In the “Prologue” to The Canterbury Tales Chaucer presents the Pardoner as a misguided and corrupt character. He does this through the description of his appearance and actions.

In the story, Chaucer explains to us the pardoners appearance, as he does so, he mentions that his hair fell “like rat-tails” (699). Rats are associated with dishonesty and lack of morals, and the fact that this characters hair is like a rat’s tail shows he may corrupt in his actions. While still explaining the pardoners physical appearance, Chaucer mentions to us that “he had bulging eyeballs, like a hare” (704). His bulging eyes are intimidating, he could easily get what he wants through intimidation. He may use this in corrupt ways. Also when explaining the appearance, he says of the pardoners chin, “his chin no beard had harbored, nor would harbor” (709). Since his chin has no beard, and from previous explanations, we are lead to believe the pardoner is effeminate. He may be misguided in his life because of this.

In the story, the pardoner is presented as a misguided character, Chaucer supports this thought when he tells us the pardoner “sang loudly ’come hither, love, come home!’ the summoner sand deep seconds to this song” (692/693). Letting us know he may be confused about his sexuality. Chaucer then goes on as saying “I judge he was a gelding or a mare” (711). A gelding is defined as a horse that had been neutered, and a mare is a female horse. And to compare him to that suggests that this character may be homosexual. And with all these hints of homosexuality, Chaucer tells us that, in church, the pardoner “was a noble ecclesiast” (728). In the time period in which this was written, homosexuality is frowned upon greatly. So to say a church official was so openly homosexual, is like a slap in the face to the church. This also lets us know he doesn’t follow church law too well, leading us to believe he is misguided in his job as well.

In the story, the pardoner also comes off as a corrupt character. Chaucer, when explaining how the pardoner used dirty tactics to earn money. He tells us that “with these relics, any time he found some poor up-country parson to astound” (721-722). The pardoner would take “relics” and sell them to poor, dumb parsons. This is how he made money, when he himself was running low on cash. Chaucer later tells us that the pardoner “made monkeys of the priest and the congregation” (726). Saying he would stay longer and trick them even more, taking more money from them. Near the end, Chaucer tells us that the pardoner would “have to preach and tune his honey-tongue and (well he could) win silver from the crowd” (753/754). Showing that his corruption knew no bounds. He would take money from anyone, and over-stayed his welcome, taking all he possibly could with his lies and exaggerations.