Question for September 19: The Pardoner's Tale (2:00 Class)
What we know about the Pardoner's motives for preaching may affect our response to his Tale. Does the tale effectively tell a story with a good moral? How does the tale reflect the Pardoner's character?
Before the Pardoner even begins his tale he preaches about the sins of gluttony, swearing, and gambling. The "moral" of the Pardoner's tale is that death with beat those who are greedy. Since each of the three friends was so greedy to have a bigger share of the gold all three of them ended up dying at their own hands. The Pardoner fails at actually teach the moral and making people feel guilty for their sinning because he contradicts himself in his ironic story about what greed does to a person. His entire apologie in the prologue was him admitting how he tricks, lies, and cheats ignorant people to win their money. He then tries the tricks on the very people he admitted them to. “Now, goode men, God forgeve yow your trespass/And ware yow fro the sinne of avarice/ Myn holy pardoun may yow alle waryce/ So that ye offre nobles or sterlinges/ Or elles silver broches, spones, ringes/ Boweth your heed under this holy bulle! Cometh up, ye wyves, offreth of your wolle! Your name I entre heer in my rolle anon/ In-to the blisse of hevene shul ye gon; (lines 442-450). Obviously The audience of pilgrims is familiar with what he is trying to do because the Host stands up and says he would sooner go to Hell that pay the Pardoner money for his fake relics. I myself would not have learned a bit of moral from the tale because I would be so shocked and entertained by the irony of the behavior of the teller who is trying to sell the lesson!
The first thing that strikes me about the Pardoner’s Tale is he rambles on and on about the sin of drunkenness while just having to ask to stop for a drink. So, as I imagine this tale, I see him standing ale in one hand and making grand “preaching” gestures with the other. There is no better image of hypocrisy than this one. “ ‘…but first,’quod he, “here at this ale-stake/ I wol bothe drinke and eten of a cake” (33-34). I can visualize him stopping during his sermon and stuffing his face with bread, mumbling some of his sermon on gluttony and drunkenness around the food. I agree with Feathery Friend that it would be hard for me to learn anything from the moral of this tale. The Pardoner certainly does not live what he preachers, and he doesn’t seem to care. He cares more about getting his money from the wights he sells bulles to. This in itself is greed. In his prologue it is quite evident that making money is the most important thing to him. He doesn’t care if children starve as long as he gets paid. Maybe he should stop his “con” game long enough to listen to his own sermons. The tale reflects the Pardoner’s character in that it reveals just how far his hypocrisy will go. Death will find every man, but it will be far worse and sooner for gluttonous sinners. I think the Pardoner would consider doing exactly what the sinful men did. He’d want all that gold for himself, and he does everything he can to procure the money he does get. Every penny he has earned was based on guilt-ing money out of people. I love how the Host responds to the story. He says he’d rather have testicles in his hand, and that the relics should be enshrined in a turd (664-667). The Pardoner is only upset that the Host saw through his trickery.
I believe that the moral of the Pardoner's Tale is that being greedy will result in death. Each of the three characters in the Pardoner's Tale is greedy and wants to keep the gold coins for himself. In the Pardoner's Tale, it is all just one big game. The characters are playing each other so one of them will get all of the coins. Each is trying to outsmart one another. When the younger friend goes into town, the other two friends plot to kill him so each will have a bigger share of the gold. However, the friend in town is also plotting to kill the other two by poisoning them. Unfortunately, once he gets back, the other two kill him, and then the two drink the poison and die. This is why I think the tale has a good moral- because each character would kill someone for money. Nothing is more greedy than that. As stated by the youngest friend, "O Lord, if so were that I mighte/ Have al this tresor to myself allone,/ There is no man that liveth under the trone/ Of God that sholde live so merye as I." He wants the treasure to himself. He's being greedy and death comes from it. Also, lines 591-594 state, "What needeth it to sermone of it more?/ For right as they had cast his deeth bifore,/ Right so they han him slain, and that anoon." This is when the other two kill the youngest one. So I have to disagree with both Feathery Friend and Hiro Protagonist because there is a moral to the story. With greed comes death. Greed is a sin, therefore, in the case of the Pardoner's Tale, their misfortune resulted in death.
