Suzanne Parenti

Literature 483: Seminar in Chaucer

Dr. E. Joy

May 12, 2003

A Veiled Lesson: Urging Women’s Speech in Chaucer’s Clerk’s Tale

        Chaucer’s Clerk’s Tale has a long been a topic of debate for scholars. The ambiguity of meaning that is prevalent throughout The Canterbury Tales, is a particular problem in the Clerk’s Tale. The seemingly contradictory combination of Petrarch’s allegorical tradition, the Clerk’s sympathetic narration, Chaucer’s increased humanization of the characters, and the Envoy to Chaucer’s speech, all contribute to the author’s ambiguous intentions and provide fertile ground for conflicting views. However, the majority of scholars agree with an analysis of the story that emphasizes Griselda, both Walter’s treatment of her and her reactions to the situation. While scholars offer various interpretations as to the meaning of the Walter and Griselda story, such as an understanding of the story as biblical allegory or as an exemplum depicting the proper behavior for a woman in marriage, they typically agree that Griselda is the main character. Recognizing the difficulty in understanding Chaucer’s intentions for the Clerk’s Tale as well as the importance he placed on Griselda, Gail Ashton concludes that "the portrayal of Griselda, upon whom the entire narrative rests, continues to arouse controversy" (Ashton 232). The statement supports the idea that Chaucer intended the Clerk’s Tale to be interpreted as a story about Griselda.

        In contrast to this idea, Michael Hanrahan’s article, "A Straunge Succesour Sholde Take Youre Heritage: The ‘Clerk’s Tale’ and the Crisis of Ricardian Rule," is an interpretation of Chaucer’s "Clerk’s Tale" as a political commentary. He focuses almost entirely on Walter, proposing that Chaucer uses him to represent the political situation surrounding him at the time, the reign of Richard II. Hanrahan argues that Walter’s situation at the beginning of the story, the kingdom’s concern with the ruler’s lack of an heir, closely resembles the familial situation of Richard II. He purports, "Translated during the last decade of Richard’s reign, the Clerk’s Tale emphasizes a ruler’s obligation to procreate. It’s fundamental interest in succession and inheritance not only figures a crisis of late Ricardian rule – an heirless realm – but also enables Chaucer to imagine alternatives to the king and realm. . . . the Clerk’s Tale offers a study in governance" (Hanrahan 335-6). Hanrahan draws coincidental parallels between Richard II and Walter throughout his article, ignoring Ashton’s and other scholars’ view that Griselda is the key figure.

        Hanrahan also ignores the fact that the story is a continuance of traditions that existed long before the reign of Richard II. Robert Worth Frank Jr. notes, " The Clerk tells an immensely popular narrative, originally a folk tale. Boccaccio introduced it to the literary world as the last story in his Decameron (1353). Petrarch recast it into Latin (1373-4), and in the next twenty years there appeared another Italian version, two French translations . . . and a French dramatization (1395). Chaucer used Petrarch’s Latin and one of the translations" (Frank 155). J. Burke Severs further acknowledges the rich history behind Griselda’s story in his book, The Literary Relationships of Chaucer’s Clerkes Tale. He notes, "In its ultimate origin, the story of Griselda and her patience is a folk tale. . . .  there are present in the tale of Griselda certain vestigial relics of the pre-literary form" (Severs 4-5). Hanrahan dismisses the importance of these analogues by asserting that certain plot conventions were contrived to mirror the contemporary political situation, without acknowledging their existence in previous texts.

        An example of this dismissal occurs when Hanrahan recounts the story of Robert de Vere, a close confidant to Richard II. De Vere divorced his wife so that he would be free to marry a member of Queen Anne’s court. In order to obtain a divorce, de Vere had to seek permission from the Pope. Hanrahan explains that the divorce and subsequent marriage were scandalous events for the 14^th Century. He supposes that Chaucer intended to comment on this situation writing, "Walter’s scheme to divorce Griselda closely resembles de Vere’s alleged perjuries. Like the marquis of Dublin (de Vere), the marquis of Saluzzo sends messengers to Rome to obtain counterfeit papal bulls authorizing his divorce" (Hanrahan 343). He continues to conclude, "The similarity between Walter’s feigned divorce from Griselda and de Vere’s actual divorce from Phillippa de Coucy secures a final instance of the political urgency of Chaucer’s translation of the Griselda story" (Hanrahan 344). Unfortunately, this logic is flawed for two reasons. First, the divorce that Walter seeks is part of his ongoing test of Griselda’s constancy and patience. Unlike de Vere, Walter never intends the divorce to be legitimate; it is merely a rouse to expose Griselda’s true feelings. De Vere’s divorce was real and he did intend to remarry another woman. Secondly, the notion that Walter sought permission to divorce from the Pope did not originate with Chaucer, rather this idea exists in both Boccaccio and Petrarch’s work. Severs explains that in Boccaccio’s novella, "Gualtieri declares publicly (but in absence of Griselda) that he will divorce her, and announces he will apply to Pope for permission" (Severs 16). He continues to write that in Petrarch's version, " Valterius sends for and receives counterfeited letters of divorce from Rome; and the report is spread among the people that he will put away his wife" (Severs 16). It is clear that the similarities Hanrahan notices between de Vere and Walter are mere coincidence as Chaucer simply transferred, and not invented, this aspect of the story from the analogues.

