Weeks 4 - 6
Please use the comments section below for your answers.
1. Cite some variations in the Loathly Lady fabula across the three tales in your Reader. Focus on the conditions by which the lady is either beautiful or ugly, and the actions of the knight/king/"hero"...
2. The Wife of Bath's Tale is considered by some critics to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist. Why might they believe this? Do you agree? Remember to cite evidence from the text or some other source.
3.Hahn's essay (see critical reader)on The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelleidentifies the motif of the loathly lady, but arguesit has a different purpose than asserting the feminine. What does he think the function of the story is?
4. In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
5. Discuss what you think is the most striking or outrageous example.
6. What does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
Q2. The Wife of Bath's Tale is considered by some critics to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist. Why might they believe this? Do you agree? Remember to cite evidence from the text or some other source.
ReplyDeleteThe Wife of Bath's Tale follows a knight from Arthur's court and his punishment for the crime of rape. Susan Carter (2003) explains that the poem explores the "destabilisation of gender roles… [and] the construction of ideas about sexuality". This can be seen in the way the narrative moves forward through the power of female figures within the poem. Feminine dominance is clearly a theme throughout, such as when Guinevere is given authority, by King Arthur, over the knight's sentence. The poem explores how women wish to have sovereignty over their husbands and lovers, and only when the knight surrenders to his haggish wife, does she turn into a beautiful maiden. This suggests that Chaucer may have been inspired by the myth of the “Irish Sovranty Hag and Dame Ragnell” (Carter, 2003).
The poem is narrated in the voice of an old woman, which further suggests that the story portrays a message of feminism. Jill Mann argues that Chaucer is supportive of women because of the portrayal of the male and female figures in his writing. In her book she describes Chaucer’s work to: "[contain] not a single example of the story-type that embodies its ideals in the central figure of a male hero. Instead, the tales that mediate serious ideals are focused on a series of women” (Mann, 2002). She goes further by explaining that although The Wife of Bath’s tale condemns the rape of a woman by a knight, a figure that is usually depicted as a hero, the tale makes clear that, in the end, the knight must surrender himself to the authority of a woman. Carter agrees with Jill Mann, commenting that she “pinpoints exactly what is so powerful in the Wife of Bath’s Tale when she notes that “[t]he ‘anti-feminist’ elements . . . constitute the force behind the tale’s challenge to male domination” (Carter, 2003). Carter continues to explain that The Wife of Bath has a subjective voice and a “sharply critical view of the reality of knights and maidens”, causing her to “oppress and reeducate” the knight. She does this by explaining nobility to the knight, which he accuses her of having none of. The old woman replies by quoting a poet who wrote that nobility comes not from your ancestors, but from your “noble” actions. She says that if nobility was inherited, then everyone would be noble and no one “could do no dishonour or vice” (Benson, 2008), referring to crime, specifically rape; a crime that the knight had committed:
"Eek every wight woot this as wel as I,
If gentillesse were planted natureelly
Unto a certeyn lynage doun the lyne,
Pryvee and apert thanne wolde they nevere fyne
To doon of gentillesse the faire office;
They myghte do no vileynye or vice.” (Chaucer, n.d.)
(continued)
Elaine Tuttle Hansen criticises Chaucer on The Wife of Bath’s Tale with the belief that Chaucer was in fact an antifeminist. She sees the Wife as a reward for the rapist knight who instead of suffers an appropriate punishment, escapes judgement because she gives him the answer to the queen’s question. Hansen calls this character “a feminine monstrosity who is the product of the masculine imagination against which she ineffectively and only superficially rebels”(Hansen, 1992). Hansen also believes that Chaucer failed to understand and portray women. In a book of criticisms of Chaucer, Hansen “elaborates on her view that the Wife of bath is the product of a male writer who reproduces and reinforces male attitudes” (Beidler, 1998). She indicates that because it is impossible for the Wife to be represented, she therefore does not exist. “The mandated silence of women and the concomitant impossibility of representing a real female speaker threatens both the author’s control and the audience’s ability to understand the character and the poem” (Hansen, 1992). In short, Chaucer seems to create characters in his writing that can be interpreted by some as feminist speakers, but at the end of the day, were created by a male poet in a time of antifeminism where women’s voices were suppressed. There is an irony because the attributes of these women were unattainable as they simply did not exist and are merely illustrations from Chaucer.
