Weeks 4-6
Please use the comments section to answer questions. Do not try to answer all questions. Try to keep up an average of one per week, with time for a few comments on the ideas of others.
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.
ReplyDeleteSome critics believe that Chaucer may have been a feminist, in particular, Susan Cater, an author in ‘The Chaucer Review’. In the review Susan discusses and elaborates on different extracts taken from the Wife of Bath’s Tale text which show Chaucer leaning towards being a feminist. Experts, especially Susan, focus on the motif of ‘the loathly lady’ in The Wife of Bath’s Tale. The focus on this motif is central into understanding why these experts, and myself, believe that Chaucer was in fact a feminist. ‘The loathly lady’ is a woman who relies on men to get what she wants. While this sounds the total opposite to feminist beliefs, the way the ‘loathly lady’ composed herself throughout the tale is very much that of a feminist mentality. “The advocacy of woman’s rights on the ground of equality of the sexes” (Oxford Dictionary, n.d) Chaucer uses the Wife of Bath not to express his opinion but to express extreme ideas about gender roles and gender theories (Carter, 2003). The Wife of Bath’s behaviour was promiscuous and scandalous, but she was a certainly sure of herself. Being so sure of your sexuality and actions as a female is what tends to lead people into seeing feminist qualities in a person or character. The Wife of Bath’s tale would say and do what she wanted, regardless of a man’s status. “Then have I gotten mastery of you," she said” (1236). In this line The Wife of Bath is speaking to the knight in a manner which shows total control in who she believes she is, among what Chaucer is trying to portray her as. She was demanding and confident as well, two personality traits which can be seen in feminists. “Choose now,” she said, “One of these two things:” (1219). Giving the opposite sex a choice but not letting anyone stand over her.
I agree with the experts in thinking that Chaucer was indeed a feminist. In my views, a feminist is any person, in this case female, that sees men and woman on the same level. The Wife of Bath throughout the tale knew where she wanted to be in the world and how she wanted to be viewed by those around her. “Pledge me thy world here in my hand, she said” (1009). She states exactly what she wants to happen from the very start and lets the knight know that he may not walk all over her and she also shows that she is a woman of her word, just like a man of his word. Feminism is all about both genders being seen as equal. Chaucer used The Wife of Bath to show hints of feminist ideas throughout the tale, which to me, makes him a feminist.
References:
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling The Beastly Bride And The Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind in Chaucer’s Wife Of Bath’s Tale. In The Chaucer Review, Vol. 37, No. 4, 2003.
Oxford Dictionary. (n.d) Feminism. Retrieved April 14, 2014, from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/feminism
Some really good points here, I like how indepth you are. Just adding to your answer, I can see why critics would see Chaucer as a feminist, but I would suggest that this would be radical thinking in those times.
DeleteTaking the tale at face value there are definitely numerous elements that suggest the author were a feminist or at least believed in gender equality.
According to Carter (2003), Chaucer is arguably interested in destabilizing gender roles. The gender subversion is obvious as the women take the authorial role in the story.
-The Queen is given the task of judgement in the Royal Court.
“And gave him to the queen, all at her will/ (896)
to choose whether she would him save or put to death/” (897)
-The rape of a virgin maiden
Carter (2003) suggests, that a true hero would never conduct in such behaviour, this solidifies the notion of gender power imbalance being more important than the character of a good king/hero.
-The loathly lady is in position of power
"Then have I gotten mastery of you," she said, (1236)
"Since I may choose and govern as I please?"(1237)
"Yes, certainly, wife," he said, "I consider it best." (1238)
Carter (2003) argues the collapse of gender roles will ensure moral fulfilment, which may have been the purpose of Chaucer’s tale.
It is impossible to be absolutely clear as to Chaucer’s feminine ideals, whether intentional or not.
I personally don’t believe Chaucer to be a feminist. After listening to the lecture this morning is does seem plausible that rather than shed light on gender roles, he might have sought to actually poke fun at medieval tradition and the rather equal footing females held in Celtic culture. As they were more tolerable to gender balance, which may have been a foreign and perplexing idea from an English perspective at that time.
Reference
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling The Beastly Bride And The Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind in Chaucer’s Wife Of Bath’s Tale. In The Chaucer Review, 37(4).
Well stated, Monique. But do you know the counter-argument?
DeleteJust to play the Devil's advocate here, the power Queen G wields in this situation is granted to her by the king, so male power is still in control in the background. Then of course we have the male writer himself ultimately pulling the strings.
The opposite of Carter's Chaucer as proto-feminist theory is the idea that Chaucer was mocking women's aspirations even while appearing to give them voice.
