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?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. The wife of bath is about a transformation... (just a test)
ReplyDeleteThe transformation is not contained to the woman's appearance. This is part of the tale , but is only one side. There is a change also for the male lead in the story. He becomes empowered with his acquired knowledge through his quests. With this he becomes more open to the feelings of being able to be with her, the loathly lady, for more than just her looks. His transformation could reside in his opinions toward either women in general, or particularly to her. (Chaucer)
Deletereference
Chaucer, G. (n.d.). the wife of bath's tale. Retrieved from http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/index.html 01.01.06
The loyathly (ugly) lady is a motif 'the wyfe of the bath'. It is a magical transformation. It is different from the well-known story 'frog and the prince'. There, we can see the female protagonist kisses the frog and change into the prince. But in 'the wyfe of Bath', we can see the male protagonist kisses the female protagonist which turns into the beautiful woman in the whole world. It is the magical transformation after marriage drawn by Chaucer.
Delete"The transformation of the loathly lady - a story common in folktales, and here combined with motifs of fairy tales like the frog prince and sleeping beauty - occurs in a popular ballad" Hahn shows that The Wedding of Sir Gawain has fairy tales components such as a magical transformation.
DeleteReference:
"The transformation of the loathly lady - a story common in folktales, and here combined with motifs of fairy tales like the frog prince and sleeping beauty - occurs in a popular ballad"
Reference:
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
Transformation of the loathly lady from ugly to beautiful is not as important. It is the loosening of strict gender roles created in the real life context of the times, which was perpetuated by previous literature that should be central to our discussion. The loathly lady’s control over the physical form of her body, her command over the masculine and her active sexuality shows that “female sovereignty” over a heterosexual relationship “may bring happiness” (Carter, 2003). Paradoxes such as ‘beastly bride’ (loathly lady) and ‘hunter hunted’ (male protagonist who is usually found to be hunting in a forest, is in turn hunted by the loathly lady) in these loathly lady tales don’t provide a definite answer feminist want, but by reversing and playing with gender roles it helps to open up issues of gender and feminist dialogue to follow.
DeleteAlthough I agree with Karina's point that the transformation of the knight is much more significant than that of the loathly lady's appearance, the credibility of his transformation has to be questioned. How does he develop as a person from the wisdom that he gains throughout his journey? In the primary text it says nothing of how he changed, only "when he saw he might not come to" (Chaucer, 2006) learning the answer to the riddle, "within his breast very sorrowful was the spirit, But home he goes".
DeleteThe knight learns nothing from his year-long experience, but only by chance, or fate, he encounters upon the loathly lady who gives him the answer in exchange for his pledge. In court when he answers to the Queen "though you kill me. Do as you please; I am here subject to your will", is he truly opening himself up to the mercy of the Queen, or is it just rhetoric since the knight knows that his answer is correct and by Queen's oath his life must be spared? And when the loathly lady comes to collect his pledge, he retaliates by taking the greatest offence to someone who just saved his life, "nay, my damnation...my family, Should be ever so foully degraded! Thou art so loathsome, and so old also...descended from such low born lineage"
His misogynistic attitude continues, and only after the very long monologue by the loathly lady and presenting him with an option to choose between ugly faithful wife and beautiful promiscuous wife, he suddenly adopts a different tone, "My lady and my love, and wife so dear". This stark contrast and the abrupt change seems almost comical or sarcastic, and considering that 'The Canterbury Tales' operates in the genre of comedy, parody and satire (as well as romance) the knight's sincerity can be debated. And can't his response also be seen as indecisiveness, rather than true submission to wife's will? Because the choice between a ugly faithful wife and beautiful whoring one is too painful?, "This knight deliberates and painfully sighs...and he says in this manner".
Personally the tale says more about the seriousness of oaths and pledges in the medieval times (Queen's oath to Knight, Knight's pledge to loathly lady and in turn the loathy lady's oath to the Knight), more than how much the male protagonist has changed.
Scholar Peter G. Beidler states that the years deeply rooted patriarchy has done much damage to men as well, in "limiting the roles men can acceptably play" (as cited in Carson, 2003). I think this relates to the knight character, or my understanding of him, no matter what he does he just can't seem to genuinely shake off the patriarchal and misogynistic ways.
I like Han Seul's brief comment. All fairy tales are about transformation. Please expand on comments!
