A General Prologue... or a Mean Girls esque Burn Book?

Opening Canterbury Tales, sitting down and beginning to truly read and understand it is a daunting task. That being said, I find that the most effective way for me to find an understanding as to what Chaucer is saying, I must work endlessly to picture these characters; I must give a voice to those without dialogue, and I must dress and give vanity-or lack their-of- based on the descriptions that Chaucer provides us as readers. With this imagery in my mind, I found that I could truly see what Chaucer felt of these people, or in the least how I felt in regards to what he felt necessary to mention about them. With this broad analysis of characters, though, one is bound to be at a loss for what the author is truly attempted to say of those he meets while beginning his travels, and I ran into this issue when reader of the Poor Parson of the town.

Frequently, it is seen in literature that those who can read and write are of high wealth and that this ability showed generous standings in society and defined them. The Poor Parson, though, was quite scholarly and perhaps insightful. I, myself, was inspired by his ways of thought and motivation for success. As the text says, “But he ne lefte nat, for reyn ne thunder, In siknesse nor in mischief to visite The ferreste in his parisshe, muche and lite, Upon his feet, and in his hand a staf” (Chaucer 14). Along with that, I also found the lines saying “That if gold ruste, what shal iren do. For if a preest be foul, on whom we truste, No wonder is a lewed man to ruste,” to be quite insightful (Chaucer 15).  Essentially, he was the epitome of a man who would do what he needed to do to survive, regardless to the disadvantages. In my eyes, this quality is admirable and I feel based on the way Chaucer characterizes and judges those in the story, he would agree. But, in the same breath, does Chaucer feel the Parson is weak, for he is reluctant to excommunicate those who do not pay their fines saying “Ful looth were hym to cursen for his tithes, But ather wolde he yeven, out of doute,” (Cnhaucer 14)? This is one of the many examples of times I wish I truly knew what Chaucer felt of these people, but I guess I can simply form my own opinions and hold those true throughout the rest of the tale. 

As an afterthought upon finishing this story, is Chaucer, or the narrator which he speaks for, the Regina George of the trip to Canterbury? The popular fellow persay? Quick to judge others, I wonder what those on the trip feel of him? If the General Blog is a metaphorical Mean Girls, or lads, Burn Book than what shame would be put towards the narrator?