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.
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.
ReplyDeleteLeicester (1984) finds the Wife of Bath’s Tale to contain feminist messages. One of Leicester’s key proposal is that the knight’s quest is an appropriation of typical male/female power imbalance as the knight, serving as an embodiment of all men, is forced to learn about women. This, Leicester says, makes him have to cater to women’s desires, a position women often find themselves in for men. Another scene which reads into this shift of balance is when the knight’s wife delivers her speech on nobility and how wrong it is. She is erudite and well spoken, and well read. Leicester goes on to say that Chaucer, a male, is writing from a woman's perspective so there is an element of impersonation. As such, interpreting the protagonist to be a feminist means extending this treatment to the author.
My interpretation of the text also found messages that empowered women, though I will only focus on a few. Firstly, Arthur giving the knight’s sentencing over to the queen. This in itself is powerful as it allows a woman control and power. Like Leicester, I identify the queen’s chosen punishment as empowering to women, as she makes the knight go find “what thing it is women most desire” (905). It’s an exercise, I think, in finding respect. Obviously he’s committed this heinous act but instead of making him just suffer for it, he has to first go and understand female agency and to listen to women.
Then there is the answer the knight finds, "Women desire to have sovereignty” (1038). The text delves into this sovereignty being over their husband, which loses me a little bit because sovereignty isn’t exclusive to the domain of marriage - it should extend to every aspect of life and self. But, admittedly, that might be a very 21st century way to think. Also I found that instead of being demonised, the queen is described with empowering imagery as she’s described as “sitting as justice,” (1028).
Even with these examples, I find it uncomfortable to judge whether Chaucer is a feminist. I don’t think it’s right to apply the word as it means today to a medieval writer - especially because there doesn’t seem to be a agreed upon definition, nor purpose. The word, because the movement itself, is ever-changing. For example, we are currently shifting towards a feminism of intersectionality and away from from the white-middle-class feminism that characterised the 20th century. Because of its dynamic nature, it is interpreted differently by different people. Some (incorrectly) interpret it to be about bringing men down, as opposed to the social liberation of women. Some focus on equality, others focus on equity. In the 21st century, we are looking at a concept of feminism that is both public and very personal. How can we then try to place it onto a writer that existed before the very notion of feminism?
Leicester, H.M. (1984). Of a Fire in the Dark: Public and Private Feminism in The Wife of Bath's Tale. Women's Studies 11(2), 157-178.
3. Carter (2003) describes the loathly lady motif as relating to ancient goddesses who broaden the definition of femininity, thereby asserting femininity. The femininity that is first buried in the loathly lady’s unflattering mannerisms and appearance remains when her transformation into a lovely lady is complete. It is a femininity that is “strong, independent and active in its ability to desire, violate, and control” (p.323). In complete contrast, Hahn (1995) argues that the crux of The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle is the taming of the unknown and threatening, ie. the feminine, and its assimilation into the respected, idealised sphere of the chivalrous and masculine. This is shown by the way Ragnelle facilitates the relationship between the men in the play or helps them to better themselves (Hahn). She does, after all, offer Arthur life saving advice, “Did you think I don't know Your secret? I know all. Without my help, you are dead. Grant me, sir king, one thing only. Then I will promise you your life” (Hahn, p.10). She becomes integral to them, is emmeshing herself into this male-dominated sphere.
ReplyDeleteAnother point made by Hahn is that the loathly lady motif only reinforces a particular myth that is prevalent in Western society- that women are both beast and beauty, exhibit a double role where they enact, “a deep ambiguity, enmeshing both attraction and revolution, fatal danger and life-giving knowledge” (p. 19). This double role, Hahn says, is reinforced by the physical and symbolic transformation that Ragnelle undergoes from old hag to lovely lady. As such, Hahn doesn’t seem to see the loathly lady as an assertion of femininity but rather as its suppression and assimilation into the masculine.
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.
Hahn, T. (1995). The wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, MA: Medieval Institute Publications.
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"...
ReplyDeleteAcross the three tales, the story line is the same. A high ranking male must save his life by offering the Loathly Lady himself or another high ranking male in an urgent need to save his life. For Example, in The Wife of Bath's Tale, King Arthur had a "Lusty Bachelor" who Raped a maiden in his land and by the rule of his wife the queen, this said Knight was given twelve months and one day to find out what Women desired above all else, on the last day the Loathly lady approaches him and tells him of her ability to save him as long as he promises to give her whatever she wishes for (not knowing that it is marriage she is wanting) When the time comes and they are married and in bed for the first time, she offers herself as old and ugly but loyal, or young and beautiful but unfaithful, in despair this Knight begs her to choose for him so she becomes both beautiful and ugly.
