Lewis, Robert E.  “The English Fabliau Tradition and Chaucer’s ‘Miller’s Tale.’”  Modern Philology 79.3 (Feb. 1982): 241-255.

Summary:

Robert E. Lewis begins his article by stating that many critics have started to renew an interest in the study of Chaucer’s use of tradition.  Recent critics have found that Chaucer was working within two different traditions, the English tradition and the continental, specifically the French, tradition.  From these statements, Lewis begins to concentrate on the fabliau traditions Chaucer may have used.  He questions whether Chaucer was influenced by an already existing English fabliau tradition.

The fabliau began as a French genre which has origins in the oral transmissions of comic stories.  The French fabliaux are noted for bearing a serious or sarcastic moral.  The fabliau is traced back through French history and several different definitions are given to this genre, which, like other genre, is difficult to define.  Lewis emphasizes the fact that there are publications of fabliau in languages other than French, particularly in Dutch, Italian, German, and English.  He notes that there are very few English examples of the fabliau that pre-date Chaucer.  Reasons why the English tradition lacks fabliau are explained.  The fabliau was a middle class genre that often satirized the same class for which it was intended to amuse.  There is also a problem of literacy of the English people during the thirteenth century.  Therefore, many fabliaux have not been recorded due to a small reading audience or lack of competent writers.  The development of the fabliau in England may have also paralleled the development of the literary genre the romance.

Lewis states that he has proven the presence of an English fabliau tradition before Chaucer.  He now questions whether Chaucer was influenced by it.  Past criticism suggests that Chaucer was indebted more to the French tradition.  If he was working within an English tradition, there are only three English fabliaux which pre-date him.  The tale of “Dame Sirith” provides the best example of influence, particularly when compared with the “Miller’s Tale.”  “Dame Sirith” is about a clerk who is in love with a merchant’s wife.  While the merchant is away, the clerk asks the wife to be his lover, but she refuses.  The clerk then goes to Dame Sirith to acquire her help to play a trick on the wife so that she will be his lover.  The trick involves convincing the wife that she will turn into a dog if she does not agree to be the clerk’s lover.  The trick is successful and the clerk’s goal is realized.

Lewis continues his article by analyzing three characteristics of these fabliaux: the use of character dialogue, the dramatic effects of characterization, and the language the author uses.  “Dame Sirith” is compared to the “Miller’s Tale” using each of these characteristics.  Lewis quotes from both “Dame Sirith” and the “Miller’s Tale” to illustrate his main points.  The words “derne” and “hende,” found in both tales, along with short speeches from different characters, are the evidence Lewis uses to present his points.  The conclusion of this discussion is that the two tales have similarities in plot, language, and vocabulary.

Lewis states that he may be illogical by basing an English tradition of fabliau which pre-dates Chaucer on “Dame Sirith” and two other short works.  However, Lewis asserts that “Dame Sirith” is distinctly different from the French fabliau and for that reason can be representative of an English tradition which existed before Chaucer.  The English fabliau could then have influenced Chaucer’s writing as illustrated by the above comparisons of “Dame Sirith” and the “Miller’s Tale.”

Analysis:

I found Lewis’ article to be extremely well written, researched, and supported.  For instance, his first paragraph shows the development of his thesis from the work of other critics who have written on this subject.  His thesis statement is in the form of a two-part question in which the answer to the first part is necessary to provide the basis for a discussion of the second part.  I like this for he first proves the existence of an English fabliau tradition and then discusses Chaucer’s use of the tradition.

He adequately proves that he has read previous literature without displaying a complete review of literature.  He uses one source in particular (Per Nykrog’s book) but specifically says that no one has discussed English fabliau which pre-dates Chaucer and its effects on Chaucer.  It is from this suggested review of literature that Lewis builds up to his own argument.

Lewis’ comparison of “Dame Sirith” and the “Miller’s Tale” provides excellent evidence for his discussion.  He gives specific examples from the tales of similarities in language, revelations of character through dialogue, and other dramatic effects.  From these examples and his earlier discussion proving an English fabliau tradition before Chaucer, I agree with his thesis even though he bases a pre-Chaucerian tradition on only three fabliaux.

(794 words)