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?
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.
ReplyDeleteThe Wife of Bath’s Tale does show many possible links to feministic view points and it is understandable how critics perceived Chaucer to be a feminist. I think, however that most likely Chaucer wasn’t; this is because of the conclusion of the story. Feministic views are however, reasonably identifiable throughout the tale (Leicester & Marshall, 1984). The reason I struggle to see this tale as a feminist text is because of the general treatment of women during this time, men had almost definitive dominance over women. It could certainly be argued that it was because of these facts that satire was employed to mock the farcical nature of this, I think the fact the knight, a rapist gets a relatively happy ending cancels out any previously argument factors of feminist story telling.
While I believe this to be the case, the fact many critics do strongly indicate a belief in Chaucer being a feminist does come from very logical grounding within the themes of the tale. Chaucer’s story flips the power dynamic away from men, giving the absolute power to female characters throughout (Carter, 2003). Power in which the queen may decide the fate of the knight but also that all women gain power in this story because only a woman can answer his question and save his life.
Not only are woman in such absolute power; a strong point for the positive to Chaucer being a feminist, but also the strength of female intelligence is portrayed here by the character of the hag. In this time-period, a woman was most often only considered important if she was classically attractive and a virgin waiting to bear children. The hag is described to be a vile looking older woman which in this setting would mean she was worthless, yet it is in her intelligence that she can save the knights life. It too here could be argued that Chaucer was promoting the strength of intellect that women hold and that they are more than just an addition to a male dominated culture. Most predominately however is the climax of the story, stating that all women want sovereignty over their husbands. A clear and defined statement of defiance to the social norm of the time (Pitcher, 2012).
While all these aspects do make for a compelling argument, I cannot go past the reality that lays within the end of this tale. A rapist gets a happy ending. It did come after seceding power to his wife, yes, but I feel even so a true feminist writer would have seen a different ending take place. Chaucer may have not been a feminist, however The Wife of Bath’s Tale did raise many interesting points surrounding gender roles of the time.
References
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the Beastly Bride and the Hunter Hunted:. The Chaucer Review, 329-345.
Leicester, J., & Marshall, H. (1984). Of a fire in the dark: Public and private feminism in the Wife of Bath's Tale. Women's Studies, 22.
Pitcher, J. A. (2012). Chaucer's feminine subjects : figures of desire in The Canterbury tales. New York : Palgrave Macmillan.
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.
ReplyDeleteIn this tale, Alison seems to be a very strong female character. She often seems to be in power and to be deciding the fate of others, and she does not allow herself to be at the mercy of men, instead she does whatever she can to ensure that she is the one in power throughout the tale. For example, women were offered the chance to choose whether they want the Knights to be beheaded, this offers the women quite a large amount of power over someone else’s life (a man’s life) which was far from realistic at this time in history. Another example of The Wife of Bath; Alison being portrayed as a feminist is though she was beaten by a husband at one stage of the story, she hits him back too. Although domestic violence of any kind is never acceptable, the fact the Alison hit back showed that she was not afraid of her husband or to stand up for herself. Also, she is incredibly open about her sexuality, and is not ashamed of her wants/needs.
Although this tale does have a strong female lead who seems to demonstrate feminist qualities, there are certain parts of the tale that can be portrayed as almost antifeminist and almost seem to go against the feminist aspects of the story. For example, Alison often uses her sexuality as her way to get what she wants from men, which in this case is money. She does not seem entirely bothered by becoming equal with men among society, instead she focuses on using her sexuality for her own reasons- to get what she wants "Women desire to have sovereignty
As well over her husband as her love,
And to be in mastery above him.
This is your greatest desire, though you kill me.”
Another aspect of the tale that seems to lack any quality feminist aspects is the way the story ends. The Knight is not punished for his actions, for raping the young maidend, instead he is gifted a young and beautiful wife, and this woman becomes all and obedient to her husband. Further noting the lack of feminism throughout the story.
