Home > The Canterbury Tales Summary & Study Guide > The Canterbury Tales Group > Discussion Board

I am reading "The Pardoner's Tale" and I am very confused on the moral of the whole thing and i cant seem to find a way to answer the question.....HELP!

The key to looking at each of these tales is to read the tale with the prologue and also examine the character who tells the tale, then relate them to each other in your analysis.

We know from the "General Prologue" that the Pardonner is your average corrupt individual, but was is particularly noticeable and shocking is his honesty about his own hypocrisy. He is very open in accusing himself of avarice, gluttony and fraud (the very sins he goes on to denounce), and seems to take a great enjoyment in accusing himself of such degradation.

Relating his character then to the tale, we see that his theme (as he himself states it) is that avarice is the root of all evil. The tale is an obvious example that shows the disastrous outcome of characters who put greed in front of everything else - death is the only possible result. The sins he lists at the beginning of the tale are all sins that he has displayed quite openly before in his character, again reinforcing his hypocrisy, even making his own oath straight after his condemnation of swearing! Typically in keeping with his character.

He ends his tale on cue by displaying his relics which just a moment ago he had denounced as being rubbish and asking the pilgrims to buy them from him. We must ask ourselves why he does this - he surely cannot expect his audience, having been told they are rubbish one moment, to believe in them the next? However, maybe the Pardonner is just that kind of figure that enjoys the challenge of trying to sell his goods even after he has been honest about their origins - he enjoys giving the "hard sell" and seeing people buy his products even after he has denounced them. The tale ends with the Host getting angry at the Pardonner for trying to trick the pilgrims.

The Pardoner is essentially a corrupt bearer of truth, and his tale demonstrates exactly this. He speaks truth with a moral pointing to money being the root of evil, then turns and tries to sell worthless pardons. He creates a situation in which we can ask: Does the speaker invalidate truth or is it still true even when spoken by someone who is false.