You are here

Home » Content

MEDIEVAL HYBRID AND MIMIC IDENTITIES: GEOFFREY CHAUCER’S FRANKLIN IN THE CANTERBURY TALES

ORTAÇAĞ’IN MELEZ VE TAKLİTÇİ KİMLİKLERİ: GEOFFREY CHAUCER’IN CANTERBURY HİKAYELERİ’NDEKİ FRANKLIN KARAKTERİ

Journal Name:

  • Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2017
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.21497/sefad.328609

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales represents every facet of medieval society by its unique satire of medieval people exhibiting various classes. Depicting his life-like pilgrims in accordance with the social, economic and political changes of the time, one of the focal points Chaucer highlights in his The Canterbury Tales is social mobility which moulds the portrait of his old landowner, the Franklin. Due to social mobility, as in the case of his real counterparts in history, the portrayal of the Franklin is shaped by in-betweenness since he is a social climber without a noble birth. The Franklin, a rich social climber of peasant origin, embraces the characteristics of both his previous and present social position and inhabits a medieval “third space.” Not entirely belonging to the nobility or to the commoners, parvenu Franklin is in an identity crisis and belongs to the medieval “middle grouping” of social climbers apart from the members of the traditional three estates: the clergy, the nobility and the commoners. Those people of “middle-grouping” develop their alternative identities on the borders of the acknowledged identities of the three medieval estates. Thereupon, the Franklin has to develop a hybrid identity by mimicking his social superiors, the members of the nobility, to be able to find a place for himself in society. Accordingly, this paper aims to discuss Chaucer’s Franklin in The Canterbury Tales as a Bhabhanian hybrid and mimic who is caught in between the medieval acknowledged identities of the commoners and the nobility, and searches for a recognisable identity in dynamic medieval society.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Geoffrey Chaucer’ın Canterbury Hikayeleri farklı sınıfları resmeden eşsiz hicviyle Ortaçağ toplumunu her yönüyle ele alır. Hacılarını zamanın toplumsal, ekonomik ve siyasal değişimlerine uygun olarak gerçekçi bir biçimde tasvir eden Chaucer’ın Canterbury Hikayeleri’ndeki odak noktalarından biri de yaşlı bir toprak sahibi olan Franklin karakterini şekillendiren toplumsal hareketliliktir. Franklin’in portresi, toplumsal hareketlilikten dolayı asil kanı olmaksızın sosyal statüsünü yükselten tarihteki gerçek emsalleri gibi arada kalmışlıkla yoğrulmuştur. Asil kökenleri olmayan köylü sınıfına mensup, zenginliğiyle toplumda yükselen Franklin, hem önceki hem de şimdiki toplumsal statüsünün özelliklerini kendisinde barındırarak Ortaçağ “üçüncü alanı”nda yaşam sürer. Tam anlamıyla ne asiller ne de köylü sınıfına dâhil olan Franklin bir kimlik bunalımı içindedir ve geleneksel üç sınıfa (ruhban sınıfı, soylular ve köylü sınıfı) dâhil olmayan sonradan görmelerin oluşturduğu Ortaçağ “orta sınıf”ına mensuptur. Bu “orta sınıf”a dâhil olan Ortaçağ insanları, üç sınıfa dayanan kesin hatlarla çizilmiş Ortaçağ kimliklerinin kıyısında kendi alternatif kimliklerini geliştirirler. Franklin bu bağlamda kendisine toplumda bir yer edinebilmek için toplumsal statüleri kendisinden yüksek olan asilleri taklit ederek melez bir kimlik geliştirmek zorunda kalır. Bu çerçevede, bu makale Ortaçağ’ın kabul gören köylü ve soylu sınıflarının kimlikleri arasında kalan ve dinamik Ortaçağ toplumunda kabul görebilecek bir kimlik arayan Chaucer’ın Canterbury Hikayeleri’indeki Franklin karakterini Bhabha’nın dile getirdiği anlamda melez ve taklitçi bir kimlik olarak ele alır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-medieval-hybrid-and-mimic-identities-geoffrey-chaucers-franklin-canterbury-tales.pdf
  • 37
329
342
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

