Customer Reviews

The Canterbury Tales: The Prologue/The Knight's Tale/The Miller's Tale/The Pardoner's Tale/The Merchant's Tale/The Franklin's Tale (Great Tales)

5 star:		(81)
4 star:		(30)
3 star:		(18)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

Over some period I have read several translations of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. My first experience, selections in a high school text, was not promising. (Perhaps, I was not yet ready for Chaucer.) Translating poetry from one language to another is difficult and often unsuccessful. Translating Chaucer from Middle English is not much easier. English has changed dramatically in the last 600 years, to the point that Middle English is nearly indecipherable. For example, we read Chaucer's description of the Knight's appearance:

Of fustian he wered a gipoun (Of coarse cloth he wore a doublet)
Al bismotered with his habergeoun (All rust-spotted by his coat-of-mail)

A glossary, diligence, and time are required for reading the original Chaucer. If you choose to do so, the Riverside Chaucer edition (edited by L. Benson) and the Norton Critical Edition (edited by Olson and Kolve) are highly recommended. The Signet Classic paperback edited by D. R. Howard modernizes the spelling a bit, but largely adheres to the original Chaucer and is an easier introduction to Middle English.

Although in most cases the instructor assigns a particular version of Canterbury Tales, it can be exceedingly helpful to pick-up an additional version or two. A slightly different translation may entirely surprise you, even resonate with you, making Chaucer much more enjoyable. I suggest that you look for these versions:

Selected Canterbury Tales, Dover Thrift edition - provides a poetic, rather than literal interpretation, and is quite readable. The collection of tales is fairly small, however.

Canterbury Tales, Penguin edition, translated by Nevill Coghill, is an excellent poetic translation. It is a complete collection, arranged by Group A thru H, and also includes The Parson's Prologue, The Parson's Tale in synopsis, and Chaucer's Retractions. Coghill's translation remains my favorite.

The Canterbury Tales, Bantam Classic paperback edited by Hieatt, uses the "facing page" format with the original Chaucer on the left and a modern literal translation on the right page. I found the literal translation a little wooden, but this edition can be quite helpful if you need some help with Middle English. (A guide to phonetics, grammar, spellings, and a glossary is provided.)

Chaucer's Canterbury Tales (Barrons Educational Series) uses an "Interlinear Translation" format in which each line of Middle English is followed by a modern translation (literal to make the comparison easier). I rather like this approach.

Canterbury Tales, John Murray Publishers, London is hard to find, but provides a partial translation to modern English, maintaining as much as possible of the Middle English. This rather clever approach is somewhat risky, but the translator H. L. Hitchins pulls it off. With some effort I could follow the text without continually referring to a glossary and in a limited way I was "reading Middle English".

Canterbury Tales, Pocket Books, prose translation by R. M. Lumiansky, is easy to read, but while this prose format adheres to the storyline, it is only a shadow of the poetic Chaucer. It might prove useful if you are not comfortable with poetry.

Good luck. Reading Chaucer is really worth the extra effort.

The question is not whether to read the Canterbury Tales, but whether to read them in this translation -- or whether to go for the Middle English with all its difficulties.

I'm a purist. As a Chaucer teacher myself, I'd say read the tales in the Riverside Chaucer or in the Norton Critcal editon with lots of footnotes. But, yes, that is harder, and I'd rather see readers get some experience than none.

So, if you are going to compromise, Nevill Coghill's poetic translation is really as good a place to go as any. You will get the basic sense of Chaucer's verse; you'll get the basic rhymes and rhythms too. This is the translation that's used in most high school classes, and in many college survey classes that don't read the text in the original. It's really a fine compromise -- not only a good place to start, but also a decent trot if you are struggling with the Middle English.

You can find some closer translations of some of the tales online if you look up Michael Murphy's websites. But for all their virtues, they don't have the smoothness of Coghill's renditions; Murphy's translations are not the complete Tales; and it's clunky to print them out. This economical edition is probably still the best place to start with Chaucer, father of English poetry and the originator of comedy in the English language.