Thanks Thyra, you have definitely done your research into both sides of the argument. I appreciate the lines from the tale which you have included as they were the exact lines which lead me to believing that Chaucer was a feminist. While you do not agree with my view point on the matter, I do respect your opinion and can definitely see where you are coming from. It does seem quite unlikely that Chaucer was a feminist during the time period but more so I think he is being viewed as one as the views on feminism are changing in these modern times.
DeleteThanks Mike,
DeleteI did look into the counter-argument, which I found helped to fuel my opinion in my post. I don't think Chaucer was a feminist in his time but in today's modern world could be viewed as a feminist due to the changes in what feminism means. Chaucer does unfortunately blur the lines between being a feminist and not in some respects though, but overall I felt a feminist vibe throughout the tale.
Hey Monique,
DeleteI appreciate your response, it's clear you've done your research and have formed a strong opinion as a result of that. I personally don't believe that Chaucer was a feminist, as Thyra suggested and I have also discussed, due to the arguments supporting Chaucer's sense of humour and the possibility that Chaucer meant for "The Wife of Baths Tale" to be a parody. Whilst Chaucer may have supported the destabilisation of gender roles, I have read too many articles that argue the patriarchal society Chaucer lived in to be too strong an influence over him voicing true opinions. "The Wife of Baths Tale" clearly has humorous undertones that support this idea that Chaucer used this piece to poke fun at feminists.
Q3. Hahn’s essay, The wedding of sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell identifies the motif of the loathly lady, but argues it has a different purpose than asserting the feminine. What does he think the function of the story is?
ReplyDeleteAccording to Hahn’s (1995), The wedding of sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell is essentially a romance tale, yet not necessarily what we would understand or class as romance today.
The character of Ragnelle, the motif of the loathly lady plays a pivotal part in the narrative. The beginning of the story is set in the woods, a place of mystery and recreation, there is immediately a sense of anticipation where anything can happen.’
Hahn (1995) suggests, she is the central point of connection in tying together the male characters. She is said to ‘literally hold the poem together’ as she is the link between the characters. She helps her brother by undoing the threat he poses and reunites him to the court; she solves King Arthur’s problem and ultimately his life, and aids Gawain in regards to his King, as well as his manner with women. She is the glue that brings everything and everyone together.
The link between fantasy and necessity is expected, even anticipated in romance. Through the use of the ‘marvelous’ or supernatural – meetings in the woods, transformations, fateful encounters – it ties everything together in a way that people feel satisfied.
Hahn (1995) concludes that the romance convention employed allow for a happy ending as ‘civility and courtesy prevail’. This is a usual trope within a romance genre; to end with all parties contented. ‘Ragnelle ends therefore with everyone established in her or his proper place, and with courtesy restoring…hierarchy.’
References
Hahm, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan. Medieval Institute Publications.
Once again you have grasped the issue, Thyra. There is, however a sort of jump in your argument from paragraph 3 to paragraph 4. How does the setting relate to the parts played by the characters? No connectivity here.
DeleteNice work Thyra! It was an interesting read. I do feel as if maybe this topic didn't interest you? There's a bit of information lacking and I felt a little confused towards the end about what I was reading about. Regardless of this, you have clearly read Hahn's essay thoroughly. I would love to know what you personally thought the function of the story was?
DeleteThanks for your comments! This question was definitely challenging and I think it's pretty obvious it came through in my answer. I think I was trying to reiterate the role of Ragnelle as fatefully the linking point between the characters. However, think I definitely need to take another look at the text :)
ReplyDeleteWell done Monique and Thyra fro this interchange of ideas.
ReplyDelete2) 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 site evidence from the text or some other sources.
ReplyDeleteThere has been significant speculation over Chaucer’s beliefs in regards to feminism, especially when considering The Wife of Bath’s Tale. Some believe Chaucer used the Wife to voice his feminist beliefs in a misogynistic society whilst others believe the Wife was a figure of parody used simply for poking fun at women.
Those who believe Chaucer was a feminist consider the Wife to be an embodiment of feminist power and belief. She is independent, considers herself the only authority to be answered to, and is not afraid to stand up to male power (Leicester, 1984). She breaks down traditional gender roles and unapologetically resists conforming to a misogynistic society (Carter, 2003). The wife also exercises her right to express her sexuality and acts on desire; traits attributed to men and frowned upon (even in todays society) when practiced by women (Greene & Faulkner, 2005). This blatant disregard of typically expected feminine behavior is why many critics consider the Wife a feminist. As feminism is defined by Oxford Dictionary as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of equality of the sexes”, many consider the Wife’s stance against submissiveness to men an expression of feminism.
