Chaucer Verse Shakespeare
Raveena Shurgill
Classic works read by generations of readers worldwide all have one characteristic in common: they are enticing enough to become a classic. Aside from that, the views and styles of writers, especially those stemming from different historical periods, differ greatly. The same poem presented to two different writers results in two separate works possessing different character dimensions and a diverse portrayal of events. An example of this may be seen in the story of Troilus and Criseyde. While Chaucer’s poem of the Middle Ages reflects his realistic style and dependency on evidence for events to occur, Shakespeare’s play written in Elizabethan times provides audiences with characters shaped by the Elizabethan social standards, as well as colorful and dramatic events that are not always considered the most realistic to occur.
Geoffrey Chaucer was born in the year of 1340 in London, England and died in the year of 1400 also in London (World Biography ). Chaucer was born into the Middle Ages, which focused on concepts of love and chivalry, thus, greatly impacting Chaucer’s works of literature which provided much entertainment for Western Europe. Little is known about Chaucer’s education aside from his ability to read and write Latin, Italian, and French. During Chaucer’s time period, there were many other poets whose works were immensely popular. Retaining individuality, Chaucer used the works of other famous poets while still managing to create a unique inspiration of his own. The Middle Ages led Chaucer to create the love story of Troilus and Criseyde.
In Chaucer’s time period, the Middle Ages, all poets focused primarily on romanticism and love in their stories. Thus, Troilus and Criseyde was based on an equal relationship between the men and women in the story. During this time period, women were cherished and were somewhat equal to men (Tatlock). In Troilus and Criseyde, Chaucer makes the female character of Criseyde equal to men, and she is loved by many. This shows the effect Chaucer’s time period had on his works. Based on the secrecy and fidelity of the Middle Ages, Chaucer largely reveals Criseyde’s inner thought to the reader. In the beginning of the poem, Criseyde refuses the love letters from Troilus that were handed to her by Pandarus. Criseyde knew that she couldn’t take the love letters, because women during this time period were discreet about their love lives. Chaucer was sympathetic toward Criseyde, characterizing her as being sweet and likeable, as well as respectable in the eyes of other characters (Bowden). While Chaucer was the creator of the poem, many other artists interpreted the story, using the same general story line, but introducing the characters very differently.
Conversely, William Shakespeare retold the story line in his own version of Troilus and Cressida, which was heavily affected by how and where Shakespeare was raised. Shakespeare was born on April 23, 1564, in the Elizabethan times; which greatly affected his view point on the different characters in his play Troilus and Cressida (Thomas). The Elizabethan times focused mostly on men, and the women figure were neither appreciated nor treated well. During this time period, males showed dominance over females. Beforehand, Shakespeare’s impression of Cressida was one of an infamous, lowly female. Thus, Cressida’s character as portrayed by Shakespeare was an ignorant and unappreciative person, stemming from the beliefs and views of Shakespeare’s time.
In the poem originating from Chaucer, Troilus’s character is also one whose dynamics differ greatly between Chaucer’s and Shakespeare’s versions. Chaucer makes Troilus’s character a naïve young male who is confused by love. This leads him to seek Pandarus for guidance regarding what to do for his love for Cressida (Hazlitt). As a result, Pandarus helps Troilus with writing letters to Cressida, providing much help in a difficult situation. Troilus is also a very jealous man, who is infuriated by the remark “sholden love oon hatte Horaste” ( 3.797) (Tatlock) causing him to say that Cressida is unfaithful. Troilus, in Chaucer’s poem, differs dramatically from Shakespeare’s Troilus, totally changing the character as a whole.
Shakespeare’s Troilus hardly shows any emotion regarding being in love with Cressida because he sees Cressida as an object rather than an equal individual. Troilus has a predatory attitude that makes his main goal getting Cressida in bed. Shakespeare’s views are portrayed when he writes, “Troilus shall be such to Cressida as what envy can say worst shall be a mock for his truth, and what truth can speak truest not truer than Troilus” (3.2.95-98). This shows how great Troilus’ confidence and ego are, leading him to believe only his words are truest. In addition to Troilus’ character being altered in Shakespeare’s version, others are changed as well.
Pandarus is also a significantly different character between both works of literature. In Chaucer’s poem, Pandarus is somewhat friendly and is always running between Troilus and Cressida, taking their situation into his own hands (Hazlitt). For example, when Cressida betrays Troilus by falling in love with Diomedes, Pandarus still comforts Troilus by offering to find him another lover. In Shakespeare’s play, Pandarus has a professional status where he is a consistent knight that is strict about his duties (Gil). In the beginning of the play, Troilus will not tell Pandarus about his secret love for Cressida. Pandarus’s lack of interest leads Troilus to admit to Pandarus that he loves Cressida. Pandarus’ personality reflects his status as a knight because he is more conscientious about whether or not he would like to be involved in Troilus’ situation. Pandarus is another one of the many characters differing between Chaucer’s and Shakespeare’s works.
