Sydney Vermillion

WHO WON?!

~ Sydney Vermillion

Have you ever found yourself on a long trip with people whom you have never met before? In Geoffery Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, 20 pilgrims go on a journey to Canterbury Cathedral to the shrine of Saint Beckett. On their pilgrimage they decide to pass the time by telling stories. At the end of the pilgrimage a winner will be declared, the story with "good morality and general pleasure" shall win a dinner fully paid. Although many of the pilgrims would qualify to win, The Pardoner is who you could assume would win, and the Knight is who would lose.

Based on the criteria of "good morality and general pleasure" the Pardoner is the one that whom should win. The Pardoner's story had a good moral story, and was fairly entertaining. The Pardoners tale was about how money is basically the root of all evil and eventually causing death upon you. Because in the tale they are these three stupid guys, and they are looking for death, they think they can kill death. They meet an older man; the older man said he knew where death was. "I left him there today, under a tree." The three men rushed to the tree only to find gold. The three men abruptly changed their course in what they were looking for. It was now gold what they "sought for". So each of these three men start thinking of way they could keep the money for themselves. So they plot to kill one another. They all succeed in killing each other and no one got the gold.

The older man was right, Death was under that tree.

Based on the criteria of "good morality and general pleasure" the Knight is surly to lose. The knight could create a story with good morality, but would lack the entertaining aspect of the criteria. "he had embarked with many ol noble hosts" He is morally righteous especially for a man of his rank "no Christian man so often of his rank." He would fail at telling an entertaining story "in his bearing modest as a maid." One can assume that the knight would lose the challenge.

In conclusion, the pardoner would win; because of his story that had "good morality and general pleasure" it was very entertaining and had a good morally story that people could relate to. The Knight was a very morally righteous person. He just lacked entertaining ability. Although many of the pilgrims would qualify to win, The Pardoner is whom you could assume would win, and the Knight is whom would lose.

WHO WON?!

~ Sydney Vermillion

Have you ever found yourself on a long trip with people whom you have never met before? In Geoffery Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, 20 pilgrims go on a journey to Canterbury Cathedral to the shrine of Saint Beckett. On their pilgrimage they decide to pass the time by telling stories. At the end of the pilgrimage a winner will be declared, the story with "good morality and general pleasure" shall win a dinner fully paid. Although many of the pilgrims would qualify to win, The Pardoner is who you could assume would win, and the Knight is who would lose.

Based on the criteria of "good morality and general pleasure" the Pardoner is the one that whom should win. The Pardoner's story had a good moral story, and was fairly entertaining. The Pardoners tale was about how money is basically the root of all evil and eventually causing death upon you. Because in the tale they are these three stupid guys, and they are looking for death, they think they can kill death. They meet an older man; the older man said he knew where death was. "I left him there today, under a tree." The three men rushed to the tree only to find gold. The three men abruptly changed their course in what they were looking for. It was now gold what they "sought for". So each of these three men start thinking of way they could keep the money for themselves. So they plot to kill one another. They all succeed in killing each other and no one got the gold.

The older man was right, Death was under that tree.

Based on the criteria of "good morality and general pleasure" the Knight is surly to lose. The knight could create a story with good morality, but would lack the entertaining aspect of the criteria. "he had embarked with many ol noble hosts" He is morally righteous especially for a man of his rank "no Christian man so often of his rank." He would fail at telling an entertaining story "in his bearing modest as a maid." One can assume that the knight would lose the challenge.

In conclusion, the pardoner would win; because of his story that had "good morality and general pleasure" it was very entertaining and had a good morally story that people could relate to. The Knight was a very morally righteous person. He just lacked entertaining ability. Although many of the pilgrims would qualify to win, The Pardoner is whom you could assume would win, and the Knight is whom would lose.

WHO WON?!

~ Sydney Vermillion

Have you ever found yourself on a long trip with people whom you have never met before? In Geoffery Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, 20 pilgrims go on a journey to Canterbury Cathedral to the shrine of Saint Beckett. On their pilgrimage they decide to pass the time by telling stories. At the end of the pilgrimage a winner will be declared, the story with "good morality and general pleasure" shall win a dinner fully paid. Although many of the pilgrims would qualify to win, The Pardoner is who you could assume would win, and the Knight is who would lose.

Based on the criteria of "good morality and general pleasure" the Pardoner is the one that whom should win. The Pardoner's story had a good moral story, and was fairly entertaining. The Pardoners tale was about how money is basically the root of all evil and eventually causing death upon you. Because in the tale they are these three stupid guys, and they are looking for death, they think they can kill death. They meet an older man; the older man said he knew where death was. "I left him there today, under a tree." The three men rushed to the tree only to find gold. The three men abruptly changed their course in what they were looking for. It was now gold what they "sought for". So each of these three men start thinking of way they could keep the money for themselves. So they plot to kill one another. They all succeed in killing each other and no one got the gold.

The older man was right, Death was under that tree.

Based on the criteria