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?
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 a text called The Wife of Bath’s Prologue Introduction it writes “The Wife of Bath has a reputation as the most memorable pilgrim in Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, and there's no doubt that her Prologue is a big part of the reason why.” (Smirnoff n,.d.)
I believe that some critics think Chaucer is a feminist partly because of how the late classical period presented wives to its audiences, it is said that authors wrote about the disadvantages of being married. Authors would write that wives would “talk your ear off” and “prevent you from getting any work done,” as well as other things that even in the modern world, wives are thought to demand that you make lots of money so they can live an extravagant lifestyle. (Smirnoff, n.d.)
Though in Chaucer’s text he still created the Wife of Bath to portray majority of the negative aspects. Chaucer still created the Wife to be a character that not only defends her married and lusty lifestyle, but also speaks of the distress and sorrow that can come with marriage. This character is believed to confront the medieval antifeminist tradition that traps women under the label ‘annoying wife’ stereotype.
In the Tale, there is a more feminine feel to the setting, it is women who make up the numbers in ‘the court’ after Knight Arthur raped a maiden and a woman who saves king Arthur’s head if he follows through with the task to save his life by reporting back to the court with an answer that follows the question “what do women want most in the world?”
That certain question could be another factor in the mix as to why critics believe Chaucer is a feminist. Why is it that Chaucer chose to have that question asked? And why was that question the Knights only punishment?
“Chaucer had a keen perception of the attitudes and philosophies which were emerging and shaping the roles specific to peoples lives. Among these were ideas and customs which had dictated extremely subservient lives for women. (Blake, 1994.)”
The Wife of Bath contradicts majority of the above customs and asserts her own powerful assessment of the roles of women in society and relationships. However (Blake, 1994), writes that while Chaucer attempted to assert female dominance over men, the effect the Wife desires is to bring men and women to a more balanced level of power.
Drawing to the conclusion that although this tale perceived to think that Chaucer to leaned more toward being the Woman’s ‘team’ I believe he was just trying to bring women up to the level in society that men seemed to stand hard grounded at that point in history.
References:
Blake, J. (1994). Jonathan Blake. Struggle For Female Equality in "The Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale". Luminarium.org. Retrieved 7 April 2016, from http://www.luminarium.org/medlit/jblake.htm
Smirnoff, D. The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath's Prologue. Shmoop.com. Retrieved 31 March 2016, from http://www.shmoop.com/the-wife-of-baths-prologue/
SparkNotes: The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (2013). Sparknotes.com. Retrieved 7 April 2016, from http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/canterbury/section10.rhtml
A good answer, but it would have been better if you had included the ideas of Susan Sayer in your course material.
DeleteI mean Susan Carter.
DeleteThe 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 Oxford English online defines the term “feminist” as “an advocate or supporter of the rights and equality of women” (“feminism”, 1989) however the modern day definition of feminism seems to be distorted and constantly changing to suit certain agendas so I used the definition above when reviewing The Wife of Bath’s Tale.
The Wife of Bath’s tale constantly describes Sir Gawain’s submission to woman which I believe is the reason that so many critics have came to the assumption that he was a feminist and while it is quite possible that he did have a feminist mind set, in my opinion it would’ve been highly unlikely as most people tend to conform to social norms and the middle ages was mostly a patriarchal society in which woman submitted to men and also there is a political factor which plays a part however it is quite possible that he did have some feminist ideals but I am just not convinced that he was a feminist.
The Wife of Bath’s Tale was originally written during the late middle ages by Chaucer who was of English descent. The male lead in the tale “Sir Gawain” is a Celtic hero of Welsh descent which is an interesting point to note considering during the late middle ages, England and Wales didn’t exactly see eye to eye as England dominated wales under King Edward I for a period of time which resulted in numerous Welsh rebellions (Ross, n.d.). This therefore brings me to the idea that this tale is quite possibly the English having a dig at the Welsh as during that time period, woman were seen as below men and the Wife of Bath’s Tale is a story describing a Celtic hero (Sir Gawain) submitting to women. This makes me a little skeptical of anyone that insists that Chaucer was a feminist as I believe he would’ve fully understood that woman were below men in regards to status and it’s possible that he was smart enough to use that to further his agenda being insulting and belittling the Celts.
The Wife of Bath’s Tale starts off by saying “In the old days of King Arthur, of whom Britons speak great honor” (source) which immediately highlights the bias that Chaucer has for his country. He then goes on to introduce Sir Gawain as a rapist with high stature and not long after ends up at the mercy of women which to me further pushes the notion that Chaucer was more focused on attacking the Celts rather than advocating women’s rights during that time period.
Feminism. (1989). In Oxford English online dictionary (2nd ed.). Retrieved from http://dictionary.oed.com
Ross, D. (n.d.). Edward ii and wales. Retrieved from http://www.britainexpress.com/wales/history/edwardii.htm
Chaucer, G. (c. 1390). The Wife of Bath.
