his frankness was an attempt to gain their trust and pity. I am not suggesting that the Pardoner was knowingly going through a complete purgation of his sinful ways. Rather, whatever guilt feelings he had been harboring were simply working their way to the surface in this conducive atmosphere. Defining the Pardoner as completely evil is incomplete and incomprehensive. Looking at the character portrait in “The General Prologue” alone, however, would not give any indication that this is so. It is only after reading the character portrait, the character’s tale, and the prologue and epilogue to the tale that we get a substantive depth of psychology and personality concerning the Pardoner. In essence, the portrait gave an overall view that was somewhat superficial compared to the true character of the Pardoner. It touched on all the aspects of what he does and how he looks, but it gave no indication of his inner voice. The prologue to his tale showed the extent of his hypocrisy and introduced his curious frankness with the group, but standing alone shows us little. Likewise with the tale itself and the epilogue, only so much information can be gleaned from a single aspect of the character’s portrait. When the entire expansion is viewed at once and as one, a greater vision of depth and richness is attained. It is similar to the Canterbury Tales as a whole. When one can see the tales singularly, in context with one another, and within the context of a frame narrative, entirely new and appealing levels of meaning are revealed....