ReplyDeleteSome may argue that Chaucer was a feminist, creating characters in his stories that lifted gender constriction. The 14th century was a dynamic time of social change where traditional roles had started to shift. Trade had expanded and as a result, merchants became wealthy and in conjunction the wives of merchants were also wealthy. Women could be heads of households and even run businesses. Some gained political influence and I believe Chaucer was not just making fun of the new gender roles, but also commenting on the way women’s roles were changing in society. Women from wealthier classes who did not marry were usually expected to go to a nunnery. Some of these nunneries were powerful because they could own and control land. The Wife of Bath had five husbands, which means she probably inherited a lot of wealth. The theme of female dominance in The Wife of Bath’s Tale then becomes understandable, assuming that the Wife was a satirical depiction of the rich and powerful women of Chaucer’s time. Less than 200 years after Chaucer, Elizabeth the 1st was crowned queen and became the most powerful person in England, which wasn’t a surprise since trends were already moving in that direction. Was Chaucer a feminist? Maybe not, but that doesn’t mean that the ideas behind feminism were unfamiliar in the 14th century.
References
Beidler, P. (1998). The Wife of Bath (Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism) (1st ed.). Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press.
Benson, L. (2008). Chaucer: The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale -- An Interlinear Translation. Sites.fas.harvard.edu. Retrieved from http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/wbt-par.htm
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the Beastly Bride and the Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Tale. The Chaucer Review, 37(4), 329-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/cr.2003.0010
Chaucer, G. The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale (1st ed.).
Hansen, E. (1992). Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender (1st ed.). Berkeley u.a.: Univ. of California Press.
Mann, J. (2002). Feminizing Chaucer (1st ed., p. 3). Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: D.S. Brewer.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi Emily,
DeleteThis is a really good analysis of why the text could be considered feminist or not. I personally believe that Chaucer and his texts were not feminist, but I think you have used very good sources for both sides of your argument and I can see the merits of both sides of this argument.
I would have liked to read more of your own personal opinion on why you agreed or disagreed with the idea that Chaucer was a feminist, as you mostly just cite opinions from other people.
Hi Stephanie,
DeleteI also agree with you that Chaucer himself was not a feminist. I give my opinion in my last paragraph. During Chaucer's time, gender roles were changing and I believe Chaucer's writing to be an attempt to voice his opinion about the rise of wealthy and powerful women in a comical way. In the middle ages, women, once they were widowed, had legal independence, and power over their finances. Most women married while in their teens and were responsible for household management. Women who weren't married usually became nuns. Some women could became abbesses of convents, and could sometimes have seniority over monks, like in monasteries that accommodated men and women. My point is there is no way to really find out whether Chaucer was a feminist or not, and to the arguments that say feminism did not exist during the middle ages, I disagree with because of the way social roles for women were changing (The plague was also a great influence for the change of social roles). I don't believe he was a feminist, but he was voicing his opinion about a feminist issue.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI do agree with Chaucer was not a feminist. Woman with independent means in Wife of Bath was rarely existed at the time. Women mostly resigned to nunnery or housework. Like you said, "Women from wealthier classes who did not marry were usually expected to go to a nunnery."
DeleteWhat I don't completely agree is when you said "Chaucer was not just making fun of the new gender roles, but also commenting on the way women’s roles were changing in society". I don't see how Chaucer commenting on the change of women's roles. I think The Wife Of Bath in a way portrays the negative perspective of women but not dismantling them. The humour which is making fun of the gender roles,in a way aligned with the modern concept of irony of anti-feminism. From the insatiable sex witch and also the moral of Chaucer's tale is that what women want most is control.