        Hanrahan assumes that the Clerk’s Tale has only one logical interpretation, a study in governance. However, this understanding is limiting and an oversimplification of the text. In William McClellan’s article, " Bakhtin’s Theory of Dialogic Discourse, Medieval Rhetoric Theory, and the Multi-Voiced Structure of the Clerk’s Tale", he explores the idea that there are multiple narrative voices that interact within the story to create layered meaning. He writes, "The Clerk’s Tale is one of the tales where Chaucer was experimenting with a multi-voiced narrative discourse. . . . These heterogeneous voices can conveniently be identified as the Petrarchan voice of moral allegory, the clerkly voice of humanistic pathos, and the nominally Chaucerian voice of grotesque parody" (McClellan 483). The presence of differing voices increases the complexity and meaning of the tale, extending beyond a myopic view that the tale is a simply a symbolic representation of government.

        A proper analysis of the Clerk’s Tale acknowledges that Chaucer intended there to be more than one way to look at the tale and by examining the voices McClellan has identified and how they work together to create meaning. McClellan recognizes the traditional view of the tale as an exemplum or biblical allegory. The allegorical stance is inherited from Petrarch’s version of the Griselda story. As McClellan notes, "[ . . . ] the Petrarchan voice of moral allegory, is the voice of tradition, origination, authority, and high seriousness. . . . This allegorical voice regards the story of Griselda as an exquisite exemplum of spiritual constancy and ‘vertuous suffraunce’" (McClellan 483). This voice is present in the story and is identified as having originated from Petrarch. The clerk states:

Although Chaucer includes the idea that the tale is to be understood as an example of how a superior woman or Christian behaves, tension exists between this interpretation and the Clerk’s voice of pathos and the Envoy to Chaucer’s contribution urging woman not to follow Griselda’s example.

        Wendy Harding also observes the tension between a strict allegorical reading and Chaucer’s presentation of characters that promotes sympathy in the reader. A true allegorical tale would only praise Griselda and hold her up as a universal example to aspire towards. However, Chaucer raises questions in the mind of the reader as to the appropriate treatment and behavior of women. Harding concludes, "the Clerk insists that the tale is to be understood as an allegory of God’s testing of the soul and as an exemplum of the patient endurance required of all Christians. But in Chaucer’s version of the story of Walter and Griselda, this dual orientation is problematic. Rather than putting the human order in synchrony with the divine, the tale’s pathos arises from the disjunction between the two orders" (Harding 167). The argument that the tale can not be accepted as an allegory continues, "The tale is constantly pulled in two directions, and the human sympathies so powerfully evoked by the sight of unmerited suffering form, ultimately, a barrier to total acceptance of the work in its original function" (Salter qtd. in Harding 167). The inability to accept the text as allegory can be attributed to the Clerk’s voice of pathos, which arouses sympathy and pity for Griselda, emotions that contradict the tone of praise usually associated with an allegorical figure.

        This sensitive voice further supports the claim that the tale is a subversive pro-feminist text, intended to force the reader to question the traditional role of a woman in society and marriage. A. C. Spearing discusses the Clerk’s speech regarding Griselda and contends that, "It is almost as if he were urging his female listeners to rebel against the monstrous acts that the story he is telling would force them to accept" (Spearing qtd. in Booker 534). To which Keith Booker adds, "he thus accepts the role of ‘angry supporter of the female sex against his own sex’" (Booker 534). McClellan defines the Clerk’s voice as viewing, "the story within the horizon of ordinary human experience and can be characterized as the voice of immediacy, of feeling and common experience" (McClellan 483). The Clerk’s comments inspire the reader to feel outrage or sympathy for Griselda and perhaps begin to question the tale’s traditional interpretation as an exemplum. As Andrew Sprung observes, "The Clerk’s language of ‘realistic pathos’ inspires righteous anger at the spectacle of suffering inflicted capriciously by a human hand; his language of ‘austere allegory,’ on the other hand, inspires admiration for Griselde’s refusal to express such anger. Salter concludes that, "the realistic perspective creeps in inadvertently, disfiguring Petrarch’s allegory of saintly suffering rewarded" (Sprung 349). The language of pathos can be seen in many of the Clerk’s interjections into the story. He tells the pilgrims:

                    He hadde assayed hire ynogh bifore,

                    And foond hire evere good; what neded it

                    Hire for to tempte, and alwey moore and moore,

                    Though some men preise it for a subtil wit?

