A Comparison of "Michael"

“Michael,” for me, is very reminiscent of the type of poetry Chaucer was doing in his day. Both were focussed on elucidating different walks of life as well as being in conversation with their respective genres or structures within the literary tradition. They also operate in the same long-winded style of narrative poetry, which consciously constructs and follows character and narrative. Yet, the difference between the two poets seems to be that Wordsworth is pointing more toward universal beliefs and Chaucer concentrated on issues central to his society.

Wordsworth wants to point out the destructive nature of the urban compared to the simple life of the pastoral. The narrator states toward the end of the poem in regard to Luke, the son, “He in the dissolute city gave himself/ To evil courses: ignominy and shame/ Fell on him, so that he was driven at last/ To seek a hiding-place beyond the seas” (444-47). Not only has the city pulled the son from his family, it has caused the boy to abandon his homeland, irrevocably tearing the father from the son.

Comparing the separation present in “Michael” to that of Chaucer’s “The Man of Law’s Tale” (a comparison that may be a stretch due to the pieces’ striking differences) we can see the weight of environment in Wordsworth opposed to that of culture in Chaucer. Chaucer’s misfortunes come regardless of location, but are linked to the un-Christianness to the societies encountered (and general misogyny). Whereas Wordsworth seems to suggest society is constructed by location, the pastoral is more wholesome than the city because it is exactly not the city.