References:
Elodie. (2016). Is the Wife of Bath Feminist? Retrieved from http://community.sparknotes.com/2016/12/01/is-the-wife-of-bath-feminist
Question 3.
ReplyDeleteSusan Carter (2003) believes that in The wife of Bath’s tale Chaucer challenges the idea of sexuality and gender roles. However, Thomas Hahn (1995) has a very different opinion of The wedding of sir Gawain and dame Ragnelle. Hahn’s believes these tales express chivalry and honour. Hahn’s notes the timeline of the different tales and where they originated, all including the same motif, the loathly lady. These poems have similar plot lines where the hero or anti-hero requires something from the loathly lady, however, she expects something in return, usually of the sensual nature. Hahn’s agrees that Ragnelle plays an important role in these poems. Although, instead of being the heroine expressing feministic strengths, Hahn’s believes Ragnelle is the nexus that holds all the male characters together.
Hahn’s explores the different telling’s of the loathly lady. From the British telling to the old Irish versions, mentioning the more recent rendition of the story such as Frog Prince and Sleeping Beauty. Throughout these different cultures and origins, set mainly in the Arthurian time, the loathly lady has different narrative structure however always the same motif. This motif being of a shapeshifting disgusting, hag, “with foot-long nose, donkey ears, neck sores, a gaping mouth, and blackened teeth” (p.98), who in return for helping the male character demands something in return, always the demand is granted. The male character is then faced with a decision which he leaves in her hands, this being the ‘right’ choice, it breaks the spell turning Ragnelle into a beautiful woman.
Ragnelle is both hag and beauty, attractive and repulsive, an enigmatic threat and fulfilled woman, fatal danger and life giving (Hahn, 1995, p.98), however, throughout the poem Ragnelle continues to display femininity. These are complicated opposites that Hahn believes are popular in western romances, suggesting this is a type of romance poem (p.98). Aiding in this belief is a question that is present throughout, “What do women desire most?” (p.99), answering this enigma of women in a masculine form. While solving the question the heroes are set on a path to which chivalry, honour and purpose is prominent. Hahn believes this is done to make the male dominant society look good, this is aided by the cheerful tone to the poem. Ragnelle serves the interest of the male characters by helping to highlight the good deeds by showing off their qualities, decisions and chivalric behaviour.
Hahns (1995) believes that Ragnelle not only presents opportunities for the male characters, she is also the nexus that binds the characters together (p.99). Whereas, Carter believes, the “loathly lady incorporates feminist principles of control” (2003, p.91). Hahn’s explains and connects the relationships between the characters and how Ragnelle unifies them, making Ragnelle the nexus. Sir Gawain saves Arthur at Ragnelle bidding, presenting his spectacular chivalric and curtesy towards Arthur, then towards women. By taming the strange Ragnelle, safety is brought back to the court and round table (1995, p.99). Ragnelle makes it possible for the knights to display their fraternal and hierarchic bonds of chivalric solidarity. In the end restoring everyone to their rightful positions in society.
In conclusion, Hahn’s investigates that these poems romantic nature is to show off the knight’s code, honour, chivalry and protection, not to display that women are in control. Hahn believes women and men are both important but that there was a hierarchy at the time in which there was a male dominated society.
REFERENCING:
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the beastly bride and the hunter hunted: What lies behind chaucer’s wife of bath’s tale. The Chaucer Review. 37(4), 329-345. United States, Penn State: Pennsylvania State University.
Hahn, T. (1995) The wedding of sir Gwain and dame Ragnelle. In sir and Gwain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
Q: The Wife of Bath's Tale is considered by some critics to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist. Why might they believe this? Do you agree? Remember to cite evidence from the text or some other source.
