In the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which gives them greater powers of perception but also causes their expulsion from paradise. The story creates a connection between clear vision and the ability to perceive truth which, in this case, causes humanity to fall from a state of blissful ignorance to a state of miserable knowledge. In the Merchant's Tale, vision and truth do not have such an easy relationship. Vision is obstructed both metaphorically and literally, and the subversion of the fabliau genre calls into question the idea of ​​truthful representation. The Merchant's Tale destabilizes the very notion of representation, problematizing man's relationship to truth. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Chaucer uses a very strange metaphor to describe January's quest for a wife. The cashier compares the old knight's mind to a mirror installed in a common market, capturing the image of each young girl who passes. January began an almost obsessive mental cataloging of all the eligible women: Thanne stared several feet away from his mirror; and in the same wyseGan January with his thought devyseOf maydens who inhabited the bisyde hymn. (ll. 1584-7)The more familiar the reader is with the conventions of the fabliau genre, the more likely he or she is to sense that something is wrong. First of all, the life of the married couple before the marriage and the story of how that marriage came about are not strictly speaking the subject of fabliau at all and Chaucer devotes considerable space to it here (Pearsall 4/ 12). Second, there is something so uncomfortable about the old man's search that his mind becomes a mirror, capturing these women with his gaze, it is difficult to imagine a reader who would find this metaphor humorous. For the modern reader, it is perhaps impossible to read this description without thinking of video surveillance. At this point in the story, Chaucer had made the reader aware that the fabliau form would not be strictly followed: in addition to taking upper-class people as characters and being set in a city riddled with vices (Pearsall 4 /12), the tale deals with images like this mirror that are much more disturbing than the usual fabliau fare. This destabilization of the genre seems to call into question representation itself; the reader does not have the comfort of being firmly situated within a genre, but is instead informed of Chaucer's play with the conventions of storytelling. Such an awareness of the malleability of the narrative should naturally make the reader more suspicious of any “truth” that might present itself. The mirror itself calls into question the connection 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 form of reconstruction, and the reader thus distances himself twice from these represented women. January bases her nonvisual assessment of these women not on direct interaction but on hearsay; it is their reputation among the people which 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, and yet all fail to give January what he needs. The mirror does not present any “truth” in a way that can prevent January from being a cuckold. The text emphasizes this forcefully in one verse at a timemetaphorical and foreshadowing: “For love is blind all the days, and cannot see” (l. 1598). In addition to being a reference to January's literal blindness, the line draws the reader's attention to the mirror problem. What is the use of a “mirror” for a man who is metaphorically (and, later, literally) blind? The idea that vision is the direct path to truth, as expounded in Genesis, becomes inapplicable here. Vision is no longer a clear window between the subject and the truth. Rather, it is a kind of reconstruction, as imperfect as any form of representation, especially given the limitations of this particular subject. In addition to problematizing the relationship between vision and truth, January's blindness challenges notions of representation by pushing the limits of the fabliau. gender. First, his disability makes him a victim in a way that elicits 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. Second, his blindness makes the key element of Fabliau's clever deception somewhat difficult. Although May and Damyan very cleverly deceive January, this trick seems almost artificially inserted. Why such elaborate efforts 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 fulfill their one condition to be retained. The use in history of classical and Christian myth continues the problematization of representation. Pluto and Prosperpyna arguing like medieval Christian scholastics in the middle of a fabliau takes gender destabilization to a new extreme. Vision and truth come into play here again: Pluto, in wishing to grant January sight, seems to start from the basic assumption that vision is a clear window between a man and the truth: "He will then know that 'he hires a prostitute' (1.2262). Prosperpyna, rather than arguing against restoring January's sight, insists that vision will not help the man, because "I will even hire [Mayus] a sufficient answer" (l. 2266) . The intervention of language, May's “sufficient response,” creates a gap between sight and truth. The scene of discovery and undiscovery is replete with biblical parallels: the act of adultery takes place in a pear tree, which in the Middle Ages was depicted 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 connects the act of adultery in the story to the first sin of Adam and Eve. Yet, despite all these parallels, the climax of The Merchant's Tale reverses the relationship between truth and view established in the story of Eden. The eyes of the first couple are open; at great cost, they discover the truth about their own nudity. January's eyes are open, but her newfound sight doesn't help her see the truth about her wife's adultery. May reinterprets the scene, she constructs her own representation of what was happening in the pear tree and convinces her husband of the gap between sight and truth: “Until you have sight, you will have to wait a while, / There might be a lot of visions, yeah, bigie. " (ll. 2405-6). His willingness to believe her guarantees his continued metaphorical blindness.Keep in mind: this is just a sample.Get a personalized article now from our expert editors.Get a Essay personalizedThe Merchant's Tale problematizes man's relationship to truth by destabilizing representation Although at the end of the story the reader knows about it..