Summoner’s Tale
Summoner’s Reaction
Previously you have witnessed a presentation on the Friar’s Tale and solely based on that presentation we can already predict how the Summoner’s reaction and his tale will lay out. Basically the Summoner’s tale is going to try to “one-up” the Friar’s tale and try to degrade the Friar as much as possible. With this the audience can obtain an idea of how the Friar will be described in terms of his characteristics, his personalities, and his physical figure. This foreshadows the main aspect of the Summoner’s tale and reveals the type of relationship that exists between the characters within the tale and the actual pilgrims themselves.
Setting
The setting of the tale is in Yorkshire, Northern England more specifically in a marshy region known as Holderness. The tale takes place mainly in the streets of Holderness, Thomas’ house, and the manor-house. The company is approaching to Sittingbourne, England, which marks the end of the Summoner’s tale.
Here is a brief plot synopsis of the Summoner’s Prologue and the Summoner’s Tale narrated by Nihal
Motive: Humiliation/Karma
Much like Simkin from the Reeve’s tale, by the end of the tale, Friar John is utterly humiliated by both Thomas and the lord of the manor along with his squire. Basically, the Summoner describes Friar John with one word: “limiter” meaning a begging friar. He states that the friar “goes about Holderness in Yorkshire, preaching [and begging]” from his “regular sermon exhorting folk”. This is his daily routine until that day he meets Thomas. Upon being shamed by Thomas who gives the friar his gaseous treasure, Friar John who is furious at Thomas, complains to the lord of the manor and his squire hoping for some retribution. However, the squire further humiliates him by dividing another fart in twelve, each for 1 out of the 12 friars. Some argue that this humiliation was necessary to the cheating friar and that Chaucer had done this to discuss some conflicts presented by the tale.
*Adding on to Vibhu’s theme of Clerical Corruption – Situational Irony
Situational irony is presented when the Summoner describes the actions of Friar John when he meets Thomas’ wife. When Thomas’ wife asks Friar John of his well being, he is seen to “gallantly rise to his feet, giv[ing] [Thomas’ wife] a hug, and sweetly kiss[ing] her […] like a sparrow with his lips”. This type of courtesy is expected from a common man and not from a spiritually enlightened man who has taken a vow of chastity. The diction used such as “sparrow” has a sexual connotation of lewdness, which further supports the situational irony found here. By doing so, the Summoner is cleverly insulting the friar by associating him with all immoral things the friar would not typically do at Chaucer’s days. Another quotation that reaffirms the same idea can be seen in the lines: “when the poor old sick man felt the friar groping about his arsehole here and there”. This shows that the friar will do anything for money even if it means to physically grope another man’s arsehole. It is also quite comical how the Summoner states that the friar, doesn’t feel disgust with his actions as he “thrusts his hand right down”, and even feels the need to “grope here and there” suggesting that the friar doesn’t mind what happens when money is involved. Moreover, Chaucer might’ve implemented this irony in order to reveal the corruptive and “two-faced” nature of the friars.
Conflicts & Stylistic Elements presented by the Tale
Friar John vs. Thomas
The relationship between these two is that of a host-parasite relationship at first. Chaucer portrays Friar John as the parasite who leeches off his hosts, Thomas and his wife. Even after being told about the condition of Thomas’ family, whose “baby died […] not very long ago”, Friar John persists in asking them of a “simple homely meal” that consists of “the liver of a chicken, a slice of soft bread and a roast pig’s head.”
This is very hypocritical of Friar John considering that quickly after, he alludes to several biblical figures, Moses, Elijah and Aaron, to argue that “friars are wed to poverty, charity, humility and abstinence […] for the sake of righteousness [and to be more acceptable] to God”
Moses, who “fasted for forty nights and forty days before almighty God […] spoke with him”, Elijah on Horeb who “spent [many] days in fasting and in contemplation before he spoke with God”, and Aaron “as well as the other priests [who] abstained from food and drink [to] watch and pray”.
These allusions clearly contradict his gluttonous behavior in obtaining the “simple homely meal” at any cost. After Friar John’s exhorting tactics fail, he goes on a sermon-like lecture about anger – more specifically the vices of anger. He tells 3 tales all consisting of angry kings who had caused extensive damage to their surroundings in one form or another.
After Friar John’s exhorting tactics fail, he goes on a sermon-like lecture about anger. He tells 3 tales all consisting of angry kings who had caused extensive damage to their surroundings in one form or another. As the tale prolongs, their relationship soon turns fiery and hateful after Thomas bequeaths Friar John with a fart.
“He sprang up like a lion, furious.
‘By God’s bones!’ shouted he, ‘you two-faced clod!’
That’s an insult! You did it on purpose!