Before the Pardoner even begins his tale he preaches about the sins of gluttony, swearing, and gambling. The "moral" of the Pardoner's tale is that death with beat those who are greedy. Since each of the three friends was so greedy to have a bigger share of the gold all three of them ended up dying at their own hands. The Pardoner fails at actually teach the moral and making people feel guilty for their sinning because he contradicts himself in his ironic story about what greed does to a person. His entire apologie in the prologue was him admitting how he tricks, lies, and cheats ignorant people to win their money. He then tries the tricks on the very people he admitted them to. “Now, goode men, God forgeve yow your trespass/And ware yow fro the sinne of avarice/ Myn holy pardoun may yow alle waryce/ So that ye offre nobles or sterlinges/ Or elles silver broches, spones, ringes/ Boweth your heed under this holy bulle! Cometh up, ye wyves, offreth of your wolle! Your name I entre heer in my rolle anon/ In-to the blisse of hevene shul ye gon; (lines 442-450). Obviously The audience of pilgrims is familiar with what he is trying to do because the Host stands up and says he would sooner go to Hell that pay the Pardoner money for his fake relics. I myself would not have learned a bit of moral from the tale because I would be so shocked and entertained by the irony of the behavior of the teller who is trying to sell the lesson!
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that strikes me about the Pardoner’s Tale is he rambles on and on about the sin of drunkenness while just having to ask to stop for a drink. So, as I imagine this tale, I see him standing ale in one hand and making grand “preaching” gestures with the other. There is no better image of hypocrisy than this one. “ ‘…but first,’quod he, “here at this ale-stake/ I wol bothe drinke and eten of a cake” (33-34). I can visualize him stopping during his sermon and stuffing his face with bread, mumbling some of his sermon on gluttony and drunkenness around the food. I agree with Feathery Friend that it would be hard for me to learn anything from the moral of this tale. The Pardoner certainly does not live what he preachers, and he doesn’t seem to care. He cares more about getting his money from the wights he sells bulles to. This in itself is greed. In his prologue it is quite evident that making money is the most important thing to him. He doesn’t care if children starve as long as he gets paid. Maybe he should stop his “con” game long enough to listen to his own sermons. The tale reflects the Pardoner’s character in that it reveals just how far his hypocrisy will go. Death will find every man, but it will be far worse and sooner for gluttonous sinners. I think the Pardoner would consider doing exactly what the sinful men did. He’d want all that gold for himself, and he does everything he can to procure the money he does get. Every penny he has earned was based on guilt-ing money out of people. I love how the Host responds to the story. He says he’d rather have testicles in his hand, and that the relics should be enshrined in a turd (664-667). The Pardoner is only upset that the Host saw through his trickery.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the moral of the Pardoner's Tale is that being greedy will result in death. Each of the three characters in the Pardoner's Tale is greedy and wants to keep the gold coins for himself. In the Pardoner's Tale, it is all just one big game. The characters are playing each other so one of them will get all of the coins. Each is trying to outsmart one another. When the younger friend goes into town, the other two friends plot to kill him so each will have a bigger share of the gold. However, the friend in town is also plotting to kill the other two by poisoning them. Unfortunately, once he gets back, the other two kill him, and then the two drink the poison and die. This is why I think the tale has a good moral- because each character would kill someone for money. Nothing is more greedy than that. As stated by the youngest friend, "O Lord, if so were that I mighte/ Have al this tresor to myself allone,/ There is no man that liveth under the trone/ Of God that sholde live so merye as I." He wants the treasure to himself. He's being greedy and death comes from it. Also, lines 591-594 state, "What needeth it to sermone of it more?/ For right as they had cast his deeth bifore,/ Right so they han him slain, and that anoon." This is when the other two kill the youngest one. So I have to disagree with both Feathery Friend and Hiro Protagonist because there is a moral to the story. With greed comes death. Greed is a sin, therefore, in the case of the Pardoner's Tale, their misfortune resulted in death.
ReplyDelete