ReplyDeleteA: The Wife of Bath’s Tale is a text that provides insight into the roles of women in the late Middle Ages. It is presented to a modern day reader as an early tale of feminism showcasing acts of female dominance and power within a repressive, patriarchal society. In the eyes of some critics this text could be seen as a feminist text. But while some aspects of the text could be considered feminist, the text still shows evidence of Chaucer being antifeminist.
An argument towards the text being feminist in nature could be placement of women in the text into a position of authority over the knight who raped a young woman. As Chaucer (c. 1390) describes "And yaf hym to the queene, al at hir wille, To chese wheither she wolde hym save or spille”. This act of King Arthur passing authority over the fate of the knight to his wife and the women of the court could be considered feminist as it allows the women of the court to place judgement of the fate of the male character over the acts he committed towards another woman.
While this could be considered feminist in nature, a big problem with the scene that points towards antifeminism is the disappearance of the young woman who was raped. The woman is mentioned briefly during the act but never again is mentioned or makes an appearance. This is poor treatment of a female character who is the victim of a terrible crime, who is simply forgotten and is never given any sort of apology for the knights actions. In fact during this scene the knight is almost treated like the victim of the womens authority as he is forced to carry out the task given to him by Queen Guinevere as described by Chaucer (c. 1390) "Wo was this knyght, and sorwefully he siketh; But what! He may nat do al as hym liveth”. Even though his life is spared by the women who could have easily had him beheaded for raping the woman, the act is treated like a tremendous disadvantage and task for the knight.
(continued below)
Another argument towards the text being feminist could be that the knight ends up being forced to marry the old woman and submitting to her authority as a form of punishment for his crimes. The old woman helps him complete the task given to him by Queen Guinevere and in return he owes her a favour as told by Chaucer (c. 1390) "The nexte thyng that I requere thee, thou shalt it do, if it lye in thy myght, and I wol telle it yow er it be night.” to which he agrees. This could be seen a feminist because the knight is being punished in a way that is like a taste of his own medicine, him being forced into a situation that he does not want.
ReplyDeleteBut in my opinion this is the most antifeminist aspect of the story. While the knight is forced to submit to the authority of women and respect this authority he in no way atones for the crime he committed against the young women he raped and the young women gets no justice from the knights trial, she is never mentioned again and we do not know if she ever got any sort of apology for the knights actions. The knight is allowed to escape punishment and is also rewarded for his actions in the end. While he finally submits to the old woman and allows her to make the desicision as he states "My lady and my love, and wyf so deere, I put me in youre wise governance; cheseth youreself which may be moost pleasance” (Chaucer, c. 1390) instead of him coming to the realisation that he has to live with his actions and try to better himself, the old woman rewards him and turns into and beautiful young woman who is loyal to him and they live happily ever after as we see here, "And thus they lyve unto hir lyves ende in parfit joye” and he serves no real punishment for his actions.
While I think this could be considered a feminist text of the late middle ages in terms of what might have been viewed as feminist at the time, I do not think it can still be considered a feminist text in present time. As Carosone (n.d.) states “he was a writer who wrote in a time when women were oppressed, abused, and subservient to men”, so back in the middle ages this view on female authority and the treatment of victims and offenders of crimes such as rape may have been considered and viewed differently, so in turn this text could have been viewed as a text of feminism in the middle ages. But as our views on such ideas have changed I do not think that a text that ultimately frees and rewards a man for the crime of raping a women and treats the victim as a device to forward the plot should not be considered a feminist text in our society today.
REFERENCES:
Carosone, M. (n.d). Geoffrey Chaucer: Feminist or not? Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/657084/Geoffrey_Chaucer_Feminist_Or_Not
Chaucer, G. (c.1390). The Wife of Bath.