Whereas in King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman, the story is similar but slightly less dramatic, instead of offering herself to the king, the Loathly lady wishes to wed one of King Arthurs Knights and once he has agreed to the deal, the Loathly lady will tell King Arthur the Information on how to save his life. The story follows King Arthur pleading to his knight and his knight showing him undivided loyalty.
From below the belt is my favorite out of the three tales, this is because the Knight gives her food, drink, clothing and all she asks for without knowing why he is doing so. He did not owe her anything yet by helping a woman in need, she rewards him by turning into the fairest lady he had ever seen. "I've met with many a gentle knight That gave me such a fill, But never before with a courteous knight That gave me all my will"
I liked your response to this question. I enjoyed Steeleye Span's version of the Loathly Lady tale too. I also enjoy King Henry's immediate acceptance of the woman entering his hall. If it were me, I'd be questioning her motives and wondering why she's so demanding, but the King simply accepts it and does what she asks, while everyone else runs away.
DeleteI do find it interesting that in these tales, the Loathly Lady rewards the men with her beauty, because of course that's the only thing they care about, not how they act and none of their morals or values, but looks.
1.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Carter (2003), “the generic loathly lady’s beastliness signals that she belongs in the wilderness” (p. 330-331). The knight in The Wife of Bath meets Chaucer’s Loathly Lady in the forest and readily describes her look, though it is something that despite being continually brought up throughout the tale, is never described in great detail. We know that she’s is ugly, as Chaucer writes “a fouler wight ther may no man devyse / there can no man imagine an uglier creature.” (l.999). Later on the Loathly Lady herself comments on how she looks, but without care, “for thogh that I be foul, and oold, and poore / For though I am ugly, and old, and poor” (l.1063). The knight who is now betrothed to the Lady, shows his displeasure when she gives him his two options; “thou art so loothly, and so oold also / Thou art so loathsome, and so old also / And therto comen of so lough a kynde, / And moreover descended from such low born lineage” (l.1100 - 1101). The knight is well practiced at showing his unhappiness with the situation he’s landed himself in. From this we get the true sense of the Loathly Lady as she spends a few stanzas berating him for his attitude and beliefs, eventually forcing him to choose. But of course, the knight cannot be happy no matter what he chooses.
In The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, we’re very quickly confronted with a large detailed description of the Loathly Lady.
“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. Her teeth hung out of her lips, Her cheeks were as broad as a woman's hips. He back was as curved as a lute. Her neck was long and also thick. Her hair clotted in a heap. In the shoulders she was a yard across. Her breasts would have been a load for a horse. Like a barrel was she made. To recite the foulness of that lady There is no tongue fit. She had ugliness to spare. [sic]” (l.7-21)
That is a whole fifteen lines to describe the Loathly Lady, and it’s still not all that’s dedicated to the subject. This shows that King Arthur, despite the readers getting such a vivid and dramatic visual, offers very little description to his Knight, Sir Gawain, the one that agrees to marry the Loathly Lady to save his life. This also shows how loyal Sir Gawain is, not even asking to know how ugly this lady might be, he doesn’t care, simply sacrificing his own needs for the life and reputation of his most respected King.
In King Henry by Steeleye Span (1972), spends one stanza describing the look of the Loathly Lady that enters his hall, and the reactions of the men around the King as they see her.
“Her head hit the roof-tree of the house, Her middle you could not span, Each frightened huntsman fled the hall And left the king alone, Her teeth were like the tether stakes, Her nose like club or mell, And nothing less she seemed to be Than a fiend that comes form hell. [sic]“ (l.25-33)
I enjoy this example of a Loathly Lady text best, as King Henry says nothing in response to this woman storming into his hall, says nothing at all to criticise the look of the Loathly Lady. He simply does everything she requests of him almost making it okay the fact that she made herself better, or becoming beautiful, for him. She quickly took control as soon as she entered the text and held it right until the end. King Henry, though a ruler who had every right to question the woman storming into his hall, didn’t and by acting so becoming and welcoming.
