Estates Satire in Piers Plowman: A Dream Vision of Social Critique
Consider the vision of society in the “Field of Folk”. To what extent is it an example of “Estates Satire”?
Field of Folk
Going back to the poem, in the prologue (line 17), we see how the writer falls asleep and then he has a dream in which he sees people from all fields of society.
Estates Satire
What is an Estate Satire? It consists of finding the flaws and weaknesses of this hierarchical classification. Thus, the medieval estates are analyzed and studied in detail, examining whether this way of classifying society into different groups (those who pray, those who work the land, etc.) is effective, providing reasons for this judgment.
So, why is “Field of Folk” an example of “Estates Satire”?
Because if we go to line 57 of the prologue, we can see how, in the “Field of Folk”, several people start describing the various estates of society, attacking, analyzing, and criticizing one another (the government, lawyers, prayers, pilgrims…).
However, this is a kind of satire in which the author is not openly showing his point of view. Instead, it is a kind of veiled satire in which, thanks to a dream, Langland expresses his opinion about society and the estates into which it’s divided, using unreal characters and situations that allude or refer to the truth of the epoch. Consequently, he will avoid the oppression and repression of the most powerful classes, the clergy, etc., because as he is not saying or affirming anything directly, they will not be able to take action against these arguments.
What Social Groups are described in the Prologue?
The 3 main social groups described in the Prologue are:
- Those who have the lands and fight: the nobility, knights, etc.
- Those who pray: the clerics
- Those who work the land: the peasantry
Thus, examples from the Prologue in which we can find all these 3 main social strata described could be:
(clerics, hermits, anchorites)
However, there is also a group described or named in the Prologue which we could not include in any of those estates. They are the lazy people or beggars.
Which groups or professions in society are treated most negatively in the Prologue of Piers Plowman?
We could affirm there are 2 groups of society who are mainly criticized or commented on by the author in this Prologue.
First, on the one hand, it is the estate of those who pray: the church and clergy, with all their workers and opportunists. Thus, as it is said in the following fragments:
Pilgrims and palmers
‘Pilgrims and palmers plighted them together
to seek St. James and saints in Rome.
…And had leave to lie all their lives thereafter…
…For every tale that they told, their tongues were tempered to lie
More than to say sooth, it seemed by their speech’
Hermits commented on in this fragment again; they want to be distinguished, dressed in different clothes, to be recognized, etc.
Friars
Priests, pardoners (corruption of the church, the text is not anti-religious, but there is something that the church workers are doing wrong)
Thus, this does not mean this text is anticlerical/anti-ecclesiastical or the author is against the Church or religion, of course not. Nevertheless, the author is against the corruption of this system, and how the workers (pardoners, friars, hermits, etc.) are more moved by their love of money and ambitions than for the charity, solidarity, and humanity that are supposed to be taken into account among all the religious values, which seem to be forgotten.
Is Piers Plowman primarily an anti-ecclesiastical satire? What or who is the focus of Langland’s criticism?
He does his satire very carefully, conscious of the repression he could suffer if he does not use the right or perfect words to construct his story. As we have said before, he is not an anti-ecclesiastical man, he only wants the ‘Church workers’ to do their tasks in the right way, and not think only about themselves and their own benefit. So, to what or whom is Langland’s criticism directed? As we have just commented, on the one hand to the ‘Church workers’ and the corruption seen among them, who only want to fulfill their own interests. On the other, he also criticizes the wrong actions taken by the Parliament or the Kings, who, like the Church, are looking to their own navel and then thinking of their own benefits and progress. Consequently, they forget why they are in power and for whom they should fight, that is, the working classes, in a search of their own interests, goods, and wealth.
What is a dream vision? What historical events are the subject of the dream vision in the prologue of Piers Plowman?
Dream vision Middle English poets used the cover of a dream, with symbolic figures and landscapes, when they wanted to discuss general truths or explore politically sensitive or dangerous topics.
Thus, Langland uses several types of dream visions: enigmatic dream, oraculum, prophetic vision, etc., and they provide a flexible and inconspicuous structure on which he can make observations of his world, avoiding reprisals, oppression, etc.
The historical events introduced in the dream vision of the prologue are:
- Black Death, which caused the death of miles and miles of workers. Consequently, taxes rose, and as the people who worked the land could not pay, they asked for more money in their salaries. But money never arrived, and all these conditions started a context or a situation of disgust among the workers that would finish with the Peasants’ Revolt (1381).
- Great Schism (cisma) 2 popes at the same time. Apart from the one chosen in Rome, there was another one elected in France, and although Langland does not affirm he is against this situation, he describes it because he does not consider it fair.
- Profound sense of disappointment in the inability of the late medieval English parliament to rectify the woes of the kingdom. This disillusionment was generated not only by the reversal of the measures taken against the court in the Good Parliament of 1376, but also by a much broader context of failure by the crown to address the petitions presented in parliament by the political community. Parliament’s Failure to deliver institutional remedies rebels Peasants’ Revolt 1381.
Good Parliament Edward III’s reign. By 1376 Edward III was old, and although he had reigned strongly and vigorously, he was then a sad shadow, so that control of the government passed more into the hands of ministers and courtiers. Result = growing sense within the political community that government no longer served the common interest (the government no longer looked after the common interests of the people, but the parliamentarians – bad – looked after themselves, etc.) = corrupt and failing government.
Assembly of Rats and Mice
An assembly of rats and mice convenes to discuss how they can best ensure their common safety by preventing the cruelties inflicted on them by a cat. A rat suggests that a bell should be fitted around the collar of the cat so as to warn the rodents of his presence; but when none of the rodents is brave enough to carry through the plan a mouse speaks up and reasons that such an act would do more harm than good because rodents are incapable of ruling themselves: they need the oppressive rule of the cat to maintain order and stability. The rodent assembly ends with nothing useful having been done.
Summary of Rat Fable:
- Rats and mice hold an assembly for 1 problem = 1 cat bothering them
- They say to put a bell on the cat to know when it is coming and when it is not
- 1 of the mice realizes that the cure is worse than the disease = if the cat is no longer oppressing them, they would be incapable of governing themselves
Rats/mice = parliament
Mouse = John of Gaunt? = member of parliament, but bad, looks out for himself
Cat = king = oppressor (Richard II)
2 interpretations of this fable:
A straightforward denunciation of the parliamentary system. Ministers are incapable of implementing reform because their selfish interests and pursuit of private gain prevent them from ruling for the common good. Thus, it shows ‘the inevitability and desirability of absolutism’.
The anti-parliament views of the mouse do not represent the views of Langland or his audience. It allegorizes both the Good Parliament and the so-called Bad Parliament of January 1377. This later assembly implicitly endorsed the measures that had been taken by John of Gaunt to undo the reforms instigated by the Good Parliament. Thus, the mouse represents the anti-reforming perspective of January 1377; cat = Gaunt. Langland’s fable = very upbeat and positive assertion of Parliament’s place and role in the polity.
Conclusion
2 interpretations: 1 that sees Langland as a proponent of absolute monarchy in a political system which has no need of, or place for, a representative assembly; and an alternative view which sees Langland as a ‘parliamentarian’ seeking to uphold the legitimacy and validity of parliamentary criticism.
My opinion Langland is more in favor of the 2nd interpretation = he prefers Parliament so that matters can be discussed and they can reach a conclusion or common ground (rather than an absolute monarch who represses the population, etc.).