                    But as for me, I seye that yvele it sit

                    To assay a wyf whan that it is no nede,

                    And putten hire in angwyssh and in drede.

                    (IV. 456-462)

        Clearly, the Clerk disagrees with the continued trials of Griselda and expresses his opinion that it is an unnecessary punishment. McClellan explains, "The voice of pathos expresses strong identification with the heroine . . . and unlike the Petrarchan voice of allegory, refuses to justify her suffering. . . . The voice of pathos constitutes a hidden and limited polemic against the monumentalizing, supra-natural, inhuman ideal of the allegoresis" (McClellan 485). The Clerk’s speech works against the voice of Petrarch and allegory. The combination of these voices creates tension in the text and prohibits the reader from viewing the tale as a simple retelling of the Latin version as well as weakens Hanrahan’s idea of the tale as political.

        Closely related to the notion of the Clerk’s pathos is the idea that Chaucer’s additions to his translation add a more humanistic quality that connects the reader more closely with the characters. This realism functions in the same way as the Clerk’s speech, in that it creates tension between the allegorical tradition and offering Griselda sympathy rather than praise. In an article that appears separately from his book, Severs comments, "Chaucer made significant changes in characterization, in narrative technique, and in the whole tone and spirit which informs the tale. . . . and Chaucer cannot refrain from adding outspoken and vehement condemnation of the marquis and of the people who condoned the repudiation of Griselda" (Severs 290). Harding also believes that Chaucer’s additions heighten the sympathy factor and shifts the interpretation towards a critique of society’s authoritarian oppression of women. She comments, " In Chaucer’s rendering of the tale, readers are made to feel the difficulties of submitting to an unjust regime and out sympathies are aroused against tyranny" (Harding 170). Chaucer chose to make the characters more realistic not so that he might represent a political figure, as Hanrahan suggests, but to take a well-known story and make it reach deeper into people’s hearts so they might open their eyes to the injustice that surrounds them. Elizabeth Salter suggests, "Viewed as a human document, the tale is cruel, unnatural and unconvincing, and it is just this ‘human view’ which is irresistible to Chaucer, and which urges him to dramatize then criticize what he has created" (Salter qtd. in Harding 167). By adding a quality to Griselda that causes her plight to resonate deeply with the audience, Chaucer subtly changes the tone of tale and quietly urges readers, particularly women, to take action. At the end of the tale, as Salter suggests, Chaucer criticizes what he has just written in the form of the Envoy to Chaucer’s speech. The Envoy also serves as the third voice that McClellan identifies and labels as parody. The addition of yet another dialogue further deepens the tale’s meaning and signifies Chaucer’s real feelings. The Envoy’s speech also leaves an impression on the reader that urges change and advocates women’s speech, a far cry from Hanrahan’s view of Walter as the main figure in a political commentary.

                    The Envoy addresses the female listeners:

                    O noble wyves, ful of heigh prudence,

                    Lat noon humylitee youre tonge naille,

                    Ne lat no clerk have cause or diligence

                    To write of yow a storie of such mervaille

                    As of Griseldis pacient and kynde,

                    Lest Chichevache yow swelwe in hire entraille!

                    (IV. 1183-1188)

        In the examination of the Envoy’s speech, a moral is espoused that does not exist in translations preceding Chaucer. This moral encourages women to speak their minds and not to let humility serve as a nail in their tongues, a powerful image written with passion designed to inspire. As the third voice in a dialogic discourse, McClellan argues, "this voice parodies both the rhetorical styles of the other voices and their ideological foundations as well. . . . It is as if the voice casts a sidelong glance at the ideals and values enunciated by the other voices – silence and submission – and rejects both of them" (McClellan 484). While Petrarch would argue the moral to be one of wifely obedience, and the Clerk states that constancy in adversity is the moral, the Envoy disregards both of these claims. Booker writes, "‘Chaucer’ then ends the tale with an ‘envoy’ that advises wives not to follow Griselda’s example of quiet obedience, but instead to resist such oppression and to speak out against it rather than suffering in silence" (Booker 524). The Envoy expounds this idea by encouraging women to follow Echo, one who always speaks back.