The version of this classic I read was a translation into modern English by Nevill Coghill. As you can see above, I awarded Chaucer (and the translation) five stars; but I do have a criticism. This translation (and many other publications of Chaucer) do not contain the two prose tales ("The Tale of Melibee" and "The Parson's Tale"). These are rarely read and I understand the publisher's and the translator's desire to keep the book to a managable size. Still, that should be the readers decision and no one else's. I had to go to the University library and get a complete copy in order to read those sections. As I mentioned, this copy is a translation into modern English. However, I do recommend that readers take a look at the Middle English version, at least of the Prologue. Many years ago, when I was in high school, my teacher had the entire class memorize the first part of the Prologue in the original Middle English. Almost forty years later, I still know it. I am always stunned at how beautiful, fluid, and melodic the poetry is, even if you don't understand the words. Twenty-nine pilgrims meet in the Tabard Inn in Southwark on their way to Canterbury. The host suggests that the pilgrims tell four stories each in order to shorten the trip (the work is incomplete in that only twenty-four stories are told). The tales are linked by narrative exchanges and each tale is presented in the manner and style of the character providing the story. This book was a major influence on literature. In fact, the development of the "short story" format owes much to these tales. All of the elements needed in a successful short story are present: flow of diction and freedom from artifice, faultless technical details and lightness of touch, and a graphic style which propels the story. In poetry, Chaucer introduced into English what will become known as rime royal (seven-line stanza riming ababbcc), the eight-line stanza (riming ababbcbc), and the heroic couplet. His poetry is noted for being melodious and fluid and has influenced a great many later poets. He has a remarkable talent for imagery and description. With respect to humor, which often receives the most negative responses from a certain group of readers (as witnessed by some of the comments below), there are at least three types: good humor which produces a laugh and is unexpected and unpredictable (for example, the description of the Prioress in the Prologue), satire (for example, the Wife of Bath's confession in the Prologue to her tale), and course humor, which is always meant to keep with the salty character of the teller of the tale or with the gross character of the tale itself. I am really stunned at the comments of the reviewer from London (of June 21, 1999). He/she clearly has no idea of the influence of the work nor on the reasons why Chaucer chose to present the humor the way he has. T. Keene of May 17 gave the work only three stars, presumably because it was once banned in Lake City, Florida. (Does that mean it would get fewer stars if it hadn't been banned?) Perhaps our London reviewer will be more comfortable moving to Lake City! Another reviewer suggested that "The Canterbury Tales" was only a classic because it had been around a long time. No! Chaucer's own contemporaries (for example, Gower, Lydgate, and Hoccleve) acknowledged his genius. My goodness, even science fiction books acknowledge the Tales (for example, Dan Simmons' "Hyperion," which won the 1990 Hugo Award for best science fiction novel of the year, is based on the Tales). These brief entries are too short to review all of the tales. Let me just descibe the first two. Other readers might consider reviewing the other tales in later responses. In "The Knight's Tale," the Theban cousins Palamon and Arcite, while prisoners of the King of Athens (Theseus), fall in love with Emelyn, sister of Hippolyta and sister-in-law to Theseus. Their rivalry for Emelyn destroys their friendship. They compete for her in a tournament with different Greek gods supporting the two combatants. Arcite, supported by Mars, wins but soon dies from a fall from his horse (due to the intervention of Venus and Saturn). Both Palamon and Emelyn mourn Arcite, after which they are united. It is the basis of "The Two Noble Kinsmen" by Fletcher and Shakespeare. "The Miller's Tale" is a ribald tale about a husband, the carpenter John, who is deceived by the scholar Nicholas and the carpenter's wife Alison that a second flood is due. In this tale, a prospective lover is deceived into kissing a lady in an unusual location. And, recalling the response from our reviewer from London, apparently this Tale should not be read by people from London (or Lake City)!

