Mirror:

Geoffrey Chaucer was a poet in the 14th century. He represents his own age and holds the
mirror to his time. His poetry reflects the 14th century not in fragments but as a whole. The
Prologue to The Canterbury Tales forms a wonderful commentary upon English life in
the Middle Ages. 
The group of pilgrims described in the Prologue is itself an unequaled picture of the society
of Chaucer’s time. Here are some thirty persons belonging to the most different classes. The
Knight is the picture of a professional soldier, coming straight from foreign wars with clothes
all stained from his armour. The variety of lords for whom he has fought suggest that he is
some kind of mercenary but it seems that Chaucer may have known people at
the English court with similar records. 
Medieval social theory divided the English king’s subjects into three estates-the Military, the
Clergy and Laity. Chaucer observes this division. The Knight, the Squire and the Yeoman
belong to the Military estate. As knights dominated English society since the Norman
conquest, Chaucer begins his catalogue with the Knight. 
The clerical estates present a much less worthy trio-the Prioress, the Monk and the Friar. Like
most Prioresses in the Middle Ages, she has the manners of the upper class. Her tenderness to
her dogs and the ambiguous motto on her rosary amuse the readers. 
The shortcomings of the 14thcentury monks and nuns are amusingly displayed in the General
Prologue. 
The Clerk and the Parson were members the secular clergy. Chaucer’s Clerk is devoted to the
pursuit of knowledge. Chaucer’s Parson is the ideal parish priest, free from the faults both of
the regular clergy and some parish priests. 
Chaucer also portrays two church officials-the Summoner and the Pardoner. He was aware of
the weaknesses of the church officials-their love of money, corruption and materialism. The
Pardoner is a despicable parasite trading in letters of pardons with the sinners. 
Among the poor pilgrims, the Ploughman is a good person. He is a virtuous man. He is a hard
worker who loves God and his neighbor, serves other and pay his tither. 
In the Doctor of Physic, we have a vivid picture of the medieval medicine man, with his
herbal remedies and his knowledge of astronomy as well as astrology. Chaucer indicates that
his medical studies had drawn him away from his study of the Bible:
              “His study was but litel on the Bible.” 
In order to give us a realistic picture of contemporary society. Chaucer also draws the
characters of miller, a Maunciple, sergeant-at-law, Franklin, Reeve, Shipman and cook. All of
them are distinguished from each other. Most of them are clearer and materialistic. 
Chaucer’s Sergeant-at-law was discreet and worthy of great reverence. He was an eminent
and efficient lawyer. Nobody could find any defect in his writing. 
Chaucer’s Franklin was one who kept open table and was the genius of eating and drinking
He was a substantial person in every way, He presided at sessions of justices of the peace. He
had been Member of Parliament and had functioned as a sheriff and a treasurer. 
The Wife of Bath represents the class of woman who, having an amorous nature, cared little
for chastity. She was fond of merry making and fun. The Prologue tells us a lot about 'the
food, the hobbies and the mode of the dress of the times. It also makes us acquainted with the
clothes worn by persons of different ranks, positions and professions. 
Though Chaucer holds the mirror to his times, his picture of society is incomplete in one
respect. Chaucer’s group of pilgrims constitutes a picture of the society of his times which
has no parallel in any country.

Effect of Social Development on Literature of 18th century:

