Licen, Christian Ray C.
BA English Major in Literature
III-V
Comparative Literature: Chaucer, Shakespeare and Milton
A Critical Essay
Chaucer, Shakespeare and Milton are three famous giants in the literary world. Each of them leaped a towering bulk of significant literary canon, thus, bringing about an indelible and formidable impression until this post-modern era. Notably, these prime shakers had not just enkindled their literary flare to its utmost luminescence but also belted out the course of literary history with an iron hand. Chaucer gradually pioneered a major historical change in the development of English had it not been by the influence of Giovanni Boccaccio’s Decameron, Juan Ruiz’ The Good Book of Love and Petrarch’s poetic parlance. Such that after his vivid exposure in Italy, he had begun writing the Canterbury Tales by the time he was lightening his torch. By way of intertextuality, we are able to understand the pervading influence of these Italian writers. Such is a postmodern concept though it has roots even in the Classical Era. What made Chaucer outstand among his literary predecessors was his wit and poetic expertise. Through his magnum opus, the Canterbury Tales, English, which was a vernacular that time, was popularized and distinguished to be superior to the French language only spoken by the noble few. Not only that, the Canterbury Tales served as a “bird’s eye view” to the shaping and molding of a critical eye. Hence, the General Prologue provided the basis for Chaucer’s mirror of society. It is interesting to note that Chaucer deliberately illustrated each character according to the four portraits which the Scholars had agreed upon: real, satirical, grotesque and ideal. In this perspective, Chaucer puts into details their eccentricities and satirical asides which made it a social commentary. Chaucer crafted the tales as either serious or comical. The thematic underpinnings can be classified according to the level of society they belong, namely: the nobles, the clergy and the commoners. Ranging in status from a Knight to a Plowman or Peasant, they were allegorized as a microcosm of the 14th- century English society. As to which its readers find convenient and musing, it is left to their discretion.
Shakespeare, though little is known about his biography, had become the bulwark of the Renaissance. He fortified a pillar among his contemporaries by his prodigious talent of immortalizing his works through real-life themes. Such employment of his gained an earnest impression among notable scholars. What I favor much in Shakespeare is his undying dedication to the fashioning of his works. By sweat and blood, it is evident enough that he’s one celebrated figure in the literary realm. Through his Rape of Lucrece, one may come to understand Shakespeare’s intention of having written verse. As political overtones surface, one may notably deal with the conflict that is very scholarly and rhetorical. As I read the epic poem a couple of times, I realized how Shakespeare skillfully manipulated the events to unfold a lucrative reality: That because of Collatine’s hyperbolic praise of Lucrece, it had provoked Tarquin’s profane desire. Such incident is instrumental to the perpetration of Tarquin’s crime. Furthermore, the poem itself draws its own complicity by the fatal rhetoric of Collatine. Had he not done such, either intentionally or incidentally, the course of the story would have changed. But maybe, Shakespeare wanted its readers to look beyond the façade of the poem. As far as I have scrutinized its quintessential elements, I’ve found out that there was more to unfolding of the conflict itself. Lucrecia’s suicide can be a form of political maneuvering. Her morose revelations were as effective as to seek out an active retribution on Tarquin. Seemingly, this may also connote to put an end on the reign of the Tarquins by way of revenge. And thus, the poem concluded with Lucrecia’s body paraded around the Roman Council as a means of rebellion and protest. That way around, the Tarquin regime had collapsed. In a feminist point of view, such event in the story proved that women can be agents of change if only allowed to bring about a radical move that will subjugate patriarchal hegemony. More or less, that incident alone provided an impact to its readers. Even I myself had extended sympathy over such a miserable fate. Though tragic, Shakespeare ended it this way to empower women in its most sublime sense. They cannot just shut their mouths and acquiesce at their husband’s fold and bidding. They have to echo their voices to be recognized as equals with men.
Shakespeare’s Rape of Lucrece may be an expression of sentiment and grief to the growing discontent of the people during the Renaissance era. In Milton’s case, it functions both as experiential and literary manipulation. The failure of the Revolution reflected his own personal despair. Scholars said that Paradise Lost is itself Milton’s shared tragedy with his protagonist, Satan, who had also lost during the battle between good and evil. More importantly, Paradise Lost affirms an ultimate optimism in human potential. Milton, being a proponent of Monism or animist materialism had led to the astonishing and mind-provoking scenes in the blank-verse epic. Much of it has influences from the Bible. At that time of writing Paradise Lost, there was religious and political flux in England. The onset of Reformation aggravated to the growing disbelief and distrust of the people to the Catholic Church. This furthered Milton to inflict a tension between vice and virtue. In his explicit depiction of evil as the protagonist, he was drawing an irony of situation from which readers themselves will resolve the inner struggle of evil as contained in their volition. Just like Chaucer and Shakespeare who wrote from a critical eye, Milton variably expressed an outpour of emotions over his predicament that time. In the light of writing experience, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Milton are social commentators by nature. I guess, it’s a writer’s proclivity to always view a work of art in the context of the society- that includes its historicity, tradition, norms and culture and political situation. What’s so remarkable about Paradise Lost is also Milton’s purpose, as stated in Book 1, “to justify the ways of God to men and elucidate the conflict between God’s eternal foresight and free will”. Satan, being the protagonist is seen as someone who is sympathetic with Milton. No wonder that critics praised Milton for his belief in the possibility of sin as part of the mystery of human existence. Such radical thought made him popular among his contemporaries.