Over the years, this book has been banned upways, sideways, and down. Thanks to the Comstock Law (1873), Geoffrey Chaucer's 'The Canterbury Tales' was prohibited for sale in the United States due to sexual situations and swearing. (In other words, the fun parts.) It continues to be abridged for content and language across the United States.

I read Canterbury Tales a while ago. It was an abridged edition. Severely abridged. Entire sections and tales were cut out, for PC and conservative reasons both. I reread it in an unabridged edition, and while even a truncated Chaucer is beautiful, I see how much I missed.

Yes, the Tales may be anti-semitic and sexist and Chaucer probably killed puppies just to see their expressions. It's still a beautiful example of writing. Rather than limit himself to portraying the upper classes and more refined manners, Chaucer elected to portray "low" manners and tastes as well, giving a more complete picture of life as he saw it. The completeness of the Tales for that time period blows me away.

It's long, but it's worth it. If you can, find an edition that keeps as much of the original language and slang as possible. It's slower reading, but his skill shines through.

Over some period I have read several translations of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. My first experience, selections in a high school text, was not promising. (Possibly, I was not yet ready for Chaucer.) Translating poetry from one language to another is difficult and often unsuccessful. Translating Chaucer from Middle English is not much easier. English has changed dramatically in the last 600 years, to the point that Middle English is nearly indecipherable. For example, we read Chaucer's description of the Knight's appearance:

Of fustian he wered a gipoun (Of coarse cloth he wore a doublet)
Al bismotered with his habergeoun (All rust-spotted by his coat-of-mail)

A glossary, persistence, and considerable time are required for reading the original Chaucer. If you choose to do so, the Riverside Chaucer edition (edited by L. Benson) and the Norton Critical Edition (edited by Olson and Kolve) are highly recommended. The Signet Classic paperback (edited by D. R. Howard) modernizes the spelling a bit, but still largely adheres to the original Chaucer.

Although your instructor will most likely assign a particular edition of Canterbury Tales, it can be exceedingly helpful to pick-up an additional version or two. A slightly different translation may entirely surprise you, may even resonate with you, making Chaucer much more enjoyable. I suggest that you look for these versions:

Canterbury Tales, Penguin edition, translated by Nevill Coghill, is an excellent poetic translation. It is a complete collection arranged by Group A thru H. It also includes The Parson's Prologue, The Parson's Tale in synopsis, and Chaucer's Retractions. Coghill's translation remains my favorite.

Selected Canterbury Tales, Dover Thrift edition - provides a poetic, rather than literal interpretation, and is quite readable. The collection of tales is fairly small, however.

The Canterbury Tales, Bantam Classic paperback edited by Hieatt, uses the "facing page" format with the original Chaucer on the left and a modern literal translation on the right page. I found the literal translation a little wooden, but this edition can be quite helpful if you need some help with Middle English. (A guide to phonetics, grammar, spellings, and a glossary is provided.)

Chaucer's Canterbury Tales (Barrons Educational Series) uses an "Interlinear Translation" format in which each line of Middle English is followed by a modern translation (literal to make the comparison easier). I rather like this approach.

Canterbury Tales, John Murray Publishers, London is hard to find, but provides a partial translation to modern English, maintaining as much as possible of the Middle English. This rather clever approach is somewhat risky, but the translator H. L. Hitchins pulls it off. With some effort I could follow the text without continually referring to a glossary and in a limited way I was "reading Middle English".

Canterbury Tales, Pocket Books, prose translation by R. M. Lumiansky, is easy to read, but while this prose format adheres to the storyline, it is only a shadow of the poetic Chaucer. However, it can be helpful if you are not comfortable with poetry.

In addition to its literary importance, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales are an enchanting reading experience. The Bantam Classic edition presents the tales in Modern English translation alongside the Middle English so that one can fully appreciate the tales as Chaucer composed them, or if you're just in the mood for a fun romp you can speedily read the translation. The tales themselves move at a quick pace, so beginners will probably enjoy the modern version much more.

