This is the third in a series of posts about Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales (1390s).
PLOT
TRANSCENDENCE: There is no transcendence in this plot: only the authorial intent of the Reeve (a town official) who wants to get back at the Miller for telling a tale that satirizes carpenters because he is himself a carpenter.
HIERARCHY: This, along with sanctions, is the main dynamic of the story. The miller tries to get one over on everyone he comes across. The local university boys (“clerks”) take it upon themselves to put him in his place.
ETHICS: The miller is unethical in his grain cutting. He always takes part of the cut. When he robs the clerks, they decide enough is enough.
SANCTIONS: The clerks are even more despicable than the miller. They spend the night with their thieving host and sleep with his wife and daughter.
SUCCESSION: No one is getting married. The trysts were based in revenge. The family is scandalized. The miller has been embarrassed.
THEME
HIERARCHY: The world of human revenge is often about hierarchy: who serves whom.
SANCTIONS: Without transcendence, human interaction is nothing but judgment. There is no grace in this story. It’s neither funny nor successful as a story. Its content is unpleasant, as it is aesthetic rendering. The Reeve is a vindictive man, and his tale is mercifully short.
Experiments in Criticism 