Writers and readers of the eighteenth century were shaped by their daily experience of a
culture dominated by an almost unquestioned belief in social hierarchy. Our understanding of
this hierarchy, and its literary impact has nonetheless been hindered by theoretical obstacles
and historical simplifications. A now long line of scholars has argued that the conception of
“social class” is highly misleading when applied to a culture that conceived of itself through
gradations of “status” or “rank.” The rising economic power of the so-called middle class or
bourgeoisie, itself a deeply divided and complex grouping, did not translate into a grab for
power, or even a disrespect for traditional ideas of political authority. Traditional Marxist
analysis does not make much sense of a situation where the leaders of capitalism tended to
support the ancient regime though few aspired to any title above “Sir” or invested in great
landed estates. The sons of merchants tended to remain in the family line of business, though
their daughters more often married into the gentry.
Understanding the role of the literary artist in this complex and changing situation raises even
more formidable problems. As noted by Raymond Williams, the period after 1680 showed a
marked change in the social origins of authors, with more deriving from the middle ranks and
fewer from the aristocracy and upper-gentry (1961: 234). Swift, Gay, Haywood, Richardson,
Johnson, and Goldsmith came from very modest backgrounds while other writers such as
Pope, Fielding, and Burney claimed roughly genteel status without great wealth or an
automatic claim to recognition. Moreover, from the Restoration onwards, successful authors
tended to write for a distinctly plebeian group of City-based booksellers who regarded
literature as a trade and who sometimes became very rich from the “business of books”.
Especially following the Glorious Revolution in 1688, writers often subjected the traditional
elite to scathing satire, contrasting the decadence and greed of the present aristocracy with
traditional ideals of genteel honor and virtue. Nevertheless, writers equally denigrated the
avarice and vulgarity of the rising financial elite and seldom suggested that the commercial
ranks should take power. Literary representations of the old and new elite, inherited and
newly made wealth, are generally characterized by a controlled tension rather than
confrontation, generating a series of higher values of morality and national interest while
implicitly underwriting the legitimacy of the traditional social hierarchy. In this way,
literature played an arguably significant role in mediating the social and political tensions that
exploded into revolution in France.
What occurred in Britain was, notwithstanding, a “revolution” of a more gradual kind. Just as
political society in the 1790s was in fact profoundly different from that of the 1690s, literary
culture had undergone a significant transformation. Traditional genres such as tragedy, the
pastoral, and heroic poetry were being displaced by new forms such as the novel and hybrid
kinds of drama and verse. This evolution occurred because the older genres simply failed to
reflect the emerging realities of a fluid and multifaceted commercial society and a broader,
more socially mixed audience. These new forms were indeed defining, through a long
process, what would eventually be recognized as “middle-class” social and aesthetic values,
though this term was rarely used until the early nineteenth century. To understand this
evolving interrelationship between social change and literary form, we need to begin with the
confused and volatile situation that existed in the aftermath of the restoration of the monarchy
in 1660.

Satire was largely used in both prose and poetry in 18th century English literature:
To call the 18th century the Age of Reason is to seize on a useful half-truth but to cause
confusion in the general picture, because the primacy of reason had also been a mark of
certain periods of the previous age. It is more accurate to say that the 18th century was
marked by two main impulses: reason and passion. The respect paid to reason was shown in
pursuit of order, symmetry, decorum, and scientific knowledge; the cultivation of the feelings
stimulated philanthropy, exaltation of personal relationships, religious fervour, and the cult of
sentiment, or sensibility. In literature the rational impulse fostered satire, argument, wit, plain
prose; the other inspired the psychological novel and the poetry of the sublime.
The cult of wit, satire, and argument is evident in England in the writings of Alexander Pope,
Jonathan Swift, and Samuel Johnson, continuing the tradition of Dryden from the 17th
century. The novel was established as a major art form in English literature partly by a
rational realism shown in the works of Henry Fielding, Daniel Defoe, and Tobias Smollett
and partly by the psychological probing of the novels of Samuel Richardson and of Laurence
Sterne’s Tristram Shandy. In France the major characteristic of the period lies in the
philosophical and political writings of the Enlightenment, which had a profound influence
throughout the rest of Europe and foreshadowed the French Revolution. Voltaire, Jean-
Jacques Rousseau, Charles de Montesquieu, and the Encyclopédistes Denis Diderot and Jean
d’Alembert all devoted much of their writing to controversies about social and religious
matters, often involving direct conflict with the authorities. In the first part of the century,
German literature looked to English and French models, although innovative advances were
made by the dramatist and critic Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. The great epoch of German
literature came at the end of the century, when cultivation of the feelings and of emotional
grandeur found its most powerful expression in what came to be called the Sturm und Drang
(“Storm and Stress”) movement. Associated with this were two of the greatest names of
German literature, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Friedrich Schiller, both of whom in
drama and poetry advanced far beyond the turbulence of Sturm und Drang.