I’ll see you’re paid out for this fart, by God!’ […]
And off he went, rage working in his face, […]
And you’d have taken him for a wild boar;
He ground his teeth, he was so serious […]”
The diction and metaphor used in this small extract clearly describes how angry Friar John had quickly gotten. He is portrayed to be “[grinding] his teeth” with a “rage working in his face”. The diction used such as furious, rage, ground, and serious further highlights his anger at Thomas. However it is quite ironic how Friar John who had given a lengthy-sermon like lecture about the vices of anger, quickly becomes “[absolutely] furious and serious” at Thomas, thus revealing the “two-faced” nature of a friar. In addition, the use of animal imagery, where Friar John is “taken [to be] for a wild boar”, adds to the friar’s anger and portrays him as a wild dirty animal. Furthermore, the fart (from Thomas to Friar John) is described to be “thunderous” which leaves Friar John (the closest to God out of the “four Orders”) to take God’s name in vain: “By God’s bones! Shouted [Friar John], ‘you two-faced clod!” and “by God!”. The use of exclamation marks throughout this extract further emphasizes Friar John’s hatred towards Thomas.
Allow us to present you with a contemporary example that relates to Friar John’s lecture about anger.
The Summoner vs. The Friar
This conflict is evident in both the Friar’s and the Summoner’s tales. As expected, after the Friar finishes his tale, the Summoner, who “was so wild with anger at the friar”, insists to the Host that he goes next. Thus, the placement of the tale is extremely significant as it foreshadows to the audience that the Summoner’s tale will be retaliation to the Friar’s tale. This retaliation can already be seen in the Summoner’s prologue where he completely denies the Friar’s tale in the line: “Now that you’ve heard this two-faced friar lie” and then states that “friars and fiends are not so [different].”
He then moves on and describes a hyperbolized image of over 20,000 friars driven out of the devil’s arse similar to “bees […] swarming from a hive”. The Summoner claimed that the devil’s arse was “[the friars] true and natural home” and this is significant since it can be considered to be worse off than hell itself. Hence, quickly into the Summoner’s Prologue, we can already see the Summoner-Friar Conflict.
One thing we noticed is that Chaucer writes the tales in pairs: Summoner and Friar, Reeve and Miller etc. When considering the structure of the tales and the relationships of the taletellers embarking on the pilgrimage, it is evident that relationships outside of the pilgrimage are present within the taletellers. The most prominent example is the Friar and Summoner’s tales and their relationship towards each other: hatred. This relationship is vividly transferred into their tales as both the characters tell an ‘anti-hero’ tale where the hero of the tale (Summoner or the Friar) is ultimately mocked and ridiculed. This form of writing can also be seen with the Miller and Reeve’s tales. But this begs the question: why do the Friar and the Summoner hate each other in the first place? Looking back into Chaucer’s times, it was believed that the professions of the Summoners and the Friars were conflicting to one another. The former works to summon sinners while the latter works to hear confessions and grant holy absolutions to the masses. As you can see, with the Friar doing his job, the Summoner won’t be able to summon people with a just cause. Moving on, this ‘anti-hero’ writing introduces the main genre of the Summoner’s Tale.
Genre 1: Fabliau
The genre of this tale is a fabliau, which flourished in the thirteenth century but the more sophisticated comic tales were almost always in prose (as in the case of Boccaccio’s Decameron). Fabliaux typically involve cuckoldings (Miller’s Tale), beatings and elaborate practical jokes and in our case, this elaborate practical joke can easily be spotted as Thomas’ fart. There also seems to be a “fabliau justice” that does not coincide with conventional morality.
“The cuckolding, beatings, and elaborate practical jokes that are the main concern of fabliaux are distributed in accord with a with a code of “fabliau justice,” which does not always coincide with conventional morality: greed, hypocrisy, and pride are invariably punished, but so too are old age, dispossessed intellectuals, clever peasants, and enthusiastically unchaste wives. The fabliau, in short, is delightfully subversive – a light-hearted thumbing of the nose at the dictates of religion, the solid virtues of citizenry, and the idealistic pretensions of the aristocracy and its courtly literature. They seem to frequently involve incredible degrees of gullibility in the victims and of ingenuity and sexual appetite in the trickster-heroes and -heroines.” (Riverside Chaucer p.7-8)
Usually, a fabliau involves deception for money or goods, sexual gratification and to get revenge. Starting off with the aspect of deception for money, Friar John is described by the Summoner, as a “limiter and a mendicant”, in simplified terms meaning a beggar and a preacher. He is portrayed to be cunning with “his regular sermon exhorting folk to find the money”. Towards the end, many of the friar’s vices are presented and in the end Friar John’s greed for money and food leads to his downfall. The Summoner is able to mock the friar using crude humour in the form of thunderous farts, emphasizing the comedic elements to this tale. However, the main problem arises after Friar John complains to the lord of the manor about “each [of the 12 friars] gets an equal part [of the fart]”. This signals the final humiliation for the friar; a mere squire solves the “conundrum” “as wisely as Euclid or Ptolemy”. Ultimately, the friar is left humiliated both physically and intellectually by Thomas and the squire.