Plowman 4-5
While I was very confused at times during Passus 4, I enjoyed that the story finally began to get slightly interesting with all of the drama regarding Wrong. Throughout the entire chapter, I found myself very confused about the role of "Reason". I don't necessarily understand why this character seems to have the final say in every decision made when there are other characters, such as the king, who seem to be in a higher position on the social hierarchy; in almost every piece of literature that I have ever read involving a king or a king-like figure, this character would never ask someone else's permission or wait for the approval of another character given their high social status. Additionally, Conscience insists on getting Reason's approval before marrying Mede. He denies the King's order to kiss Mede, responding "Nay, by God... conge me rathere;/But Resoun rede me ther-tille, arst wil I deye,"(Plowman, A.IV.4-5). Reason's power over both Conscience and the King further complicate's Reason's role in the story. While I wouldn't think so at first, it seems as though Reason might be the most powerful character/being in the entire story, existing above both royalty, which could represent a facade of power, and conscience, which could refer to human's natural tendency to act immorally. The lack of a definitive "chain of command" in the story definitely makes the characters more difficult to unpack and analyze.
Passus 5 was confusing on a whole different level than passus 4. I understood that the "Dreamer" wakes up, stumbles a little bit, and then falls back asleep into a dream about doomsday, but I got confused once the story got more complex. The summary explains the plot as involving six of the seven deadly sins as they confess and try to avoid their doom; however, I was only able to point out two or three of them as the story unfolded. Then, there is an extremely dramatic ending in which the huge crowd of people just cries for mercy: "A thousand men and mo tho thrunge togederes/Wepyng and weyling for here wyckede dedis,/Cried upward to Crist, and to his clene moder,/'To have grace to seke Truthe, so God leve that ye mote'"(Piers Plowman, A.V.248-251). This part of the story reminded me a lot of certain aspects of the Bible, such as Sodom and Gomorrah and the story of the flood in Genesis. The final scene of Passus 5 is reminiscent of these Bible stories because they involve God (or Christ) punishing humans that have sinned. Knowing these stories definitely helped me understand passus 5 a little better.
Passus 5 was confusing on a whole different level than passus 4. I understood that the "Dreamer" wakes up, stumbles a little bit, and then falls back asleep into a dream about doomsday, but I got confused once the story got more complex. The summary explains the plot as involving six of the seven deadly sins as they confess and try to avoid their doom; however, I was only able to point out two or three of them as the story unfolded. Then, there is an extremely dramatic ending in which the huge crowd of people just cries for mercy: "A thousand men and mo tho thrunge togederes/Wepyng and weyling for here wyckede dedis,/Cried upward to Crist, and to his clene moder,/'To have grace to seke Truthe, so God leve that ye mote'"(Piers Plowman, A.V.248-251). This part of the story reminded me a lot of certain aspects of the Bible, such as Sodom and Gomorrah and the story of the flood in Genesis. The final scene of Passus 5 is reminiscent of these Bible stories because they involve God (or Christ) punishing humans that have sinned. Knowing these stories definitely helped me understand passus 5 a little better.
Your comments about how Reason is very confusing happened to me too. I did not realize for the first couple of pages that it was a different person than Conciens. It was weird how they separated two very similar ideas and made them argue the same argument.
ReplyDeletePassus five for me a little easier to understand and allowed me to understand a little more until the end where I get completely lost and don't understand a thing.
Maybe Reason is kind of like Truth in that because of their nature they're just considered better than everyone else
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting how you discuss a lack of hierarchy in "Piers Plowman". The King is highlighted as being different from the other characters, as he is the only person who is not representative of a specific ideal or virtue. However, it seems contradictory that even though he is given distinction from other characters, he is not regarded with much authority.
ReplyDelete