Within all of these fables, there is loyalty coming from each man. They say what they will do, or not say in the case of King Henry (1972), and they follow through. These are all Knights and Kings, men that hold status of some kind and they are all being tested. Some react better than others, King Henry being the best and most accepting, to King Arthur who counted on Sir Gawain’s loyalty to get him out of the situation he got himself into.
References:
DeleteCarter, S. (2003). The Chaucer Review: Coupling the Beastly Bride and the Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind Chaucer’s Wife of Bath Tale. Vol 37: 4.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete4. & 5.
ReplyDeleteConceits are defined as “metaphors that are intricately woven into the verse, often used to express satire, puns, or deeper meaning within and the poem, and to display the poet’s own cunning with words” (Abrams, 1993, p. 1081). A striking example of which is John Donne’s The Flea (1633). The conceit is in a male suitor attempting to take his girl to bed by spinning the deed as already done, or halfway there, because a flea has bitten them both- a prick, a drop of blood, an exchange of bodily fluids. He laments that that’s more action than he’s getting, “And this, alas, is more than we would do” (9). But the deeper meaning, suggested by Abrams, is that the man is suggesting a loss of virginity wouldn’t be shameful, as the concern of the time was. This, Abrams says, is evident because the man identifies the same basic functions of sex as happening inside the flea - and nobody is denouncing the flea as shameful and dishonourable. How modern of him. I’d be more sympathetic had his argument not come about when he wanted some.
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature (6th Ed.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company inc.
Donne, J. The Flea (1663).
6. About power and language in the English Renaissance, Revard suggests men struggled to accept women as capable of poetry and wit. This claim is supported by a Mr H’s response to a call women to pursue the writing of poetry, “What daring Female is’t who thus complains, in Masculine Pindarcik Strains, of great Apollo’s Salique Laws”. He obnoxiously claims poetry as a male domain and shames women for complaining. Or, on the rare occasion a man was able to get over himself and identify a female poet with great power over language, he would mention her skill after being a woman. That is, he was not capable of divorcing the poet from being a female. This example Revard uses is that of Abraham Cowley on Katherine Philips “the issue of sex becomes so important a motif that the assessment of Philips as a poet takes second place.” His assessment of her beauty comes before her poetry, he cannot get over her being a woman. It was an era, Revard continues, where gender was inescapable. Lastly, there was also the fear that a woman being a better poet than a man would mean the man (already submitted to her beauty/being the fairer sex) would have to submit in other domains too. All in all, it was a complex era for gender, power and language- women were not capable to be poets, or perhaps capable for a female poet, or, too capable and threatening to the male ego. Basically, to stray from Revard's words and into my own- women, did we ever get a break?
ReplyDeleteRevard, S.P. (1997). Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn, and the Female Pindaric in C.J. Summers & T. Pebworth (eds.) Representing Women in Renaissance England, Columbia: University of Missouri Press
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.
ReplyDeleteWhen first reading this story, I recall genuinely feeling as though the writer was a feminist and was surprised that the king allowed his queen to decide the fate of the "lusty bachelor". This tale is from around the 1400's, a time when if you were a female you had no opinion, unless you had a husband who allowed you have a voice. People may believe that Chaucer was a feminist due to him writing that King Arthur allows his wife to take over the situation of giving the Knight who raped a maiden his sentence, just because she asks him to which was practically unheard of in the time that this tale was written.
I decided to do some research on Chaucer and found some information that I believe would have influenced his writing. Geoffrey Chaucer was born into a family that was relatively successful, his father and grandfather both being merchants. His mother on the other hand was a heiress that inherited a few London businesses. This is where I believe he learnt that Woman also have the capability to be as driven and smart as a male, which was extremely forward thinking for the time he was from.
Lewis, J. J. (2017). Geoffrey Chaucer: Early Feminist? Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/geoffrey-chaucer-early-feminist-3529684
2.
ReplyDeleteI do believe and understand why Chaucer could be considered a feminist, whether in our present society or the one Chaucer existed within. Chaucer undeniably wrote The Wife of Bath’s Tale from a woman’s perspective and gave them, the wife, queen, and women of the court, the power. He portrays the imbalance of power in a male dominated society through this text.
There is a belief that the knight in Chaucer’s loathly lady tale is a symbol for men and the women are teaching men a lesson. To me this tale encourages feminine desires, wants and needs. In The Wife of Bath’s Tale the knight is requested by the Queen to find out “What thing it is that women most desire” (l. 905). I see this as Chaucer himself motivating and supporting women’s desires, whatever they may be, envisioning a society where women deserve what they have likely been denied in the culture Chaucer lived in.