Hi Stephanie,
DeleteFirst off, great work on identifying the feministic/anti-feministic aspects of the Wife of Bath. I agree with your view on Chaucer being anti-feminist as I also found it odd that the raped maiden, the instigator of all events that followed, was absent from the text. I also feel the Queen took advantage of the young woman's sexual assault to assert dominance over the Knight in an act of "justice". This also further portrays Chaucer's anti-feministic traits. Though, both sides of the argument on Chaucer are very interesting.
I do see why you'd think the knight is rewarded, as the hag turns into a beautiful woman and he does not have to answer for his crime, but is he really rewarded when he has completely given himself over to the hag? He has subjected his right as a man (who in that time dominated) to the hag, his choice, his "liberation" and though he was not punished physically I feel he was punished/manipulated mentally. The hag gave him a "choice" in either having her as ugly but faithful or beautiful but uncontrolled, but I see that "choice" as no choice at all. More so as a test of her having complete mastery over him. Also the year and one day he was seeking the answer to the question "what women most desire" seemed to me as another form of manipulation for the knight to subject himself to women. He is to seek the answer to what women want most when he himself forcefully took from a woman. Do I think he got off easy, yes, but I do think he was punished mentally.
Like I said, I see merit in both sides of the argument.
Good work.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI just found some grammar mistakes, so I deleted again..
DeleteThis should be the last version.
Question 4.
As cited in The Norton Anthology of English Literature by Abrams (1993), “ the ‘conceits’ of poetics as metaphors that are intricately woven into the verse, often used to express satire, puns, or deeper meanings within the poem, and to display the poet’s own cunning with words” (p 113). So the use of conceit can be a formula of language that changes the meanings of poems. The most arresting example could be Edmund Spenser’s “Ice and Fire” (1522-1599). As Edmund Spenser wrote in the poem, “my love is like to ice, and I to fire”. The conceit that Spenser used here is to compare the opposing relationship between ice and fire. Spenser used ice as a metaphor of refuse to desire and fire as a metaphor of desire for love. When we simply look at it, fire usually seems as a symbol of desire or love because of fire relates to the heat and colour of red. On the contract, ice usually seems as a symbol of no desire of something and it is to describe a person who is cold and hard to talk to. As we know that fire can melt ice in any situation. The conceit in this text was perfectly used to describe that Spenser cannot dissolve this girl’s ice heart. According to (Spenser, 1522-159), “harder grows the more I her entreat”. In the fact that this girl’s ice did not cool his fire but her ice made his fire stronger.
Nevertheless, the use of conceits can be simply considered as a deeper metaphor of the language. It is quite common to see that conceit is the most effective way to achieve the high level of different meanings behind the texts. But also metaphors in poems can be failed to understand for some readers. In Shakespeare’s Sonnet CXXX (1564-1616), the description of his love was simple, he even used opposite words to describe the beauty. Such as “My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun”, “coral is far redder than her lip’s red” and “If snow is white, why then her breasts are dun”. The woman was not beautiful in the texts. Traditionally, when come to describe someone that you loved, we mostly describe them as the beauty of angel or any great compliments. In Shakespeare’s poems, we see her as a normal woman with dark skin. But Shakespeare expressed his love to this woman in the last two lines “And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare. As any, she belied with false compare.” In this poem, Shakespeare overturns the traditional description of beauty, the use of conceit here is honest, real and with no affectation. We do uses conceits in the contrast of the subject to describe something or someone in present. Like when we described someone as “love fool”. Love fool is more likely to be a commendatory term to describe someone sacrificed or loved more in a relationship and we may have sympathy for them.
In conclusion, the use of conceits is important and also powerful for poets to portray multiple meanings of something or someone in the poem. The conceits happen to give the underlying meanings to the readers of an object of comparison.
References:
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., p.1081.
Shakespeare (1564-1616), Sonnet CXXX
Edmund Spenser (1522-1599), ‘Ice And Fire’
Question 2: The ‘Wife of Bath’s Tale is considered by some critics to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist. Why might they believe this? Do you agree? Remember to cite evidence from the text or some other source.
