Surname 1

Name
Instructor
Course Title
Date
“Canterbury Tales” Analysis
The “Canterbury Tale” plot consists of intricate weaved orality and literacy. The story is
written as a frame story having a story within a story component. Chaucer's third-person
omniscient narrator is recounting the plight of the pilgrimage at a tomb in St. Thomas in
Canterbury as indicated in lines 12- 17 of the General Prologue. In lines 792-799 (Chaucer line
792-799), within the narrator's story, the pilgrims are narrating their stories independently as part
of the story telling contest to aid them in passing time on the journey. Leicester (34) argued that
the story is shared by the pilgrims are a reflection of the oral culture of their time, thus they are
not reading stories from written sources but rather reciting them to the party. The incidence
marks a faux-oral presentation the reader is enjoined into listening along with other pilgrims thus
creating an illusion of orality even though they are reading the text. 
The writing technique used by Chaucer highlights the intersection between literate and
oral culture. Leicester (54) contends that spoken utterances involve addressing a real living
individual by another person at a given time in a real setting implying that reciting and listening
group activity. Thus, the context of the people present and the context of the situation are useful
as the words being said. Crosby (413) adds that words in an oral or natural habitat are part of the
existential present. When words are transformed into texts, it is shifted from their present form
and given a timeless status bereft of the text. Despite the written being accessible at any time its
original meaning has been altered since the reader may not know what the author intended. 
Writing and reading are solitary endeavors and need both the author and the audience to
imagine each other intent. Chaucer's target audience is fictional in several aspects. In the
narration, other pilgrims are serving as an audience to the tale like the reader. However, he
manages to dictate and control the reaction of other pilgrims in the prologue. Even though the
reader has the freedom for reacting, understand, or misunderstand the text as they wish.
Therefore, Chaucer makes it his role to provide enough details and context to elicit directions to
the imaginary reader. 
 Surname 2

The “General Prologue” exhibits the issues of literacy and orality by highlighting time in
the context of the pilgrims. Chaucer's exploration of the pilgrim’s tale is a unique aspect of his
intention to address societal transition in his work. Breaking the normative literary convention,
the narrator breaks in the pilgrim journey (line 345-376) and narrates a series of lines rather than
creating an illusion that she is recounting the tale. The first instance in “General Prologue” is
captured in the words “ysprad quod she” (Chaucer line 454) is describing the scene to the
audience about the standpoint of the external narrative framed within the tale. However, it's
common for the narrator and other characters in the narrative to present each other’s prologue.
Chaucer is using the narrator to break into the tale by forcing the audience to become a strict
reading of the overall work and not a pseudo-listener of the tale.  
The poem of Canterbury Tales is basically an imitation of oral performance. The poem is
much drawn to the traditional roots in the culture of orality and tries to replicate a kind of oral
performance through it. The reader of this poem happens to be the audience for the story that the
narrator is saying about the pilgrims in Canterbury Tales. There are many scenarios in the poem
where the reader is invited to be part of the audience of the personal tales along with the narrator
of the tale. Chaucer tries to simulate listening based on the communal activity within the reading
solitary activity. Even though Chaucer was communicating through writing, he was trying to
consider his audience. This is why the narrative or the tale is written in vernacular English
(Chaucer line 2). In this case, Chaucer used this aspect of literature in order to facilitate the
spoken part of the narrative through writing. In order for his audience, of which most are not
well conversant with English, to understand his message, he had to use the vernacular English.
The readers are bound to have different perceptions concerning the intensity and tone of the line
used in the tale. Crosby (417) denotes that if the story was purely oral the readers present would
be capable of discerning what prompted each of the pilgrims to recount their particular stories. 
It is evident that the poem was written to be read as if it was spoken. Most of the lines in
the “General Prologue” of The Canterbury Tales justify this fact. For instance, line 77 can only
be read as if spoken and not just a mere reading. In this line, the kind of message being conveyed
can only be brought out clearly through spoken means. This is why Chaucer chose to
communicate via vernacular English. Spoken literature is most of the time written in such a way
that explicit some elements of oral performance. This is also found throughout The Canterbury
Tales.  The oral performance in this piece of the poem shows that is more evident from lines 94 –
 Surname 2

100. In these lines, Chaucer shows how the participant was engaged in the performed art. This is
an indication that oral performance was one of the key aspects of this poem. Even though all the
tales are arranged systematically so that they are recounted by each of the pilgrims, they are
arguably a written story. No non-verbal cues such as gestures, changes in volume for the precise
context of wordings, or facial expressions are captured in the prologue. 
The main thing that makes this poem literary imitation of oral performance is the time
factor. The significant element of the time period that these poems were written in was the
societal effects and the growth of the manuscript that made the industry before printing was
widespread. This is why the writing style of Chaucer was mainly the recent oral culture
reminiscent. His ideas about the tale-telling contest are dependent on the knowledge of oral
tradition. One salient evidence in the “General Prologue” is evidenced by the act that the
pilgrims cannot just tell anyone their story since they are reserves of good tales only to be told
well. For example, the Squire in the prologues is incessantly interrupted and not allowed to finish
his tale since he is not one of the pilgrims and has no attachment to the traditions (Chaucer line
695). Reiss (34) contends that Franklyn might have disrupted Squire's Speech to save himself
and other pilgrims from having to listen to the overwrought, romantic, and lengthy tale. The
incident point to the literary imitation of oral performance when Franklyn strategically stops
Squire Tale only to be granted the opportunity to present his version. 
Works Cited
Crosby, Ruth. "Chaucer and the custom of oral delivery." Speculum 13.4 (1938): 413-432.
Jr Marshall Leicester, H. "Structure as Deconstruction:“Chaucer and Estates Satire” in the
General Prologue, or Reading Chaucer as a Prologue to the History of
Disenchantment." Exemplaria 2.1 (1990): 241-261.
Reiss, Edmund. "The Pilgrimage Narrative and the" Canterbury Tales"." Studies in
Philology 67.3 (1970): 295-305.