gets found, converts to Christianity, goes on lots of adventures, eventually lives happily ever after. Long tale.
Wife of bath: her prologue is more interesting than the tale. But here goes, knight rapes woman, punishment is to find the thing all women want in a year and a day. Seriously, his punishment is to wander the land looking for answer, because criminals should be a transient population? An old woman gives him the answer (sovereignty) but he has to marry her. Wedding night comes, he’s grossed out, but she turns into a pretty young woman when he gives her sovereignty. Because even rapists deserve a happy ending.
The Friar’s Tale: Arch deacon black males lecherous people, compares notes with the devil, wins, gets dragged to hell.
The summoners tale: a fart joke. Friars are so greedy they try to divide up a fart among them
The Clerk’s Tale: man tests his wife’s loyalty by pretending to kill her children and leave her for a younger woman. She stays loyal. Seriously?
Squires tale: magic sword heals bird, unfinished
Franklin’s tale: wife promises to sleep with a man if he removes dangerous rocks from the coast so her husband can get home safely. He does, her husband tells her the honorable thing to do is fulfill the bargain. Man regretfully turns her down.
Physicians tale: virgin would rather get behead than have sex with a particular man. Her father complies
Pardoners tale: men go searching for death and end up killing each other
Shipman’s tale: merchant tricks someone else’s wife into sleeping with him by lending her husband money.
Chaucers tale 1 and 2: 1, doggerel. Horrible poetry about sir Thompas fighting a dragon. 2: house is robbed and wife and child are beaten. Wifeb(prudence) tells husband (melibee) to forgive and forget
Prioress’s tale: a Jewish child is killed, his singing leads his mother to his body
Monks tale: every hero has a low point
Nuns priests tale: chanticleer the rooster has a prophetic dream about getting chased by a monster. His wife thinks he’s silly, but the next day he is attacked by and outwits a fox
Second nun: wife sends husband on a holy journey to convert him to Christianity before allowing him to have sex with her
Canon and yeoman’s tale: they pretend to use alchemy to trick people into buying gold and get caught
Manciples tale: borrows from Ovid’s Metamorphasis and a thousand and one nights, crow (formerly white) tells man his wife is cheating, man kills crow and curses it with blackness
The parsons tale: preaching against the seven deadly sins
Chaucers retraction: give god credit for what you like, give me credit for what you don’t.

To reward myself, and to review what I’d read, a friend of mine and I went to see the The Canterbury Tales at the Shakespeare tavern. I’m so glad I went, it was hysterical. The pilgrims were on a tour bus, and the tales were acted out very tongue and cheek (the nun’s priest was a drunk, the millers tale ended in a shoot out, ect). My favorite was the nun’s priest tale. They were SO funny and over the top. I’m glad I went, I feel like I’ll remember those tales for sure.

Paradise Lost

May 15, 2012May 20, 2012 / kaitlinbevis / 4 Comments

I’m studying for the GRE: English Literature subject test. If you’re familiar with the test then you know that the sheer amount of reading you have to do to prep for the test is pretty time consuming. Between reading and writing, I haven’t had a lot of time for anything else.

I’m glad to be reading through the classics though. I didn’t appreciate them in high school (partially because as a rule I think we teach them too young). Really the only books I enjoyed from this list were the ones I read later in college. I like reading them because it’s interesting to see how literature and writing evolved over time, and I like being familiar to the works that everything references. The big two that I’m more familiar with thanks to pop culture than the work themselves are Paradise Lost, and Dante’s inferno.

So I’m going to be posting book reviews. Some of them will eventually be popular and new books, but for now, it’s going to be old classics, starting with Paradise Lost.

Paradise Lost was written by John Milton in the late 17th century. Because of his blindness, Milton had his daughter write down the words of the poem as he spoke it. Milton alludes to his blindness in the poem, hoping his physical blindness allows him to have a better spiritual sight. His blindness does give reading the lengthy descriptions of eden and hell and heaven more depth. He was SO descriptive. Paradise Lost is constructed as a modern epic poem and follows the traits of an epic closely. It invokes the muse (the holy spirit and Urania at different occasions), begins in medias res (in the middle of things) and acknowledges the epics that came before throughout the poem.
The poem begins with Satan and his followers waking up in hell after their war on heaven. At first they are devastated but Satan shows the same plucky determination and positive outlooks that Disney heroes exhibit today. He’s determined to make the best out of a bad situation and declares that it’s “better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.” he and his demons who are also deities of other religions, set about making hell a more habitable environment. According to them heaven is what you make of it and they can make a heaven out of their hell.