The Canterbury Tales revolve around a group of 29 on a pilgrimage to Canterbury Cathedral to pay homage to the martyred St. Thomas a'Becket. The members of the pilgrimage come from all walks of life, including a Knight, Prioress, Merchant, Miller, the ever-entertaining Wife of Bath, and many others. The Canterbury Tales are the pilgrims' stories and each one reflects the individual character's personality beautifully. One can't help but feel a part of this lively group.

Whether you like a bawdy, raucous tale or a morally sound fable you will definitely find something entertaining in this book. I laughed out loud several times and found Chaucer's use of symbolism, wit, wisdom, and the glimpse into 14th Century life absolutely fascinating.

I remember slogging through The Canterbury Tales in Middle English when I was in high school and although the language is beautiful, having to take time to decipher it all did diminish somewhat the enjoyment of a terrific collection of stories. Since most of us are more comfortable with modern English, a good translation makes all the difference, and Nevill Coghill's excellent translation does full version to Chaucer's book. Reading this version takes the work out of it and makes "The Canterbury Tales" a pure pleasure.

Chaucer writes about everyman and his stories represent one of the motliest crews in English literature: the Wife of Bath who has put away five husbands and is looking for a sixth; the pardoner, the reeve, the clerk, the knight, and a host of others from all walks of life. There is something in here for everyone; my three favorite stories are the Pardoner's Tale; the Miller's Tale (reading this in Coghill's translation, I could see why it has been excised from the bowdlerized versions used in high school English classes; it's rude, crude and downright lewd, but it's so hysterical they had to sew my sides up again when I finally stopped laughing), and the Franklin's tale of the knight, the squire and the magician who outdo each other in chivalry.

Antisemitism was commonplace in medieval Europe and Chaucer is no more free of it than anyone else of his time; but to say that The Canterbury Tales is not worth reading because Chaucer was true to his time is overstatement. One must accept that Chaucer was as human and imperfect as most of his peers; without compromising the fact that Chaucer was a literary genius who had a profound effect on English language and English literature.

Judy Lind

CHAUCER : THE CANTERBURY TALES. Translated into Modern English by Nevill Coghill. 504 pp. Penguin Classics. ISBN : 0140440224 (pbk.)

Nevill Coghill's brilliant modern English translation of Chaucer's masterpiece, 'The Canterbury Tales,' has always been a bestseller and it's easy to understand why. Chaucer was an intensely human writer and a great comic artist, but besides the ribaldry and sheer good fun of tales such as 'The Miller's Tale,' we also know he was capable of other things. His range was wide, and the striking thing about Coghill's translation is how amazingly faithful it is to the spirit of the original - at times bawdy and hilariously funny, at other times more serious and moving when Chaucer shifts to a more poignant mode.

But despite the brilliance of Coghill's translation, a translation so effective that it was even made into a successful musical, and despite the fact that it remains the best possible introduction to Chaucer for those who don't know Middle English, those who restrict themselves to Coghill are going to miss a lot - such readers are certainly going to get the stories, but they're going to lose much of the beauty those stories have in the original language. The difference is as great as that between a black-and-white movie and technicolor.

Chaucer's Middle English _looks_ difficult to many, and I think I know why. It _looks_ difficult because that in fact is what people are doing, they are _looking_ at it, they are reading silently and trying to take it in through the eye. This is a recipe for instant frustration and failure. But fortunately there is a quick and easy remedy.

So much of Chaucer's power is in the sheer music of his lines, and in their energy and thrust. He was writing when English was at its most masculine and vigorous. And his writings were intended, as was the common practice in the Middle Ages when silent reading was considered a freakish phenomenon, to be read aloud. Those new to Chaucer would therefore be well advised, after reading and enjoying Nevill Coghill's rendering, to learn how to read Middle English _aloud_ as soon as possible by listening to one of the many excellent recordings (one of the best is by Robert Ross on Caedmon).

