In the Book of Genesis, Adam and Eve eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which gives them greater powers of perception but also causes their expulsion from Paradise. The story creates a link between clear vision and the ability to perceive the truth which, in this case, causes humanity to fall from a state of blissful ignorance to one of miserable knowledge. In the Merchant's Tale, vision and truth do not enjoy such an easy relationship. Vision is hindered on both a metaphorical and literal level, and the subversion of the fabliau genre challenges the idea of ​​truthful representation. The merchant's story destabilizes the very notion of representation, problematizing man's relationship with truth. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayChaucer uses a very strange metaphor to describe January's search for a wife. The narrator compares the old knight's mind to a mirror that has been installed in a common market, capturing the image of every maiden who passes. January undertakes an almost obsessive mental cataloging of all eligible women: Thanne Sholde has seen many figures in step with her gaze; and in the same wyseGan January entered with his thought devyseOf maydens that dwelt hym bisyde. (ll. 1584-7)The more familiar the reader is with the conventions of the fabliau genre, the more likely he is to feel that something is not right. First, the life of the married couple before the marriage and the story of how that marriage came about is not at all properly the subject of fabliau and Chaucer devotes considerable space to it here (Pearsall 4/12). Second, there is something so disheartening about the old man's search for his mind to become an inquiring mirror, catching these women with its gaze that it is difficult to imagine a reader finding this metaphor amusing. For modern readers it is perhaps impossible to read this description without being reminded of video surveillance. At this point in the story, Chaucer has made the reader aware that the form of the fabliau will not be strictly followed: in addition to taking upper-class people as characters and setting itself in a city dominated by vice (Pearsall 4/12), the tale deals with of images like this mirror that are much more disturbing than normal fabliau fare. This destabilization of gender seems to question representation itself; the reader is not afforded the comfort of being firmly situated in one genre, and is instead made aware of Chaucer's play with the conventions of narrative. Such awareness of the malleability of narrative should naturally make the reader more wary of any “truth” that might present itself. The mirror itself challenges the link between representation and truth: the images January sees are reconstructions/reflections, rather than the women themselves. Plus the mirror isn't even real. It is the poet's metaphor, itself another type of reconstruction, and so the reader is twice distanced from these women who are represented. January bases her non-visual assessment of these women not on direct interaction but on hearsay; it is their reputation among the people that determines what they think of their characters (ll. 1591-2). The mirror becomes a metaphorical space in which January can evaluate both physical beauty and reputation. As a series of images, these reconstructions are at once physical, social, and metaphorical, yet they all fail to give January what she needs. The mirror presents no “truth” in a way that can save January from cuckolding. The text strongly emphasizes the point in a verse which is allosimultaneously metaphor and prefiguration: "Because love is blind every day and cannot see" (l. 1598). In addition to being a reference to January's subsequent literal blindness, the line calls to the reader's attention the problem of the mirror. What use is a “mirror” to a man who is metaphorically (and, later, literally) blind? The idea of ​​vision as a direct path to truth, as expounded in Genesis, becomes inapplicable here. Vision is no longer a clear window between the subject and the truth. Instead, it is a sort of reconstruction, imperfect like any type of representation, especially considering the limitations of this particular topic. In addition to problematizing the relationship between vision and truth, January Blindness challenges notions of representation by extending the limits of the fabliau. type. First, his handicap makes him a victim in a way that invites more pity from the reader; pity inhibits the effectiveness of the story's humorous elements, disqualifying one of the defining characteristics of what makes a fabliau. Secondly, his blindness makes the key element of the fabliau of cunning quite difficult. Although May and Damyan very cleverly deceive January, this trick seems almost artificially inserted: why are they so elaborate to deceive a blind man? Like Damyan Crouching in the Garden (Pearsall 4/12), this trick seems excessive, as if the characters knew they were in a fabliau story and had to meet their one requirement to be cut. The use of classical and Christian myth in history continues the problematization of representation. Pluto and Prosperpina arguing like medieval Christian scholastics in the midst of a fabliau takes gender destabilization to a new extreme. Vision and truth come into play again: Pluto, in wanting to grant January sight, seems to start from the basic assumption that vision is a transparent window between a man and the truth: "Thanne shal he knowen al rent harlotrye" ( l .2262). Prosperpyna, rather than arguing against the restoration of sight in January, insists that vision will not help the man, because "I will assume [Mayus] suffisant Answere" (l. 2266). The intervention of language, May's "suffisant response", creates a gap between sight and truth. The scene of discovery and non-discovery is full of biblical parallels: the act of adultery takes place on a pear tree which, in the Middle Ages, was represented as the type of tree that bore the forbidden fruit (Thompson 4/16). The beautiful garden is parallel to Paradise; the Augustinian interpretation of the forbidden fruit as a sexual sin links the act of adultery in the story to the first sin of Adam and Eve. Yet despite all these parallels, the climax of Merchant's Tale reverses the relationship between truth and sight established in the Eden story. The first pair's eyes are opened; at a great cost, they see the truth of their own nakedness. January's eyes are open, but his newfound sight doesn't help him see the truth about his wife's adultery. May reinterprets the scene, constructs her own representation of what was happening in the pear tree, and convinces her husband of a gap between sight and truth: "It'll be a while 'til you're seen, / There might be many sightings, yow bigile." " (ll. 2405-6). His willingness to believe her ensures his continued metaphorical blindness. Keep in mind: this is just one example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay The Merchant's Tale problematizes the man's relationship with truth through destabilizing representation. Although by the end of the story the reader knows more than January about what happened in the garden, the tale does not allow the reader to sit comfortably with a secure understanding of the "truth.".