There has been much debate from critics about whether The Wife of Bath’s Tale indicates that Chaucer was a feminist. Personally, I can see this going both ways. This poem has many aspects of it that seem to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist, with having a strong female lead, who is confident, not ashamed of her sexuality and at times powerful when it comes to deciding the fate of the Knight. On the other hand, there are parts of the poem that demonstrate otherwise, with the female character believing that all she has that will offer any power over her husband is her sexuality, and then using it against him. This can come across as quite demeaning to women, stating that that is all they have to offer. In this day in age, it is unlikely that this story would be understood as a feminist poem and people would doubt any possibility that Chaucer was a feminist. I believe, however that this is a feminist poem of the time. As it goes against the ways of the time, and may be interpreted as a feminist poem by those who were not used to having a female, lead who is not entirely submissive to her husband, and who is put in a position of power over a male. However in today’s society, I do not believe that Chaucer would not have been interpreted as a feminist.
http://www.writersalon.com/literary_criticism/the-complex-feminist-ideal-in-the-wife-of-baths-prologue
https://prezi.com/d5fl01wyatlf/the-wife-of-baths-tale-feminism-and-antifeminism/
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"...
ReplyDeleteThe Loathly Lady, is a common character throughout the reader these past few weeks, particularly in The Wedding of Sir Gawain, King Henry and The Wife of Bath’s Tale. The Loathly lady, is a character that represents women’s sovereignty, just as the Knight represents male sovereignty. It was typical that in the time that these tales were created, females were expected to be a person whose sole job was to take care of her house, husband, and children. She was supposed to be beautiful and close to perfect. Enter the Loathly Lady, and there is a completely different female character from what is typical of the time. A similar version of the Loathly Lady can be seen amongst the three tales at hand, all slightly different but drawing from the same theme.
The Wedding of Sir Gawain describes the Loathly Lady “There he met with a lady. She was the ugliest creature That a man ever saw… To recite the foulness of that lady There is no tongue fit. She had ugliness to spare.” In The Wife of Bath’s tale she is described as “Thou art so loathsome, and old also…” In King Henry, the Loathly Lady is said to be “…A fiend that comes from hell.” It is obvious from reading the stories, and even just these three quotes that the Loathly Lady was not the typical female character of the time, she lacked beauty, a husband and was far from perfect. However, the supposed ‘happy ending’ of the tales, is when the women get turned into beauties in both the Wife of Bath’s tale and King Henry, once she has slept with the male symbol of sovereignty, the Knight/King. The King and the Knight manage to see past her outward imperfections and give the Loathly Lady a chance, for this action the King and the Knight are rewarded with a beautiful woman.
Although these tales have quite a different female character from many other stories of the time and showing the importance of inner beauty, the result is the same. In the fact that the male character still ends up with a young beautiful female, as their ‘reward’. This seems to say that an unattractive female, whilst makes a good plotline cannot be worthy of such a males love, further than him overcoming a personal obstacle.
https://prezi.com/7cewjafusk11/sir-gawain-and-the-loathly-lady/
http://www.shmoop.com/the-wife-of-baths-tale/the-loathly-lady-the-hag.html
http://www.shmoop.com/the-wife-of-baths-tale/queen-loathly-lady-symbol.html
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.
ReplyDeleteWhile much of what Chaucer has to say does suggest he may be a feminist, the conclusion of the story with a happy ending for the knight leads me to believe that he is not a feminist. Not only the happy ending for the knight, but also the fact that his wife had to be beautiful in order for him to be happy very much goes against feminist beliefs. Creating a strong female character, while rare, does not make one a feminist. Many times stories are written to tell fantastic tales about things that can’t happen and what’s more exciting than a strong female character in a time when men had sole dominance over women? I believe Chaucer’s goal was to create something new and exciting while also commentating on gender roles. That being said however, many of Bath’s character traits hold true to the values of feminism. For example, wanting sovereignty over men or not being ashamed of her own sexuality and furthermore uses it to get what she wants. I think a better question would be, was Chaucer a feminist for his time? Obviously feminism wasn’t a word at the time, but I think there are clear examples throughout the text pointing to his possible sympathizing with feminist ideals especially for that time. In a time where men very much ruled over women, writing a female character that has power of men is a clear indicator of this. One might even see it as defiance against the patriarchy. Also, the fact that the story did end happily for the rapist knight could be seen as commentary on how unjust society is towards women. Today however, I don’t think Chaucer would be considered a feminist at all because of the conclusion to the story. While feminism might not have been a word at the time and Chaucer may not have had any intention of portraying feminist ideals, I do believe he at least recognized and sympathized with the injustices toward women. Towards the end of the story, Chaucer writes “And also I pray Jesus shorten their lives That will not be governed by their wives” which also leads me to think that he may have been a feminist of his time. To commentate that men should live shorter lives because of lack of being ‘governed’ by their wives shows a step forward toward more mutual relationships between genders. While it’s nearly impossible to say if Chaucer was a feminist or not, there are defiantly compelling arguments to be had on either side of the question.