Furthermore, women, in general, seem to command the majority of power in The Wife of Bath’s Tale. It is established that every woman’s one true desire is to have ‘sovereignty’ over her husband, partners etc., which suggests wanting liberation from traditional gender roles (Carter, 2003). Carter (2003) goes on to discuss how the Queen and the all female court decide the fate of the “lusty bachelor”, exercising control over a male in what is usually considered a masculine environment. What’s more, the Wife later proves her power over the knight as well, as he is indebted to her in return for her help. As he made the maiden a sexual victim, he is then made one himself, as he lies with the Wife in their wedding bed. Many critics, including Carter (2003) and Leicester (1984) consider this an act of feminism, therefore assuming Chaucer himself was a feminist.
I personally do not agree that Chaucer was a feminist. Further reading showed that some critics consider Chaucer’s portrayal of the Wife a parody used to poke fun at women. Hansen (1992) suggests that the Wife is a victim of antifeminism, so desperate to defy male stereotypes that she in fact falls further into a world of misogyny. It is also thought that women having power over men in The Wife of Bath’s Tale is supposed to seem so ridiculous and unlikely that nobody should take the Wife seriously. Furthermore, the Wife eventually gives in to the desires of the knight, after he was spared punishment for the rape, and transforms into a beautiful woman after all; is this really a display of strength and feminism? Rewarding the knight after all?
I agree with Hansen (1992) when she claims that Chaucer was not a feminist. I consider his portrayal of the Wife an expression of the extreme misogyny of his time period, and his reversal of gender roles a parody stressing the inequality women experienced. The power women had over men in The Wife of Bath’s Tale is not feminism; feminism is equality of the sexes, not one having power over the other, and therefore I do not believe that Chaucer was a feminist.
Well thought out. A quote or two from tale itself to illustrate your point would have strengthened your argument
DeleteReferences
ReplyDeleteCarter, S. (2003). Coupling the beastly bride and the hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s tale. The Chaucer Review, 34(3), 81-96.
Greene, K., & Faulkner, S. L. (2005). Gender, belief in the sexual double standard, and sexual talk in heterosexual dating relationships. Sex Roles, 53(3-4), 239-251
Hansen, E. T. (1992). Chaucer and the fictions of gender. University of California Press.
Leicester Jr, H. M. (1984). Of a fire in the dark: Public and private feminism in the Wife of Bath’s tale. Women’s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11(1-2), 157-178. DOI: 10.1080/00497878.1984.9978608
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteRevard (1997) addresses the somewhat discriminatory relationship between men and women mostly by discussion of Pindaric odes composed by Abraham Cowley and Katherine Phillips. In doing this, one can understand that men had an arguably narrow view of women and their artistic ability, seemingly reducing most female poets to their gender and only awarding conditional praise. Using sonnets from the likes of Shakespeare and Marvell, I can support the issues Revard (1997) addresses as to the perception of women during the English Renaissance.
The first issue Revard (1997) addresses is the discriminatory male attitude that reduces poets such as Katherine Phillips to being female poets rather than poets first and foremost. Abraham Cowley in particular was guilty of this, awarding Phillips conditional praise for her talent; that is, Phillips was a respectable poet….for a woman. Revard (1997) goes so far to say, “The issue of sex becomes so important a motif that the assessment of Philips as a poet takes second place. It was apparently impossible in this era to be gender blind.” (p. 20).
Physical appearance was a significant factor in this bias attitude, as many male poets stressed the importance of women’s beauty over intellect, as seen in many of Cowley’s odes to Phillips:
“We allow’d You Beauty, and we did submit
To all the Tyrannies of it;
Ah! Cruel Sex, will you depose us too in Wit?” (1:1-3).
This suggests the animosity men feel towards women’s’ strive to be something more than beautiful, people of creativity and intellect. It would seem that men stress the importance of physical stature over that of intellectual substance, as similarly seen in Renaissance sonnets, including that of Shakespeare:
“Shall I compare thee to a summers day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate…” (Lines 1-2).
Whilst few, if any, romantic sonnets describe the love of a woman’s wit or literary ability, the majority would seem to address physical appearance and basic attraction. My interpretation of this concludes that men, as many still do today, valued beauty over intellect during the Renaissance, and therefore reduced women to that of physical beings.
It would appear that the amatory contest was inevitably interwoven through any literary contest between men and women poets, and due to men traditionally naming women the victors of the former, men further deducted they should be the victors of the latter. As Revard (1997) questioned, “For if a man and a woman compete in a literary contest and he ‘loses’, as a man he also loses the right to dominate in other areas.” (p. 19-20). From my understanding, this addresses the stereotypical expectations that women should remain subservient to men as to ensure men maintain their general power over women. If women threaten this balance then men are reformed to become their equals; does this decrease the value of men or award women the credit they should already obtain?
