Going into my personal analysis of Chaucer’s The Miller’s Tale, I had preconceived notions of the purely evil values that are presented. To be specific, I took great notice of the lustful and deceitful love displayed. In my reflection, analysis, and conversation with critics regarding the tale, I stumbled upon some deeper themes within the fable that perhaps I ignored from the beginning. It took the arguments of Jordan (the scholar I engaged) to help me think more objectively. Through her analysis, I saw that there were true sparks of romantic love contained within the story, and it took my personal insight as a teenager to discover this.The views of the Miller’s Tale we discussed in class acted against my final revelations. The observations of crude, sinful love that were voiced hardened my subjective opinion when I went to write my paper. These opinions were far from being incorrect, however, they perhaps limited my ability to think outside the box in my analysis.

In completing my paper, I let my conscious flow and went back and fixed the errors after. As LTC Ticen helped me discover through brainstorming sessions, I had the right pieces in place after my rough draft, it was just a matter of rearranging and revising for me. I also took a lot from the scholar I engaged through playing the devil’s advocate. Jordan’s observations of the play helped me look at the the tale from the view of a third party. I believe that objectivity is an essential element of a true constructive conversation of a scholarly subject. The biggest challenge I came across was reminding myself to fortify my arguments with quotations from the text. I believe that by my final draft however, I sufficiently achieved this.