I wonder about Chaucer's motivation to distinguish each character by his/her vocation and to limit characterization by withholding specific names. Possibly, I think it could reflect the speaker's relationship to each individual. His personal knowledge of each character is limited. He does not mention their names, in fact, it seems he does not know them. Of course, names make relationships more personal, but rather than dealing personally with these individuals, and putting a name with a face, so to speak, the narrator speaks generally. I only speculate, but I think Chaucer is saying something about the positions themselves. That is, from his experience, the knights he knew were generally all chivalrous, or the religious leaders he knew had undesirable qualities, or maybe the wives he knew (or had) resembled the wife of Bath. In short, I think Chaucer might be speaking stereotypically.
KELLI BROWN
I kind of got the same vibe. During the first couple descriptions that I read, I wondered at the seemingly intentional withholding of proper names, but I soon reached the same conclusion as you. He definitely appeared to be working with stereotypes.
ReplyDelete