CANTERBURY TALES--THE MONK AND HIS TALE
[Cross-references included at the bottom of the page]
625. BEICHNER, PAUL E. "Daun Piers, Monk and Business Administrator." Speculum 34 (1959):611-19. Reprinted in Chaucer Criticism, Volume I: "The Canterbury Tales," ed. by Richard J. Schoeck and Jerome Taylor (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969), pp. 52-62.
Assesses Chaucer's portrait of the Monk as a depiction of a "monastic official not a cloisterer on a holiday." The portrait better represents human nature than satire, since the Monk's high office and his social responsibilities account for his apparent deviations from monastic ideals.
626. BERNDT, DAVID E. "Monastic Acedia and Chaucer's Characterization of Daun Piers." Studies in Philology 68 (1971):435-50.
Reconciles the apparent conflict between the Monk's worldly sketch in General Prologue with his ascetic tale by reading them both as manifestations of an acedious personality. Details of the Monk's actions and physiognomy match discussions of acedia in Cassian, Gregory, and Pernaldus, suggesting that Chaucer consciously represented "this complex psychological phenomenon."
627. DELASANTA, RODNEY K. "'Namoore of this': Chaucer's Priest and Monk." Tennessee Studies in Literature 13 (1968):117-32.
Contrasts Chaucer's Monk and Nun's Priest, demonstrating how their tales are theologically opposed. The Monk's dreary view of Fortune is undercut by the Nun's Priest's orthodox and lively assertion of Providence, making of the Monk a "theological lummox."
628. FRY, DONALD K. "The Ending of the Monk's Tale." JEGP: Journal of English and Germanic Philology 71 (1972): 355-68.
Through manuscript discussion and demonstration of dramatic propriety, substantiates the Ellesmere arrangement of the Monk's tragedies where the contemporary accounts, or so-called "modern instances" are at the end. The Knight interrupts the Monk for philosophical reasons and because Pedro of Cyprus, one of the Monk's topics, was his former commander.
629. LOCK, F.P. "Chaucer's Monk's Use of Lucan, Suetonius, and 'Valerie'." English Language Notes 12 (1975):251-55.
Shows how the Monk's interpretations of his exemplary tragedies characterize him as intellectually weak. He blames fortune for the falls in his narratives, but the sources he cites offer more cogent reasons in several notable cases: Adam, Ugolino, and Julius Caesar.
630. OLSSON, KURT. "Grammar, Manhood, and Tears: The Curiosity of Chaucer's Monk." Modern Philology 76 (1978):1-17.
Analyzes the various aspects of the character of Chaucer's Monk to show how the element of "idle curiosity" appears in his portrait, prologue, and tale. Patristic authority explains how curiosity dominates his roles as grammarian, tragedian, hunter, and "outridere."
631. WHITE, ROBERT B., Jr. "Chaucer's Daun Piers and the Rule of St. Benedict: The Failure of An Ideal." JEGP:Journal of English and Germanic Philology 70 (1971):13-30.
Summarizes the monastic Rule of St. Benedict and demonstrates that, directly or by inference, all of the monastic vows are compromisd in Chaucer's portrait of the Monk, presenting the character as a "satiric consummation of all possible monastic faults."
See also entries 212, 360, 638. For genre: 212, 727, 736; sources and analogues 169, 185, 252.
Table of Contents
Previous Section: Canterbury Tales--The Tale of Melibee
Next Section: Canterbury Tales--The Nun's Priest and his Tale