Chaucer does not portray a double standard in his characters; they are either serious in the events or provide comical relief. Chaucer’s poem allows for depth by using well developed livelihoods of the characters throughout the entire poem (Hazlitt). Chaucer’s knowledge about his characters allows the reader to be less suspenseful and more engaged with the poem. While Chaucer’s poem was more historical in content, Shakespeare’s play was dull of drama and suspenseful action. Shakespeare portrays his characters as having mixed personalities and very crazy at times (Hazlitt). Shakespeare considered views from the audience and the effects of the actor’s movements, and was more flexible with transitions throughout his play. While Chaucer’s poem was much more natural, the readers had a huge impact when translating the events of the poem to real life. Shakespeare fantasized about his characters and scenes, which allows readers to use their full imagination (Hazlitt). Chaucer’s work is more believable and straight forward to the readers, while Shakespeare’s play is scattered with random plot lines.
Chaucer’s version of the poem is full of thought and is a serious attempt at portraying events realistically, while Shakespeare based his version on intuition. Chaucer’s realistic portrayal of events was based on evidence presented in earlier lines of the poem. He observed nature and human thoughts, presenting clearly defined characters in his work. In contrast to Chaucer’s style, Shakespeare’s version of the poem is action filled and truly a piece meant for entertaining audiences. Shakespeare adds the elements of drama and action, hoping to captivate audiences with events that are straying from what the reader or viewer believes to be totally possible or likely to occur.
Everything in Chaucer’s writing has a flat reality. Details are used in conjunction with evidence of their existence. In Shakespeare’s version, the most common matter-of-fact details have a romantic grace about them; seeming to float with the breath of imagination to a freer element. While the depth of feeling and observation shown by Chaucer is unsurpassed, he left room for the readers’ resources of invention to interpret events with the same radiant light that Shakespeare has done. However fine or profound the thought may be, the reader knows the projected outcome of Chaucer’s work whereas reading Shakespeare is “like the eye of vassalage encountering majesty” (Hazlitt). Chaucer's mind is a forward path rather than being all over the place. He comes to the truth by a consistent beat, allowing the reader to soak in the plot line easier. Chaucer’s format of the poem results in the separation of characters, thoughts, and events. “There is something hard and dry in them” (Hazlitt). In contrast, Shakespeare views everything through a lens of intuition by working on a particular subject and working around it. Shakespeare uses characters, props, and emphasis to pursue a social bond in that society. What is the most wonderful thing in Shakespeare's faculties is their excessive sociability, and how they gossiped and compared notes (Hazlitt).
The same piece, worked by two different writers, yields two totally different and unique results. Chaucer’s and Shakespeare’s renditions of Troilus and Criseyde reflect the social upbringing of each writer during different time periods. The treatment of women is strongly reflected in the works, as well as characters’ attitudes toward expression of love and the importance of duty. Chaucer relies greatly on reality to drive the events of his poem, leaving little for the reader to imagine. A reader of Chaucer’s work simply has to listen and be carried by his events alone. Shakespeare’s production, on the other hand, is full of action and drama. He uses characters that are both serious and comical to produce a work meant for the stage. Shakespeare’s portrayal of events often focuses on what is exciting rather than what is most realistic. By contrasting the same essential piece worked by two different writers, one is able to see the immense affect a writer’s personality and historical time period has on the over piece.
Works Cited
Bowden, Muriel. "The Influence of Chaucer's Chivalric World ." Bowden, Muriel. A Reader;s Gudie to Geoffrey Chaucer. Tornto, Ontario, Canada: Ambassador Books, 1999. 175-189.
Gil, Daniel Juan. "At the Limits of the Social World: Fear and Pride in Troilus and Cressida ." Shakespeare Quarterly 52,3 (2001): 336-359.
Hazlitt, William. "TROILUS AND CRESSIDA; An analysis of the play by William Shakespeare." 01 November 2010 <http://www.theatrehistory.com/british/troilus_and_cressida_001.html>.
Tatlock, John. Troilus and Criseyde. Norwood, Mass. : Norwood Press, 1914.
Thomas, Diane. Troy. 04 November 2010 <http://novaonline.nvcc.edu/Eli/Troy/new/troyweb/chaucer.html>.