The core argument on this comparative analysis lies in their perspective on the role of women. Women always played a vital role in the three oeuvres. In Chaucer’s General Prologue, specimens of womanhood differ to a large extent. The Prioress who has a “Love conquers all” brooch stereotypes an aberration of society’s monotype thought. Well, being a servant of the Church, one decisively thinks of a Prioress as very conservative and circumspect. With Chaucer’s satirical employment, we are made to believe that they too have their repressed desires, feelings, guilt, and passions. Her wearing of that brooch is a very ostensible manifestation that she had indeed been in loved or had relished and savored courtly love which was every woman’s delight and passion that time. But her constancy to wear it only proved that she had a human-sided nature not highly devoted and sincere in her vocation. The Wife of Bath in Chaucer was also a talk of the town. Who would ever wish a woman to be every man’s wife? Parallel to Hester Prynne’s imbrogilio in The Scarlet Letter, they both shared the same misery of being subjects to mockery, ridicule and tirade. Upon Chaucer’s intention of the Wife of Bath, we may draw the reason that he presented a “darker” side of women at that time when England was very conservative. His belief in the possibility of evil propels the idea in mind that after all, one is not perfect and that, society itself is the manacle of one’s reason for incarceration, torment and destruction. In Shakespeare’s Rape of Lucrece, we saw a woman victimized by fate. Though Collatine’s praise had inspired Tarquin to pursue on Lucrece, it does not really justify the end. If only Tarquin could have clenched tightly his moral fibers, there’s no way for him to rape Lucrecia. This simply implies how power had become a destructive force when one takes it on his own advantage. It was evident how Tarquin had outweighed the battle between his id and superego. But toward the end, he got overwhelmed by his lust-fire. Clearly, tinge of politics amplified the course of event. Shakespeare’s political innuendos reveal his growing sensibility to mock a monarchial government which is abusive and corrupt. Collectively, the poem itself limited Lucrecia’s ability to speak after the rape, though in the end she was hysterically moved to confess. Instead, her self-sacrifice through suicide was seen as an act of political uprising. Thus, the people were moved to resurge against the Tarquins. Such exhibited a revolution by the people- characteristic of a democratic ideology.
Just as we speak the democratic empowerment of women in Shakespeare’s Rape of Lucrece, Milton’s Paradise Lost describes Eve as a “coy” yet seductive woman who is passionate about sex. Allegorically, Milton typified her as someone who was weak making her more vulnerable. On the contrary, Adam was more of an intellectual- capable of rationalizing between right and wrong, good and evil. Their disagreement over land territory warranted their inability to resist the biggest temptation that has yet to come. The ignition of the argument incites one that there already existed misunderstanding or chaos, in the most liberal lingo. Satan, upon seeing this, made ready to fool Eve through the process of reduction. Thus, he succeeded that eventually had led to Adam and Eve’s fall. The intercession of the Son of God, banning Adam and Eve from entering the gates of paradise and having them envisioned the cataclysm that has yet to come, revealed an image of a forgiving God. Through redemption, they will be able to live life accordingly by God’s covenant. I opine that Milton is partially-patriarchal. Just by merely analyzing his perspective on women, he could have deconstructed the woman as someone who is not a bearer of sin. Scholars have assumed that Milton’s views on marriage were manifested in his depiction of the fall of Adam and Eve. At that time when Milton remarried for a second time, he advocated divorce to be legalized. But that eventually deteriorated due to an epiphany to uphold the merits of marriage. Though he may view Adam as more domineering than Eve, we may welcome the notion that Eve also was granted the benefit of knowledge through experience. Though there are discrepancies lingering on those issues, I believe that Milton still values the importance of mutuality, evidently manifested in his later life when he finally withdrew his claims of legalizing divorce. But since the verse itself draws more influence form Biblical perspective, there’s no way to argue on its determination.
Conclusively, Chaucer is more of a social commentator, Shakespeare is political and Milton is Biblical in terms of their magnum opus being exhibited in this essay. The only difference lies from the milieu they write about. Truly, their insurmountable works prove to be of the best caliber at all times. No wonder that up until now, their popularity has never waned. The grandiosity of their ideas is a precursor to any literary aspirant who wishes to also enkindle his literary flare.