ABRAM, Annie (2013). English Life and Manners in the Later Middle Ages. Oxon: Routledge.
ASHCROFT, Bill, GRIFFITHS, Gareth et al (1998). Key Concepts in Post-Colonial Studies. London and
New York: Routledge.
BAILEY, Mark (2014). The D ecline o f S erfdom i n L ate M edieval E ngland: F rom B ondage t o F reedom.
Woodbridge: Boydell.
BHABHA, Homi K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
BISHOP, Morris (1971). The Penguin Book of the Middle Ages. Norwich: Fletcher and Son.
BISSON, Lillian M. (1998). Chaucer and the Late Medieval World. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
BLOCH, March (2007). Feodal Toplum. Trans. Melek Fırat. İstanbul: Kırmızı.
BLOCKMANS, Wim, & HOPPENBROUWERS, Peter (2014). Introduction to Medieval Europe, 300-
1500. New York: Routledge. 2nd ed.
BOEHMER, Elleke (1995). Colonial and Postcolonial Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
BROWN, Peter, & BUTCHER, Andrew (1991). The Age of Saturn: Literature and History in the
Canterbury Tales. Oxford: Blackwell.
BRYANT, Joseph A. (1948). “The Diet of Chaucer’s Franklin”. Modern Language Notes. 63 (5): 318-
325.
CARRUTHERS, Mary J. (1981). “The Gentilesse of Chaucer’s Franklin”. Criticism. (23): 283-300.
CHAUCER, Geoffrey (2008). The Riverside Chaucer. ed. Larry Dean Benson. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
COLEMAN, Janet (1981). English Literature in History 130-1400: Medieval Readers and Writers.
London: Hutchnson.
COOPER, Helen (1996). Oxford Guides to Chaucer: The Canterbury Tales.Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 2nd ed.
COSS, Peter (2006). An Age of Difference. In Rosemary Horrox & W. Mark Ormrod (eds.). A Social
History of England 1200-1500. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 31-73.
DENHOLM-YOUNG, Noel (1969). The Country Gentry in the Fourteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
DYER, Christopher (1997). The Economy and Society. In Nigel Saul (ed.). The Oxford Illustrated
History of Medieval England (pp. 137-173). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
DYER, Christopher (1989). Standards of Living in the Later Middle Ages: Social Change in England c.
1200-1520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ECKHARDT,Caroline D. (1990). “Chaucer’s Franklin and Others of the Vavasour Family”. Modern
Philology . 87 (3): 239-248.
EROL, Burçin (1981). “A Pageant of Well-dressed People: A Study of Chaucer’s Costume Imagery
in the Canterbury Tales”, Diss. Ankara: Hacettepe University.
FORGENG, Jeffrey L., & MCLEAN, Will (2009). Daily Life in Chaucer’s England.Westport:
Greenwood Press. 2nd. ed.
FRANKIS, P. J. (1990). “Chaucer’s Vavasour and Chrétien de Troyes”. In Caroline, D. Eckhardt
(ed.). Chaucer’s General Prologue to Canterbury Tales: An Annoted Bibliography, 1900-1984.
Toronto: Toronto University Press. 46-47.
GEROULD, Gordon H. (1926). “The Social Status of Chaucer’s Franklin”. PMLA. (LXI): 262-279.
GIVEN-WILSON, Chris (1996). The English Nobility in the Late Middle Ages: The Fourteenth-Century
Political Community. London and New York: Routledge.
HOMANS, George C. (1975). English Villagers of the Thirteenth Century. New York: WW Norton &
Co.
HOWARD, Donald. R. (1997). “Social Rank in the Canterbury Tales”. In Don Nardo (ed.). The
Canterbury Tales. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. 84-90.
SEFAD, 2017 (37): 329-342
3_4_1_ _______________ Medieval Hybrid and Mimic Identities: Geoffrey Chaucer’s Franklin in The Canterbury Tales
HUIZINGA, Johan. (2013). The Waning of the Middle Ages. Mineola and New York: Dover
Publications.
HUSSEY, Maurice (1967). Chaucer’s World: A Pictorial Companion: Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
KALPAKLI, Fatma (2011). “The Impact of Colonialism upon the Indigenous and the English
Women Characters in the Mimic Men”. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute.
(8): 77-84.
KEEN, Maurice (1990). English Society in the Later Middle Ages 1348-1500. London: Penguin.