There is a lot of speculation as so why Satan begins the story as such a likable character. If it were a modern day tale he’d seem like the underdog who tried to overthrow a dictator. He finds other friends (chaos, sin and death) and convinces them that they all have a common cause, bringing his ragtag band of misfits together to better their environment and bring down a common enemy.
Milton has to constantly remind the reader that Satan is evil. I think this is to show why angels might have followed him as well as to draw parallels between Satan and Adam. Remember in Milton’s mind the quest for knowledge is every bit as evil as the quest for power. As someone coming from a Christian background it’s uncomfortable reading paradise lost and realizing you admire/identify more with Satan than with god. It makes you question the traits you’re finding admirable and why. And I think that’s the point. These are human traits and they can be used for good or for evil.
In any case Satans character begins his gradual transformation into smaller and smaller forms. At first he is indescribably large, then he shifts to a smaller size to enter his castle, Pandaemonium, then he shifts to a cherub to fool Uriel, then he is compared to a wolf, then becomes a toad and finally a snake. His character undergoes a similar transformation mentally. He begins the story clever and eloquent and by the end of the story his own logic has become so twisted against himself that it becomes difficult to follow. His earlier assertion that he can make a heaven out of hell proves true in the opposite manner when he’s exploring the heavenly garden of Eden and is still suffering from inner torment. You can make a heaven out of hell, but you can also make a hell out of heaven.

God, the son, and the Angels were considerably more difficult to relate to, though I imagine they were more difficult to write. Milton relied on a lot of scripture for their dialogue.
At first Adam is as difficult to relate to as the heavenly host. He’s so good and perfect that a a character he lacks depth, this changes after the fall.

Eve is an interesting character throughout the novel. If you read the text through a feminist lens the novels cringe-worthy. Eve is denied her chance to know herself when she is pulled away from her reflection in the stream (narcissus reference), she doesn’t want to be with Adam at first (though his interpretation is that she’s playing hard to get) she is not present for any of the important conversations. She is targeted by Satan because she’s weaker and less intelligent. Eve is constantly being reminded that she is subservient to Adam and is a lesser being. To be fair, this was reflective of the time and Milton was actually fairly progressive in that he portrayed Adam and Eve as a balanced couple. Adam needs Eve as much as Eve needs Adam. Eve tempered Adams depression, Adam acted as Eve’s strength. Their love for one another and their unwillingness to live without each other is perhaps the central conflict to Paradise Lost. The Angels, the Son, and god himself warn Adam that he should not let his feelings for Eve overwhelm his commons sense but his love for her is too strong. He follows her lead. On the day of the fall instead of working he’s making her a flower wreath (symbol of his love) which he drops once he realizes she fell (symbol of the fall), he eats the fruit knowing that he is sinning (unlike Eve who was tricked) because he cannot imagine a life without her. He has one weak moment in the book where he insults her, but it’s after the fall and placed there to show that he’s changed. She pulls him out of his depression and the two leave Eden holding hands.

Another symbol in paradise lost is the scales of justice. Milton’s dislike for politicians and the corruption of the church are referred to. He allows the interpretation of science and religious theory (the sun travels around the earth vs. the earth travels around the sun) stating that whichever one is correct isnt the point. All the matters is that god made them and they works. He seems to believe that knowledge was dangerous. Adam is told several times that he doesn’t need to know everything he just needs to trust god. Ultimately this quest for knowledge is what causes Paradise to be lost.
The fall is also portrayed as not being an entirely bad thing as it gives man a chance to redeem themselves and gives god a chance to show his mercy. It’s tragic but it’s not all bad. The son of god (not yet named because he’s not yet born) plays a role in paradise lost as the one to punish and forgive man kind. Milton portrays them as separate characters of the same mind, leaving it unclear if their entirely independent of one another or the same being represented in a different way. The sons appearance is the reason for the war in heaven as Satan did not want to bow down to this new leader. Of his followers only Abdial (sp?) remained loyal to god.

The war is also portrayed through Raphael telling Adam the story. The war is almost cartoonish, Satan created a cannon and the angels throw mountains at each other, but they can’t die… So the stakes are pretty low.