A common theme in The Wife of Bath’s Tale, is that women have the control over the men. The Queen gains control over the knight deciding what punishment he deserves, “the queen, all at her will, To choose whether she would him save or put to death.” The Loathly Lady gains control over the knight by getting him to give up his freedom to choose. The knight's life is in the a woman's hand. Ross (2017) says “The Wife of Bath defies the stereotype that women are inferior to the men who surround them.” After all, as we read in The Wife of Bath’s Tale, "Women desire to have sovereignty” (l. 1038).
Leicester Jr. (1984) says of the knight in The Wife of Bath:
“the plot becomes a device for forcing him to do so, putting him in a position more familiar to women, who have to cater to male desires, and giving power to women from the beginning of the tale.” (pg. 160)
I would also say that Chaucer is regarded as a feminist for his efforts to weave women’s experiences into his work at a time when women were socially insignificant. In Chaucer’s present, women’s social identities were generally dependant on their relationships with men rather than what career they held, “women are maidens or spouses or widows; they tempt, bear children” (Crane, 1987). The rape of the maiden leads to the knights punishment and it is given quickly. In our society today, it’s a much longer and trickier process for a woman to accuse her rapist and then prove it in court. Crane (1987), also says that the tale “confronts the social belief that feminine power should be strictly limited, and it attempts to establish a defense of secular women’s sovereignty that opposes the conventions”, this shows that Chaucer is thinking about, exploring and portraying women’s lives and social inequalities.
Crane, S. (1987). Alison’s Incapacity and Poetic Instability in the Wife of Bath’s Tale. Modern Language Association, 102(1), 20-22. Doi: 10.2307/462489
Leicester Jr, H. Marshall. (1984). Of a fire in the dark: Public and private feminism in the Wife of Bath’s Tale. Women’s Studies, 11(1/2), 160.
Ross, E. (2017). Writers Salon: The Complex Feminist Ideal in the Wife of Bath’s Prologue. Retrieved April 11, 2018 from http://www.writersalon.com/literary_criticism/the-complex-feminist-ideal-in-the-wife-of-baths-prologue
4 & 5.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Dictionary.com (n.d.) a conceit is “an elaborate, fanciful metaphor, especially of a strained or far-fetched nature.” Abrams (1993) says that these metaphors are used within poems to “express satire, puns, or deeper meanings”. Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets often compare or liken lovers to forces of nature, as in Edmund Spenser’s Ice and Fire, “my love is like to ice, and I to fire” (l.1), and in Shakespeare’s Sonnet XVIII, “Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?” (l.1).
An example of a conceit that I particularly enjoyed, was the Sonnet CXXX by Shakespeare. Although the poet is at face value essentially insulting his lover, “My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun; Coral is far more red, than her lips red” (l.1-2), he still emphasises the love that he has for her, “And yet by heaven, I think my love as rare, As any she belied with false compare. (l.13-14)”. I see the conceit of this sonnet as the love the poet has for his mistress, a kind of love that doesn’t require beautiful metaphors or similes as many other more traditional sonnets and poems would. The poet appreciates his mistress as she is and doesn’t want more than that. He literally compares her to things that are generally seen as beautiful and says that she is none of those; “And in some perfumes is there more delight, than in the breath that from my mistress reeks. I love to hear her speak, yet well I know, that music hath a far more pleasing sound (l.7-10)”. I take this as the poet stating that he doesn’t care what she looks like, because he loves her and doesn’t require false comparisons to prove it.
Abrams, M. H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature (6th Ed). New York, NY. W. W. Norton and Company, Inc.
Dictionary.com. (n.d.). Conceit. Retrieved, April 26, 2018 from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/conceit?s=t
6.
ReplyDeleteIn the English Renaissance, the appearance and success of female writers and poets led to a widespread discussion. Revard (1997) said that the Triumphs of Female Wit in 1683, raised many questions about women and their poetry, he specifically goes on to say that they bring forth “the acceptability of a woman pursuing learning and contesting in the domain of poetry that had been almost exclusively male.” Revard suggests, and it’s to be believed, that men struggled to accept female poets and their successful writings as being competent and skillful.