ReplyDelete‘The Wife of Bath’ was written between 1387-1400 by Geoffrey Chaucer. In the 13th and 14th century, women had a very controlled lifestyle and despite their class or social status were expected to be submissive to their husband (Montino, 2004). This brings a sense of irony to the tale as is not only narrated by a woman but heavily involves female supremacy in a day and age where male dominated. Whether or not Chaucer is a feminist is still argued to this day.
The tale is narrated by The Wife who is described as “loathsome” and “so old” (line.1100), showing Chaucer’s involvement of the loathly lady. She gains the “pledged word” of a knight seeking the answer to a question given him or will face death for raping an innocent maiden. In turn for saving the Knight’s life he must marry the hag, as the answer given him by the loathly lady to “what thing women most desire” (line.905), was correct.
Susan Carter, one of many analysts of the tale, believes Chaucer to be a feminist. She perceives him to have personified the Wife as a representation of liberation from gender role restrictions (2003). Carter goes on to describe the Wife as authoritative and in command of the masculine. “That thou take me as thy wife, For well thou know that I have saved thy life (line.1055-1056). I would not for all the metal, nor for ore, That under earth is buried or lies above, Have anything except that I were thy wife, and also thy love” (line.1064-1066). Carter finds that alongside the Wife, the Queen and her court also bare feministic traits. “Very many a noble wife, and many a maid, and many a widow, because they are wise, the queen herself sitting as a justice are assembled” (line.1026-1029). The royal court represents the seat of patriarchal government, yet Chaucer has made it so women control the Arthurian court. “The Wife briskly usurps the male prerogative of justice, redistributes it to the women of the court, and puts the knights of the court in the shadows, the spot usually reserved for the ladies” (Carter, 2003). Where King Arthur would hold power, Queen Guinevere is given authority to act as the ultimate judge. This again, brings Chaucer’s gender role reversal into effect and also a feministic outlook as authority and power in the court is governed by women. Some find that Chaucer’s poem brings humour but awareness to the inequality of gender roles in that period of time where men reined power over women.
Though I find merit in Carter’s opinion, I can’t help but also feel a mockery of women throughout the poem. Chaucer describes women in a negative light as the Knight seeks the answer to “what thing women most desire.”
Continued...
ReplyDelete”Some said women love riches best, some said honor, some said gaiety, some rich clothing, some said lust in bed” (line.925-927, 931).
Each of these answers are materialistic and selfish desires women are stereotypically known for. The Tale shows value to women and their opinions yet denigrates them also. Though the old hag gains mastery over the Knight, she has to be transformed into a beautiful young woman to be seen as satisfactory. The raped maiden who could have spoken for wronged women is absent from the poem, negating her right for justice. Only the Queen is a valid example of a wise and powerful female as the head of court, yet she solicited her power from her husband. Furthermore, Chaucer displays women negatively when the Wife gains complete mastery over the Knight. “To have me ugly and old until I die, and to be you a true, humble wife, or else you will have me young and fair, and take your chances of the crowd,” (line.1220-1224) to which the Knight resigns his choice, his authority to the Wife. She secures female sovereignty, proving Chaucer’s assumption that all women desire sovereignty over men to be true. Though arguments on Chaucer to be feminist have its evidences, I find him to be a man in mockery of women in his day. Especially as he ends his poem with “Husbands meek, young, and vigorous in bed, and grace to outlive them whom we wed, and also pray Jesus shorten their lives, that will not be governed by their wives.” (line.1259-1262). He portrays women as manipulators and deceitful, confirming my view of Chaucer to be anti-feminist.
References:
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the Beastly Bride and the Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Tale. The Chaucer Review, 37(4), 329-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/cr.2003.0010
Chaucer, G. The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale (1st ed.).
Montino, D. (2004). Women, Display, Devotion- Florence 13th and 14th Century. 21 Feb. 2012.