Coghill certainly captures the spirit of Chaucer, but modern English cannot really convey the full flavor and intensity of the original. Learn how to roll a few of Chaucer's Middle English lines around on your tongue and you'll soon hear what I mean. You'll also find that it isn't nearly so difficult as it _looks_, and your pleasure in Chaucer will be magnified enormously.

The Canterbury Tales were almost ruined for me by my freshman English Lit class. They insisted on making us read it from The Norton Anthology of Literature, which of course is untranslated. This is pointless. Unless one is a specialist or going for a doctorate there is no point in reading The Canterbury Tales in Middle English with all those endless footnotes. It takes one of the greatest books in English Literature - or World Literature, for that matter - and makes it torture. I have no need of "thilke" or "willhem" or "clepen." That is why Nevill Coghill's translation is such a boon. Now we can enjoy it in our own language the way the fourteenth-century English did (in truth, it is not that hard to translate as many of the words stay the same). I have taken to reading it, not as a novel, but as a collection of short stories - skipping around as I please. I think it is agreed that the best parts art the Miller's Tale, The Pardoner's Tale, and The Wife of Bath (and the Prologue, of course) which makes for excellent starting points.

"Brilliant" is the right word for Chaucer, I think. Not "magnificent" - it sounds too authoritative, and authority was one thing Chaucer had little regard for. I mean this not in the sense that he devoted himself to passionately tearing down authority - simply that his ultimate motivation was to parody, sometimes to satirize, and just generally to poke fun. The mood of the work as a whole is one of a game, interspersed with various asides from both Chaucer and his various characters beseeching the readers not to take what they say too seriously and to maintain a general spirit of fun.

The backstory to the telling of the titular Tales (alliteration!) is that of thirty pilgrims, each given their own unique introduction in the prologue (though some, such as several priests, are lumped together), travelling to Canterbury to the site where Thomas a Becket was killed by Henry II - of England, of course. The host of the Tabard Inn, Harry Bailey, suggests that they make a wager where they each tell two tales on the way to Canterbury and two on the way back, and whoever tells the best tales gets a dinner to be paid for by the rest of the party. But this is fairly unimportant - what is important is the characters, the tales, and Chaucer himself's relationship to both.

The tales snowball off one another in such a way that, while it is certainly possible to read them non-chronologically, the best understanding of the work as a whole is achieved by just reading straight through - and then once more after that, as some earlier stories reference characters not fully given a chance to shine until later in the work. For example, during the Knight's tale of courtly love, he himself pokes some very subtle fun at the typical absurd purity of his Medieval romantic characters, which prompts the Miller to tell a fabliau tale in which similar high romantic rhetoric is used simply for the purposes of hot, dirty, extramarital sex at the expense of a poor, old, foolish carpenter, prompting the Reeve (himself a carpenter) to revenge himself on the Miller by telling a tale in which a cruel, stupid, thieving Miller's daughter and wife are both raped by young students whom the Miller has tricked. The cycle of degradation of the romance finally ends when the Cook begins a tale of a prostitute, Chaucer trailing off the tale without ending it, presumably because he has already made his point - namely, the dichotomy between ideal views of romance in the eyes of higher, aristocratic figures, and the realities of romance (or, rather, lust) in the eyes of the common figures of the day. And yet, despite this, the dirty, crude, ribald fabliaux of the Miller, Reeve, and Cook actually reinforce aristocratic feeling of superiority.

I could quite easily go on, and on, but I will not. Suffice it to say that this is perhaps the greatest (in terms of sheer worth, not puffed-up self-importance), most entertaining, most rewarding work in all English literature. I intend to read the untranslated version as soon as I can. Speaking of which - Coghill's translation is quite excellent, with smooth-flowing rhymes and handy footnotes (although sometimes their placement did seem a bit arbitrary - why did he feel it necessary to explain what a Summoner was, but not what a Manciple was?) My one criticism was that he decided not to translate the prose tales of the Parson and Chaucer's Tale of Melibee, giving a self-written summary in their stead. While the summaries were fine, and perfectly informative, I want Chaucer, dammit! But all in all, a fine job, Mr. Coghill.