You make a good point here. So Chaucer could mock women and the Celts at the same time! Also, awareness of Susan Sayer's essay would have helped.
DeleteI mean Susan Carter!
DeleteQuestion: What does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that Revard, S.P (1997) saw through the front that some of the authors/poets put on during the English Renaissance. He understood well, that it was, ‘impossible in this era to be gender blind.’ This was shown especially through the poems of Abraham Cowley.
Abraham expressed throughout his writing career an admiration for the female writer ‘Katherine Philips’. He writes about her first as a female over her work as a poet. Almost ignoring the fact that she is a good writer, and placing her success on her, ‘Beauty’ and ‘wit’. Revard writes that ‘Cowley never passes beyond the easy compliment to Philips’s beauty and the virtues of her sex to evaluate the quality and substance of her poetry’. Cowley did this many time whenever referring to any females in his poems.
For example;
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?
Orinda does in that too raign,
Does man behind her I proud Triumph draw,
And cancel great apollo’s Salick Law.
This would not even be noticed, however, as it is apparently normal for a commendatory poem to be attentive towards the person to whom it is about. Nevertheless, in Cowley’s poem, “On the Death of Sir Anthony Vandyke, the famous painter”, Cowley doesn’t hesitate to praise Vandyke’s skills in his field.
For example;
His All-resembling Pencil did out-pass
The mimick Imag’ry of Looking-glass,
Nor was his Life less perfect than his Art,
Nor was his Hand less erring than his heart
It appears that when writing a complimentary poem for a male, Cowley structures it to admire the art/works before the man/person themselves. This is not the case for females. He would touch on the person and limit if not leave out the art/works.
Revard, however, did not doubt, ‘Cowley’s real admiration for Katherine Philips nor the cordial relations between the two poets’. Conversely, I get the impression that Cowley did not believe that women (Katherine Philips) were not accountable for their success alone. Without beauty, I feel Cowley believes women would not be successful.
I personally feel that Revard is suggesting that in the English Renaissance, Sex was extremely important in terms of how Poets were regarded. Cowley implies that being female provides women with the upper-hand as men, can't help but fall for their beauty and wit, giving female writers more power in the writing industry. However, Cowley takes this credential and power away from Philips by carefully structuring his complimentary poems about her to reveal the possible reason for her success, beauty and wit over her skills as a Poet.
Conclusively implying that during the English Renaissance era, women poets were exclusively seen as ‘FEMALE poets’, instead of proper poets.
Reference:
ReplyDeleteRevard, S.p. (1997) "Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn, and the Female Pindaric in Representing Women in Renaissance England, edited by Claude J. Summers and Ted-Larry Pebworth. Columbia: University of Missouri Press
3.Hahn's essay (see critical reader)on The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle 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 (1995) Ragnelles loathly lady is one whose mysterious nature is the catalyst for the eventuality of the main characters. Hahn's (1995) belief is that romance is the inexorable union of fantasy and necessity. He explains that the "Unmotivated marvels - meetings in the woods, monstrous apparitions, sudden transformations" (Pg, 99), move the plot to provide what was wanted or expected to happen. This can be explained by the idea that in the middle ages the narrative for romance was more about chivalric ties, culture, politics or geography and how those things collided into romance and fantasy, intersecting in such a way that could be utilised to their best advantage (Heng, 2003). In the context of this poem, Hahn (1995) explains it as "how the unknown, the marvelous, or the threatening is brought into line with legitimate, normative, idealized chivalric society" (Pg 98).
This brings me to another way in which Hahn (1995) believed that the loathly lady motif is more than just about asserting the feminine in this context. According to Hahn (1995) Ragnelle, as the loathly lady is the symbolic and literal manifestation of the dichotomy between the court and the uncivilized. This means that Ragnelle's behaviour is as a direct result of her social standing as opposed to her personality. Her unruly nature and sexual appetite are explained as "a function of her low estate and not simply a wild monstrosity" (Pg98, Hahn 1995). This is important to the narrative as it allows to explore the central theme of chivalry and the way in which it transforms when coming into contact with the uncivilized or wild. Hahn (1995), cites Ragnelle representing a "Beauty and Beast" figure (Pg 98). Her literal transformation from ugly to beautiful symblosises that the poem is talking about her acquiring of manners and a knightly husband, which reiterate the central themes of the poem (chivalry and civilized society etc.).
Another purpose of the loathly lady motif according to Hahn (1995) is that she is the primary link between all of the main characters and thus responsible for driving the narrative. Hahn (1995) gives examples of how Ragnelle undoes the threat that is imposed by her brother, she saves Arthur's life, and she presents opportunity for Gawain. Hahn explains that through all of her ties and connections with the main male characters, she becomes the "nexus" that brings them all together and "makes possible the fraternal and hierarchic bonds of chivalric solidarity" (Pg 99).
References
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame
Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
Heng, G. (2003). Empire of magic: medieval romance and the politics of cultural fantasy. Columbia University Press.