“For though myself be a ful vicious man,
A moral tale yet I yow telle kan.”
His tale has a more lasting, profound effect on his audience than that of the pious Parson, whose sermon only succeeds in boring the pilgrims, proving that talent does not always rely on faith in one’s material.
Of course, we have to bear in mind that while the pilgrims hear the Pardoner’s rhetorical skills we hear Chaucer’s skill as a poet. In his digression the Pardoner melodramatically denounces a number of sins, making extensive use of rhetorical devices such as hyperbole, anaphora and apostrophe:
“ O glotonye, ful of cursednesse!
O cause first of oure confusioun!
O original of oure dampnacioun.”
He seems to use these to involve and unnerve his audience and effectively keep all eyes on him. He alludes to both the Bible and classical mythology, citing Biblical prophets, historical figures and philosophers.
In contrast the tale itself is relatively plainly told and we can safely assume that the Pardoner is well practiced in the art of telling this specific tale and even inserts some of his sermon into it. His sermon is based on several medieval conventions, such as that of the mysterious old man, whom Dr. McIntyre identifies as a “representation of the immanence and inescapability of death,” something which would have struck a chord with a medieval audience suffering from the onslaught of the Black Death.
The tale is an example of a very well defined genre with its own conventions and devices; nevertheless the pardoner makes it his own through his own use of rhetorical flourishes and poetic detail. He effectively makes the spiritually abstract concrete, as seen in the metaphor of “soules goon a-blakeberied” to convey the inky stain of sin, and the personification of death as a “privee theef.” Poetic flourishes such as the “clinke” of the bell and the “croked wey” effectively set an ominous tone for the rest of the tale. We also see extensive use of sententia throughout both the digression and the tale:
“ For dronkenesse is verray sepulture
Of mannes wit and his discrecioun.”
The tale ends abruptly, with a typically theatrical rhetorical crescendo:
“O cursed sinne of alle cursednesse!
O traitours homicide, O wikednesse!
O glotonye, luxurie, and hasardrye!”
before he again warns the pilgrims “…fro the sinne of avarice” before openly appealing for material reward. This further enforces his fraudulence and hypocrisy.
Through the Pardoner Chaucer makes us question if we can in fact learn a moral lesson from a man so proud of the extent of his own corruption. The Pardoner has the potential to be an excellent preacher, he has the skill but lacks the knowledge; instead of giving exact references he says, “Looketh the Bible”. The prologue is in fact a superb example of black comedy, a gross perversion of what are great skills-intelligence, wit and eloquence-used for the very worst purpose. His self-satisfaction at his own sin is undercut by references to the Apostles and the Bible. His comparison of himself to a dove on a barn roof, which links to the Dove of the Holy Spirit and his apparent assertion of his own will, “I wol..” only further convey to us that he is in fact an instrument of God being used for a moral purpose. The Pardoner essentially becomes the best exemplum in his tale, “Radix malorum est Cupiditas” is most vividly manifested in the Pardoner himself.
In this case the relationship between the preacher and his material only serve to crate a huge irony. The Pardoner preaches a profound moral sermon with no actual moral thoughts. Despite the Pardoner’s intentions, that is, to extract money from his audience, the tale is morally beneficial to Chaucer’s contemporary audience; it shows the extent to which values had become mutated. The Tale also has a lasting resonance today; as we laugh at the humiliation of the pardoner by the Host we overlook the fact that what we think of as inversion of values in the Pardoner is in fact present in us, a modern-day audience.
Although it may have a moral effect on his usual “lewd” congregation, the Pardoner’s sermon does not seem to have a moral effect on the pilgrims as we see them simple continue on their way. They do not seem to consider to the moral questions raised by the Pardoner; he touches on issues such as the vices of gluttony, drunkenness and gambling which several of the pilgrims are undoubtedly guilty of, and contemporary issues such as death and the fallen nature of mankind.