“Cowley’s Pindarics begin by looking at the woman first. The issue of sex becomes so important a motif that the assessment of Philips as a poet takes second place.” (Revard, 1997). This excerpt suggests that Cowley couldn’t help but judge his female colleagues by their sex. The stark prejudices within Cowley’s poem regarding Katherine Philips differs greatly when compared to one about painter Anthony Van Dyke. The first line of each follows, the first regarding Philips and the second, Van Dyke; “We allow'd You Beauty, and we did submit”, “His All-resembling Pencil did out-pass”. It’s clear here that when discussing a man’s work, Cowley looks first at that work or career, and then at the man himself, the opposite is irritatingly true for Cowley’s discussion of women. Revard suggests that although acknowledging and respecting them, Cowley could not take female poets work seriously because they were women; he could not separate the female from the poet.
Men, in the patriarchal society they lived in, mainly valued women for their beauty and obedience. Aphra Behn and Katherine Philips success in their writings caused male writers panic. It seemed Cowley believed females had the upper hand on males because of their female qualities. With their “beauty, virtue, and fecundity” (Revard, 1995), females would apparently conspire to remove males right to dominate women in other areas if women were to compete in a literary contest, as suggested in Female Wit; “For should we understand as much as they, They fear their Empire might decay.”
It seems Revard believes that women should be provided positive support, respect and appreciation for their work. Both Behn, Philips and many other female writers in the Renaissance, despite their success, were continuously cited as “a "female" poet, rather than as a poet” (Revard, 1995)..
Revard , S.P., Summers, C.J. & Pebworth, T. (Eds.).(1997). Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn and the Female Pindaric in Representing Women in Renaissance England. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere is a obvious differences in the length of the texts. With all tales of the Loathly Lady, although there are differences in the choices made towards description and details the underlying plot remains quiet similar.
ReplyDeleteA status man - loyal to his king - is order to marry the ugly lady - and after testing her man for out she wants him to learn or realise -and after he passes - the lady who was ugly turns herself into the fairest lady in town.
In The Wife of Bath’s Tale, through its long elaborate passages the tension in the story rises more than the other two texts. The story covers some controversial issues, still not openly talked about today. A status man has raped a woman and is stood in front of the King. King passes on the decision to the Queen. Where she and court full of women decides he must, in 12 months and 1 day, to figure out “what women desire the most?”.
This segment of the Queen making the decision is a key difference, as the King perfectly capable of but does not beheads the knight. It also attempts to show the characteristic differences between a man and woman, even on topics concerning justice and punishments for crimes committed. Even the ugly lady, in the end, asks the knight to make a decision of whether he want her beautiful, young and unloyal or old, ugly and loyal, the decision he was ask to make - was his punishment and his surrender - an act of redemption from his past.
In King Arthur Meets A Really Ugly Women (1995), the story itself lack in the drama compared to the first, the ugly lady asks the king to be married to one of his knights; it is the loyalty of the knights towards the king - that moves the action forward.
In King Henry (1995), the king is the one that gets tested. The ‘ugly lady from hell’ makes requests to the King, to test the King’s courtesy and generosity - qualities needed to be possessed by every man but, especially a King. This qualification of the King by the lady - and turns herself into the fair lady.
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
I am in agreement with the critics that interpreted the work of Chaucer, The Wife of Bath’s Tale to be influenced by his ideas about feminism. Although, not the third wave feminism that had taken hold today.
ReplyDeleteIn The Wife of Bath’s Tale, the Knight is accused of raping a women, and beheading was the punishment set for such a crime. This decision of the King was reversed by himself, after the Queen pleaded the King for his life.
This difference, where the Queen and her court - pleaded the King for knight’s life - in spite of his cruel and inhumane actions towards a lady from their court and her decision to make him search and/or learn from his mistake by finding out ‘What a women desires the most?, showcases the difference between attitudes and perspectives on justice and punishment.
Even the punishment, when looked at closely - grants an opportunity to Knight to learn more about the other sex. Rather than, condemning the Knight to death.
In the end, when the knight is asked by the ‘ugly lady’ to decide - whether he wanted her, old, ugly and loyal Or, young, beautiful and unfaithful> - can be seen as another example in the story, where the decisions made about the Knight’s life, about justice and punishment are in respect with feminist’s point of view.
And the surrender of the Knight to the loathly lady, grants the Knight his redemption from his past. The fact that according to decision made by the King, the Knight would have been beheaded. But, the Queen intervening the situation and making decisions through her code and court - granted the Knight, understanding towards the treatment of the fairer sex and also punished him for a year and through the tests of the loathly lady.