                    Folweth Ekko, that holdeth no silence,

                    But evere answereth at the countretaille.

                    Beth nat bidaffed for your innocence,

                    But sharply taak on yow the governaille.

                    Emprenteth wel this lessoun in youre mynde,

                    For commune profit sith it may availle.

                    (IV. 1189-1194)

Here is the meaning that Chaucer intends the audience to understand and take away from his rendering. The tale is not an exemplum, but rather it is veiled activism in the same vein as American slave songs that contained coded messages for escape routes. Margaret Hallissy writes in her book, "The ‘Envoy’ argues that women should not emulate Griselde. . . . Chaucer explains how women’s words are an instrument of power. To achieve power in marriage, he advises women to do the exact opposite of what Griselde does and what the behavior manuals advised, that is, to disregard false definitions of virtue and speak their minds. . . . he urges wives not to be disempowered, not to take the advice of those who would control the voice, that powerful instrument with which a woman can seize power" (Hallissy 71). Of all the voices expressed in the text, the Envoy perhaps comes closest to expressing Chaucer’s intent.

        Michael Hanrahan’s article merely skims the surface of the Clerk’s Tale, applying a single lens through which he seeks understanding. However, the history of the Griselda tale exists in analogues preceding the period of Ricardian rule that he portends Chaucer is representing. Chaucer did not invent the plot conventions that Hanrahan suggests are symbolic of Richard II’s reign. Chaucer did, however, contribute an overall humanization of the characters to the text that serve to promote sympathy for the characters. Between the voices of Petrarch, the Clerk, and the Envoy, the tale’s complex levels of meaning cannot be ignored. The overall effect of the interaction of these voices is that the Petrarchan ideal is demoted as an object of praise by the Clerk’s voice of pathos, which also inspires the listener to outrage at the treatment of Griselda and perhaps women in general. This leads to the final voice of the Envoy, which takes that outrage and tries to turn it to action, openly encouraging women to use their voices to gain equality in marriage and society. Chaucer’s text will always be ambiguous; no one definitive interpretation can prevail. This is where Chaucer’s genius truly lies. He wanted the reader to question meaning and think for themselves; his purpose was not to indoctrinate the listener with one authoritarian view. Perhaps he was an early feminist and uses the Clerk’s Tale to subvert male dominance and inspire women to let themselves be heard. While that idea may be debatable, one thing that cannot be denied is that the tale aims to cause the reader to evaluate his or her own stance regarding the issues of women’s rights in marriage, obedience, speech, and the silent submission to authority.

Works Cited

Ashton, Gail. "Patient Mimesis: Griselda and the Clerk’s Tale." The Chaucer Review

        32 (1998) : 232.

Booker, M. Keith. "Nothing That Is So Is So:" Dialogic Discourse and the Voice of the

        Woman in the Clerk’s Tale and Twelfth Night." Exemplaria 3.2 (1991) : 524-534.

Chaucer, Geoffrey. "Clerk’s Tale." The Canterbury Tales. In The Riverside Chaucer.

        3rd. ed. Ed. Larry Benson. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.

Frank, Robert Worth Jr. "The Canterbury Tales III: Pathos." The Cambridge Chaucer

        Companion. Ed. Piero Boitano. New York : Cambridge University Press. 1986.

Hallissy, Margaret. Clean Maids, True Wives, Steadfast Widows: Chaucer’s Women and

        Medieval Codes of Conduct. Westport : Greenwood Press. 1993.

Hanrahan, Michael. "‘A Straunge Succesour Sholde Take Youre Heritage:’ The Clerk’s

        Tale and the Crisis of Ricardian Rule." The Chaucer Review 35.4 (2001) : 335-344.

Harding, Wendy. "Function of Pity in Three Canterbury Tales." The Chaucer Review

        32 (1997): 167-170.

McClellan, William. "Bakhtin’s Theory of Dialogic Discourse, Medieval Rhetoric

        Theory, and the Multi-Voiced Structure of the Clerk’s Tale." Exemplaria 1.2

        (1989): 483-485.

Severs, J. Burke. The Literary Relationships of Chaucer’s Clerkes Tale. Hamdon :

        Shoe String Press. 1942.

Severs, J. Burke. "The Clerk’s Tale." Sources and Analogues of Chaucer’s Canterbury

        Tales. Ed. Bryan, W.F. New York : The Humanities Press. 1958.

Sprung, Andrew. "‘If It Youre Wille Be:’ Coercion and Compliance in Chaucer’s

        Clerk’s Tale." Exemplaria 7.2 (1997): 349.