KEEN, Maurice (2003). England in the Later Middle Ages: A Political History. London and New York:
Routledge. 2nd. ed.
KNAPP, Peggy (1990). Chaucer and the Social Contest. New York and London: Routledge.
LARSON, Peter L. (2006). Conflict and Compromise in the Late Medieval Countryside: Lords and Peasants
in Durham, 1349-1430. New York: Routledge.
MANN, Jill (1973). Chaucer and Medieval Estates Satire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MCDOWALL, David (1989). An Illustrated History of Britain. Essex: Longman.
MCKISACK, May. (1959). The Fourteenth Century: 1307- 1399. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
MORTIMER, Ian (2009). The Time Traveler’s Guide to Medieval England: A Handbook for Visitors to the
Fourteenth Century. New York: Touchstone.
MYERS, Alec (1978). England in the Late Middle Ages. London: Penguin Books.
OLSON, Paul (1986). The Canterbury Tales and the Good Society. Princeton and New Jersey: Princeton
University Press.
PEARSALL, Derek (1985). The Canterbury Tales. London: George Allen & Unwin.
PHILLIPS, Helen (2000). An Introduction to The Canterbury Tales: Reading, Fiction, Context. New
York: St. Martin’s Press.
POSTAN, Michael (1972). The Medieval Economy and Society: An Economic History of Britain 1100-
1500. Berkeley: California University Press.
RIGBY, Stephen (2007). English Society in the Later Middle Ages: Deference, Ambition and
Conflict. In Peter Brown (ed.). A Companion to Medieval English Literature and Culture c. 1350-
c. 1500. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 25-39.
ROBERTSON, Durant (1963). A Preface to Chaucer. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
ROBERTSON, Durant (1980). Essays in Medieval Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
SAUL, Nigel (1983). “The Social Status of Chaucer’s Franklin: A Reconsideration”. Medium Aevum.
(52): 10-26.
SAUL, Nigel (1992). “Chaucer and Gentility”. In Barbara Hanawalt (ed.). Chaucer’s England:
Literature in Historical Context. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press. 41-55.
SAUL, Nigel (1997). The Oxford Illustrated History of Medieval England. O xford a nd N ew Y ork:
Oxford University Press.
SAUL, Nigel (2011). Chivalry in Medieval England. Cambridge and Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press.
SCHOFIELD, Phillipp R. (2003). Peasant and Community in Medieval England, 1200-1500. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
SEMBLER, M auer ( 1996). “ A F rankeleyn w as i n h is C ompaignye”. I n L aura C . & R obert T .
Lambdin (eds.). Chaucer‘s Pilgrims: An Historical Guide to the Pilgrims in the Canterbury Tales.
Westport: Praeger. 135-145.
SENAPATİ, Suganthi (2002). “Men and Women in the Merchant’s, Franklin’s and Wife of Bath’s
Tales”. MA thesis. Houston: University of Houston Clear Lake.
SPEECHT, Henrik (1981). Chaucer’s Franklin in the Canterbury Tales: The Social and Literary
Background of a Chaucerian Character. Copenhagen: Copenhagen University Press.
SEFAD, 2017 (37): 329-342
Nazan YILDIZ ________________________________________________________________________3_4_2_
STENTON, Frank (1961). The First Century of English Feudalism: 1066-1166. London: Oxford
University Press.
STROHM, Paul (1986). “The Social and Literary Scene in England”. I n Piero Boitani & Jill Mann
(eds.). The Cambridge Chaucer Companion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-16.
STROHM, Paul (1989). Social Chaucer. Cambridge and Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
TUCHMAN, Barbara W. (1978). A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century. New York: Ballantine
Books.
TURNER, Marion (2006). “Politics and London Life”. In Corinne Saunders (ed.). A Concise
Companion to Chaucer. Oxford: Blackwell. 13-33.
YILDIZ, Nazan (2015). “Hybridity in Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales: Reconstructing Estate
Boundaries”. Diss. Ankara: Hacettepe University.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com