As for the Friar, even from the first line we gather a picture of a sexually active man! He is described as 'wantowne' and only lines later; 'He hadde maad ful many a marriage of yonge wommen at his owene cost.' Which, when put in the context of the Friar's description highly suggests that he paid for girls to be settled in marriage after he had had his way with them. This unchaste image is again backed up by his cape being full of 'knives and pinnes, for to yeven faire wives' and of course, I emphasise only to 'faire' married women.
To complete the trio even the monk wears a hood which contain a 'love-knotte' which could be a love-token, which creates doubt as to whether he is virtuous.
As I mentioned earlier, love of oneself, or rather self-importance is also displayed by all three member of the clergy. A prioress usually came form a upper class family, but even so this Prioress is over concerned with manners - even though the narrator seems to admire her upper class manners-, and by describing them at length her preoccupation which appearing upper-class makes her almost laughable; from her fake French accent through to her nasal singing.
To show that the monk as an even more unworthy character he is alos depicted as someone who finds himself very important but it is displayed in must less subtle way. The monk’s bridal which 'ginglen in a whistlinge wind als cleere and eek as loude as dooth the chapel belle' indicates two things. Firstly, his bridal acts as a grand entrance so that people know when he is coming. But also by likening his bridal to church bells which in the medieval paintings were icons for the power of reason, again highlights his assumed power and perhaps the fact that there is no reason he should be wearing the bells, as he is a monk.
The Friar's vocation is likened to him being the 'best beggere in his hous’ and with 'Noon of his bretheren can ther in his haunts' which makes the Frair's begging for money sound like a business where trickery, tactics and a smooth tongue i.e 'daliaunce and fair language' is everything. This 'righteous' Friar is made a mockery of and turned into a sordid salesman. It is made obvious that the Friar only cares for himself.
The main priority of the trio should be to the needy, and hence it is cuttingly ironic that the Prioress is cast as the comic stereotypic female who is extremely attached to her pets. Highlighting that she is neglecting her duty to humanity, by giving food, or rather delicacies to her dogs rather than starving people in the streets.
The main theme of the narrator's description of the Friar or rather the main objection (though not voiced as such) is the way the Friar, who was allowed to hear confession, abuses his position. It is obvious that this Friar is not interested in penitence but his purpose is to gain 'good pitaunce', the rhyme of the two words emphasises the irony. Hence he was only interested in the rich who rather than really needing helped only wanted to be lifted of a guilty conscience.
It is made quite clear that the monk has no respect for his vocation. He sees it rather as a career and 'to been an abbot able'. He openly questions the rules his faith is based upon. He follows the new way of thinking, as he ‘leet olde thinges pace, and heeld after the newe world the space’, and hence dismisses any suggestion (which was based upon Christian texts that) that to hunt was to be a sinner, because to the monk 'for no cost wolde he spare' for hunting. He sees religious duties as ridiculous, and even though gives his reasoning as 'how shal the world be served' in looking at books, it is obviously a cover up and that the real, less justified reason is that he finds it tedious and would much rather be hunting. Though, of course, his arguments are extremely ironic, because how 'shal the world be served' if he is out hunting. In theory, a monk should have been able to answer the rhetorical question posed by the monk in his objection to work with a belief stated by Saint Austin that men should do manual labour because they would receive their reward in the afterlife. This can be construed as the monk not being knowledgeable on his beliefs simple implying the he has no belief in them what-so-ever.
In opposition to the Prioress, the monk does not show many manners and when spouting forth on the subjects of hunting he uses colloquial terms. For example, 'he yaf nat of that text a pulled hen' and 'a fissh that is waterless', which reinforces his image of a more worldly-wise person and hence even less religious. This leads onto another similar trait through the trio that luxury rather than religion habits the forefront of their minds:
The monk is very well dressed for one who should live a life of poverty; 'his sleves purfiled at the hond with gris'. Wearing fur was against the rule of Saint Benedict. In fact, everything the monk is wearing is indicative of one who has little care for religion; he wears an expensive 'gold ywrought' pin, again destroying any poverty-living monk image he is supposed to have. Yet Chaucer underlines all of this with 'now certeinly he was a fair prelaat' which highlights the ironic inconsistency with the supposed idea of religious monks at the time.
Chaucer's most acid irony is heard in 'for unto a povre order for to yive is signe that a man is wel yshrive'. This and the following lines are highly sarcastic and it is obvious that Chaucer is trying to represent the scheme as ridiculous. Of course, this highlights the contradiction and hypocrisy of using worldly materialistic items to obtain divine and hence spiritual forgiveness in a time when this practice was looked upon as just.
Yet for all his grievous faults, Chaucer insistently scatters the description with likeable traits of the Friar's humanity. For instance, he could 'sing and playenon a rote; of yeddings he bar outrely the prys,' I.e. he could bring happiness and entertainment and by giving him a name 'Huberd' (which very few people are in the General Prologue), he is humanised and made to seem less harmless.
Both the prioress and the monk have food mentioned in their descriptions, for the monk ‘a fat swan loved he’ and of the Prioress ‘rosted flessh, or milk…’ yet again showing that they are used to luxury and comfort, the more tangible things in life rather than their faith.
The monk and the Prioress both have references to ‘glas’ in their descriptions. Of the Prioress the narrator encounts; ‘hir eyen greye as glas’, while of the monk we read: ‘his head was balled, that shoon as glas’. This detail could imply two things. Either that like glass, they reflect back the cruel world and try to not let it’s grievous affect their lives. I.e distance themselves from their vocations. Or that they are like glass in that when people look at them they get a reflection of themselves and the world around them and therefore this highlights that there is nothing special or divine about people who pretend that they are part of religious communities.
Chaucer pays close attention to the richness of the Friar's dress with: 'lyk a maister or pope, of double worstede was his semycope'.. Even so, the Frair's appearance is innocent and pure 'his nekke whit was as the flour-de-lys'. And althoughthis is all that is given of his physical appearance it implies that he is even more dangerous as he is a wolf in sheeps clothing and hence almost devil-like. This imagery is echoed in the monk’s description:
He is intimating, a 'manly man' who is 'ful fat and in good point', which suggests of his luxury lifestyle. The narrator is obviously intimidated by him saying 'And I seyed his opinion was good' implying that he was afraid to oppose him and therefore indicating that the monk appears to be a man capable of standing up for himself to quite an extent, hence silencing others, who don't want to test this capability! The image of an aggressive and imposing figure does not go hand in hand with that of a monk. Indeed, the narrator states ; 'his eyen stepe, and rollinge in his head, that stemed as a forney of a leed'. This imagery also suggests a devil-like connotation that is clearly hyperbole, but must have had a great effect on the narrator for him to use it.
The sense of the varied Medevil society in trio’s vocation is only suble, i.e. the first stays in a convent, anther preaches about God and the last one can take confession. But where the sense of variet is more evident is in the fact that the extent to which they mix up, or rather become confused between their duty to god and their love of the more material world and its pleasures. Here the main contrast between the characters is the strength of criticism. I.e. The prioress only receives slight criticisms of minor faults but on the whole it is delivered with affection and used to poke fun at her. But the portrait of the Friar presents us with a cynically ironic view on the way that the smarmy, sly and selfish villain works. Also, the trio’s priorites for God become less pronounced as we move down the list of portraits. The prioress seems to think of herself as a courtly romantic saviour, but it is presented as a cute little nuance, and the monk who would rather be having fun than doing boring jobs that will turn him ‘wood’. But the reader feels that it is understandable and rather a humane reaction. But the Friar is positively working against God and defeating society.
CHECK IF THIS IS THE CORRECT ONE.