CONTINUED IN COMMENTS
Furthermore, the issue of virtue and virginity are significantly addressed in the English Renaissance literary field. The importance of a woman’s virtue was considered to directly influence her value as an individual, although it would appear that no such standard was inflicted onto men. Revard (1997) discusses this again in relation to Cowley’s referencing Phillips virtue in his odes, writing,
Delete“Orinda’s inward virtue is so bright,
That like a Lanthorn’s fair inclosd Light,
It through the Paper shines where she do’s write.” (4:7-9).
This suggests the male belief that virtue, value of character and ability to succeed are all interdependent on each other; for a woman may not be considered a literary equal if her virtue is not in tact. The importance of virtue for the value of an individual is also reflected in Andrew Marvell’s “To His Coy Mistress”;
“…then worms shall try,
that long preserv’d virginity,
and your quaint honour turn to dust,
and into ashes all my lust.” (Lines 27-30).
From my understanding, Marvell suggests that if his mistress’s virginity is to be tried then her honor would be ruined. If anything, this is reflective of the male attitude throughout the Renaissance that considered women’s virtue to be of the utmost importance, though no such sexual restriction was relevant for men’s behavior.
Revard, S. P. (1997). Representing Women in Renaissance England. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 227-41.
Shakespeare, W. (1609) Sonnet XVIII
Marvell, A. (n.d.). To His Coy Mistress
4. In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
ReplyDeleteAccording to Abrams (1993) ‘The Norton Anthology of English Literature defines 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.’ Indeed, the implicature present in literature, particularly in the Elizabethan English sonnets, is not always easy to distinguish. Furthermore, the difference in personal opinion and abilities to understand the meaning behind the words will influence highly on one’s ability to draw meaning from the sonnets, as I have found during the reading of the sonnets. I have endeavored to understand more about the conceits within some of the sonnets regardless.
One of the sonnets I liked the most was ‘Ice and Fire’ by Edward Spencer. In line 1 of the ‘Ice and Fire’ poem is a good example of the poet using metaphors to describe his love for an unknown person. Line one states ‘my love is like ice, and I to fire.’ (Spencer, 1599) Ice and fire can never thrive near or within the existence of the other. Ice is an intensified ‘cold’ substance and fire results from intensive ‘heat’ hence the commonality they both have with each other is that they are both extremes of the field they belong to, yet they are the complete opposite. Thus, the poets love is unsuccessful and his love is having the opposite effect on his lover. This is exemplified in line 4 which states ‘but harder grows the more I her desire’ (Spencer, 1599).
Overall, most of the Elizabethan sonnets depicted the feelings and act of love in various forms. Love, even in reality, is very rarely as it initially seems, and love also has positive and negative attributes, and this was expressed in the sonnets addressing the issues of love and lust through conceits behind the words of the sonnets.
References
Abrams, M, H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature (ed 6th). N.Y, USA: W.W. Norton and Company
Spences, E. (1599). Ice and fire - APA have made it near impossible to find out how to reference a poem.
Hi Shonnell,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your response and agree that the theme of Love is particularly prevalent in English Sonnets. Whilst most are about the positive and beautiful aspects of love, there are some romantic works, such as that by William Blake, that address the difficult or even somewhat poisonous side of love including "Love's Secret" or "The Sick Rose". It would have been interesting to explore this perspective a little further.
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.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading and rereading this poem. I feel the argument from both sides are very strong. I personally feel that Chaucer is not a feminist. I think he writes ‘The Wife of Bath’s Tale’ to challenge, question and examine gender roles in his time.
“Since the knight is a sexual predator rather than an aristocratic sportsman, the turning of the power ratio to make him a sexual victim is acutely appropriate. The rape, so inappropriate for a true hero, signals that Chaucer’s tale is more interested in gender power imbalance than in the qualities that make a good king” (Carter, S. 2003 p.334). As it was written in British Society in the the 14th Century, Chaucer identifies with these gender roles and he questions the imbalance in hierarchy between women and men. In the 14th Century, most people could not distinguish that their treatment of women was wrong. It was a completely different life to how we live now and Feminism was not a subject that was broached.
In present day, I believe he would be called a Feminist, because he is making a stand for women by telling the story from a women’s perspective. “The Wife uses him to represent men in general, to express the question of male and female relations. The Wife does this deliberately to give weight to her feminist message and the imbalance between the two, in the society of the day” (Leicester, 1984).
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the beastly bridge and the hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer’s wife or bath’s tale. The Chaucer Review, 37(4), 329-345. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu
Leicester H.M (1984). Of a fire in the dark: Public and private feminism in the Wife of Bath's Tale. http://instructors.cwrl.utexas.edu/taylor/sites/instructors.cwrl.utexas.edu.test/files/Homework%20February%2016.pdf