lashay's paper

In Paul Strohm’s text “Three London Itineraries: Aesthetic Purity and the Composing Process,” he seeks to explain the importance of the relationship between the plot and the setting in medieval literature. Strohm examines three different works from the medieval era demonstrating the importance of the setting to each work. He relates the setting to social standing and by extension society in general. He makes good points about the relation to setting and social standing in medieval literature that still hold true in literature and society today.
One of the first things Strohm points out is the initial desire of the person to be alone. In all three of the narratives he examines the protagonist sets out on a lone journey; however in none of the narratives does the protagonist finish his journey alone. Chaucer finds himself in the middle of a chivalry court case, Usk finds himself charging his one time friend with “treasonous designs against Brembre’s rival candidacy and the common good of the city of London” (8), and Hoccleve finds himself broke and penniless because he likes the way the boatmen treat him. All three of these men initially set out on a sojourn, however they all end up in a large company of people leaving us to wonder if they ever really wanted to be alone. This quandary is even more perplexing because of the common location which all choose to visit in their sojourn.
The first thing I want to examine in this paper is the common denominator of place in these three works. All three of these men end up at a tavern of some sort during the work, and usually this is where the sojourn ends and the dialogue begins. Strohm writes, “An impending occasion of social redefinition is, in fact, signaled by all these taverns lurking in and around our three narratives” (10). Chaucer’s new found socially defining episode occurs when he notices a set of arms, belonging to someone other than the man he supposed, displayed outside an inn. This brings him into the court case about the coat of arms between Scrope and Grosvenor. Usk goes to a tavern, namely Willingham’s tavern, known for its shady political dealings and becomes a co-conspirator against and old friend. Hoccleve goes for a drink after work and leaves the boat he took home empty handed because he is trying to keep up appearances. It is very interesting that all of these texts center on taverns because they are such an integral part of society then and now. All I can think about when reading this text is the TV show “Cheers” and the line in the song, “Where everybody knows your name.” These men seek out, possibly inadvertently, a place where they can find companionship. They desire the dialogue that will redefine their position in life. Even today when someone wants to meet someone or just talk to someone, be it the bartender, they go to their favorite watering hole. By making the tavern the center of their narratives all of these men send the subconscious message that they really desire a dialogic relationship, however they also send the message about where those relationships can lead.
Strohm points out that Chaucer’s newfound relationship lands him in the position of a witness for Scrope in the chivalry trial. Strohm writes, “But Chaucer’s testimony also accomplishes an additional bit of status enhancement” (12). This “enhancement” comes about because the man he asks about the arms calls him “sieur” (12). Since this term was reserved for men of substance, then it stands to reason that it made Chaucer feel more important to be addressed in this way. Usk’s newfound relationship makes him more socially mobile. Strohm points out, “In heading for ‘the Bowe’ [the location of Willingham’s tavern], Usk was inserting himself in a zone of political volatility, a place where careers and reputations rose and fell with heightened rapidity” (9). Unlike Chaucer, who knows not what he is doing when he asks about the arms, Usk knows exactly what will happen when he enters Willingham’s tavern. He will become more socially mobile. He will gain the favor of the new mayor, and it will eventually lead to “his royal appointment as undersheriff of Middlesex with its accompanying title of sergeant of arms of King Richard” (14). Usk has political aspirations in mind when he goes to the tavern, and he succeeds in accomplishing them. Unlike Chaucer or Usk the only thing Hoccleve has in mind when entering the tavern is a drink to take his mind off his troubles. However, this drink leads him to more trouble when he lets the sarcastic mockery of the boatmen effect his judgment. Hoccleve admits that the practice of the boatmen calling him “maistir” when he is in the range of hearing makes him empty his pockets in tipping them when his voyage down the river is complete. Strohm writes, “It proceeds from a dream of advancement, energized by a situation of social difference, in which he is perceived . . . as something beyond his station, as something closer to what he would like to be” (15). All of these narrators find something they desire at the tavern, be it recognition as a more important person than they actually are or be it social mobility, they become something more than they are in reality.
Strohm’s text helps us to analyze medieval literature in a new way looking at social mobility and its relation to place. In examining the works in the way that he did he takes the normal everyday activities of these people and puts them in the context of social standing and society. He also helps us to realize that the actions of people today are not any different than the actions of people in the medieval period in regard to society and social standing. Everyone wants to be something better or more respectable, and Strohm proves that it has always been this way.