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"....
ReplyDeleteThe Loathly Lady fabula was a fabula commonly used in the middle ages. It is believed that the Loathly Lady fabula is of Celtic origin. A Loathly Lady fabula usually consists of a test that a king must face in order to earn the sovereignty of the land. The goddess sovereignty is first described as a hag who is ugly and not desirable who wishes to marry or sleep with the king. Often at first the King is unwilling but if he obliges the woman turns into a beautiful and desirable woman. In the three texts ‘The Wife of Bath’s Tale’ written by Geoffrey Chaucer, ‘ The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle’ the Modern English Version and ‘King Henry’ written by Steeleye Span, all of the texts include the Loathly Lady Fabula however they all have different variations.
The Wife of Bath’s tale makes a lot of references to age in relation to the Loathly Lady Fabula rather than describing the woman as being ‘ugly.’ This can be seen in the following quotes, “For though I am ugly, and old, and poor,” and “To have me ugly and old and ugly until I die, and be to you true, humble wife” (Chaucer, 1390). Although this tale focuses more on age similar to the other tales all focus on the woman being ugly, “There can be no man imagine an uglier creature,” (Chaucer, 1390) her undesirability can also be understood by the way the knight acts, “He wallows and turns to and fro,” (Chaucer, 1390) the knight is so put off by the woman that he tosses and turns in bed. Following the Loathly Lady Fabula the woman transforms into a “beautiful, and so young” (Chaucer, 1390) woman and “For joy he clasped her in his two arms. His heart bathed in a bath of bliss. A thousand times in a row he did her kiss” (Chaucer, 1390) the treatment of the woman has changed dramatically now that she is now beautiful and desirable.
2 Continued -
ReplyDeleteThe descriptions of the woman following the Loathly Lady Fabula in ‘The wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle’ also describes the woman as being ugly on the outside however because she is willing to help the King in exchange for marriage of a Knight this shows her inner beauty however this was not considered in the middle ages. Ragnelle is described as “the ugliest creature. That a man ever saw” (Hahn, 1995). In this tale a long description is given to the reader about the ugliness of Ragnelle, “Her face was red, her nose running. Her mouth wide, her teeth all yellow. Her eyes were bleary, as large as balls, her mouth just as large” (Hahn, 1995). Ragnelle knows that she is not attractive to men and she knows that she is ‘ugly’, she says “Though I am foul, I am lusty” (Hahn, 1995) this quote adds a sense of romance to the tale and highlights what she wants which is love and lust. “I am no villain” (Hahn, 1995) is the quote that highlights the inner beauty of Ragnelle because she doesn’t want to harm the King, instead she wants to help him in return for something so simple. The King is conflicted by the help of Ragnelle and as he promised that in return for her help she could marry Sir Gaiwain. When the King goes to Sir Gawain he responds with great loyalty and without hesitation, “I shall wed her and wed her again,” “You are my honoured King and have done me good many times. Therefore I hesitate not” (Hahn, 1995).
The last text or tale takes a rather different turn and the focus is not so much on the woman but instead the King gives in to the every need of the woman, even though she is a “a fiend that comes from hell” (Steeleye, 1972). The woman is described as “He teeth were like the tether stakes, her nose like club or mell,” (Steeleye,1972) the woman is also described as being undesirable by the way that she eats, “For she’s eaten up both skin and bone. Left nothing but hide and hair” (Steeleye,1972). Obviously, this is not how a woman should act or is expected to act. The women is very needy and demands “some meat, some meat you, King Henry. Some meat you give to me,” “more meat, more meat” (Steeleye, 1972). The needy woman also demands that the King kill for her to eat also. King Henry is shocked when the women ask “to take me as your bride,” (Steeleye, 1972), he is hesitant at first to take the hideous women as his bride. But as per the Loathly Lady Fabula once King Henry meets the needs of the women, “ The fairest lady that ever was seen, Lay between him and the wall,” (Steeleye, 1972) in this tale the condition of the women and the King are quite different to the other two tales, the main focus is the emphasis of how needy the women is and how far the King will go to fulfil this need.
References.
Chaucer, G., (c.1390). The Wife of Baths Tale.
Hahn, T. (1995) The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
Steeleye, S. (1972) King Henry. In Below the Salt. US: Sanachie.