Ellipsis... In The Tales

I don't know why, but I think I get caught in "insignificant" details whilst reading. I read the last two parts and yes, I thought about the mythology and how it fit in the text. I pondered about why Arcite died and what or if it mattered. The role of women, the narrators point of view, the addition of both kings from Africa and Emeleye’s ture role. Despite all these uncertainties, I always ended up thinking in why Theseus laid down the rule of no mortal wounds for the battle for love. This simply stood out to me like a sore thumb. Why not? SERIOUSLY… in most tragic romance stories there’s a character that overcomes the other in a battle, slays the other, if you will. Besides, the introduction of Gods almost requires bloodshed. I always associate gods with mortal suffering (with good reason making reference to Greek mythology and the Old Testament and all), so why should it be any different here?

Maybe Theseus didn’t want a legit battle, maybe something somewhat entertaining for him. Perhaps he wanted to see them get hurt and suffer the recovery for his own sick pleasure. I don’t know, maybe because Chaucer wanted to establish an honor code, make a point, set a tone for the next tale.

No, I’m not actually answering anything here and just kind of ranting on and on about some questions that I have. For now I conclude, wait... scratch that, assume that Chaucer has a reason for this, but for now we, or I’ll have to wait. This'll be my ellipsis.

BeDazzling Reality

Another year, another aged typical tragic and unreasonable love story which appears to be misspelled; or so I thought. As I read The Millers Tale I couldn’t help but think about all the stories and myths that I’ve read or heard of or seen in movies that are exactly the same. However, I later realized that this was not the case. It had a third perspective, I realized I was literally being told this story from someone’s point of view and was told what they considered to be important, or at least what they considered they wanted the story to be for me as the reader which has proved to be key in my understanding of it.

As I approached the plot I read all about Arcite’s reaction as “He cast his eye upon Emelye” ( line 1077) and how Palamon also fell for her right then and there, I couldn’t help but think how pathetic it was to “love” someone who you don’t even know… literally. As it progressed and explained how they couldn’t stop thinking about her, which ultimately became their purpose of life, I couldn’t help but compare it to real life. It’s fairly easy to realize when someone is making stuff up in their mind and believing it, when it’s not you who is doing it at least, and I could think of so many people over my lifetime that I have seen do this over a simple hug, conversation or a glance and build up in their mind a whole complex love story.

Arcite is later released from prison and the narrator asks, “Who has the worse, Arcite or Palamon? That one may see his lady every day, But in prison he must always dwell; That other where he pleases may ride or walk, But he shall see his lady nevermore.” (lines 1348-1352) Basically the one who is provided with real visual stimuli but has nothing to do with it other than love through imagination or the one who is overusing his imagination leaving him with actual possibility? This is a parallel to reality, how people act around the ones they like or love. My first connection point.

Arcite decides to disguise himself for love. I took this as becoming someone who you’re not, changing for the sole purpose of holding on to the possiblity of maybe solidifying a fantasy that might at some point sort of become “love” or a relationship, something that is quite common in real life.My second connection point.

Now, why are there two guys? My understanding of this came from reading later on when they were about to start fighting. As they helped eachother to armour up to later go at eachother like animals juxtaposes the comradery they had possessed and later lost to rivalry. This emphasises the point that is made explicitly over and over again that love knows no boundaries. However cliché that might sound it overcomes the most important of bonds, blood. This specific part I'm not sure if is adopted by society to make into reality or vice versa by which it became cliché. In any case the section appeared to allude to reality.

I soon started to feel as if a person, any person, was telling me a story about their friends. A fairly common situation, yeah with some exaggerations and surprises here and there but all and all pretty familiar. It’s almost as if I could be the narrator, telling this story simply describing my friends’ love lifes'. This leaves me to ask:
Is this what all of these stories, myths, and tales about impossible love and over exaggerated tragedy are all about? Beautified reality?

The Details of Listening

Migrations. A self explanatory title. The poem is clearly about the Hispanic conquest in South America, a pretty burnt out topic if you ask me. They arrived, there was blood shed, slaughtering of Indians, “stealing” of their properties, it was like an infectious over-abusing unwanted guest.


The slight twist that I found interesting in the video was the tone of voice and the audio support of the music to convey a -what is it?- feeling? The comparison between the end very dark-like with min 2:15 of the various words creates a wave-like quality which simply makes everything flow.

I realize I didn’t write much about migrations, but I really didn’t have much to say.