ReplyDeleteI also like that when there is actually a shorter comment to begin with we CAN actually discuss
DeleteAnswering question one:
ReplyDeleteAlthough the three tales The Wife of Bath’s Tale, The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, and King Henry all have the theme of the ‘Loathly Lady’, they have some variations in the details of the story. Firstly, the ‘loathly ladies’ are all met under different circumstances. The Wife of Bath’s Tale is the only one out of these three examples where the person who meets the lady is not the king himself, but a knight, and one who has fallen into disrepute at that, for his actions in raping a young woman. “He saw a maiden walking before him,…By utter force, he took away her maidenhead…” (Chaucer, c.1390/2006, line 886, 888).
On the other hand, in The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, and King Henry, it is the kings themselves who meet the ‘loathly lady’. “Kyng Arthoure rode forthe on the other day…And ther he mett with a Lady.” (Hahn, 1995) which equates to “King Arthur rode out his gate…There he met with a lady.” (The Wedding of Sir Gawain, c.1450/2014) in Modern English. In King Henry (Steeleye Span, 1972, track 6) it says “And in there came a grisly ghost…Each frightened huntsman fled the hall and left the king alone…”
It is interesting to note that only in The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle (c.1450/2014), is the person who first encountered the ‘loathly lady’ (King Arthur) not the one who married the lady in the end (Sir Gawain). Also, in this version, Sir Gawain marries the lady willingly, due to his sense of duty to his king. “I shall wed her…Even if she be a fiend…I hesitate not…To save your life, my lord. It is my duty.” Comparing this with the response of the knight in The Wife of Bath’s Tale, “Alas, that any of my family should ever be so foully degraded!” (Chaucer, c.1390/2006, line 1068-1069) and King Henry’s “Oh God forbid…That ever a fiend that comes from hell should stretch down by my side.” (Steeleye Span, 1972, track 6).
The submission of the knight/king to the wife’s will is present in all three texts as the event by which the ‘loathly lady’ becomes beautiful for the rest of her days. In both The Wife of Bath’s Tale and The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnelle, the knights are given a choice. In The Wife of Bath’s Tale it is between an “ugly and old” and “true”, meaning faithful, wife or a “young and fair”, unfaithful one (Chaucer, c.1390/2006), while in The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnelle, the choice is given to Sir Gawain to either have his wife “Beautiful in the nights…ugly in the days…” or “…beautiful in the day and the ugliest woman in the nights.” (The Wedding of Sir Gawain, c.1450/2014). When the knights give in to the wisdom of their wives and let them make the choice, only then are they rewarded. In Steeleye Span’s King Henry (1972), the king is not faced with a choice between ugly and beautiful. Instead, it is because he followed all the lady’s commands “gave [her] all [her] will” that he was rewarded with “the fairest lady that ever was seen”.
A minor note to make is that only The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnelle (c.1450/2014) mentions anything regarding an enchantment, when Lady Ragnelle thanks Sir Gawain. “[My stepmother] changed me by enchantment from my true form…”
References:
Chaucer, G. (2006). Tale of the Wyf of Bathe/The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (L. D. Benson, Trans.). (Original work published c.1390). Retrieved from http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/wbt-par.htm
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
Steeleye Span (1972). King Henry. On Below the Salt [CD]. US: Shanachie.
The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell. (D. Breeden, Trans.). (Original work published c.1450). Retrieved from http://www.lone-star.net/mall/literature/gawain.htm
It is interesting to note these differences in the versions of the motif, but what is the significance of these differences?'The submission of the knight/king to the wife’s will is present in all three texts as the event by which the ‘loathly lady’ becomes beautiful for the rest of her days.' This sentence is a bit obscure. Meaning is not clear.
ReplyDeleteThis refers to the choice that the knight/king is given by the 'loathly lady'. When they submit to her decision, they are rewarded as the 'loathly lady' is transformed into a beautiful lady. In a way, this does not put the male characters in a positive light as their desire for a physically beautiful wife outweighs any 'beautiful' elements of the lady's personality that she may have had.
DeleteExtending on Roanna’s answer to q.1, the treatment of the Loathly Lady conceit has slight degrees of variation. Although all Loathly Ladies share the common trait of being physically ugly/repulsive, and transforming into a beautiful bride by the submission of the male protagonist, they symbolize different themes pertaining to whichever ideas are conveyed by the specific Loathly Lady fabula.
DeleteAccording to Susan Carter in, “Coupling the beastly bride and the hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s Tales” (2003) Chaucer’s Wife of Bath represents an immediate destabilization of gender roles, whilst majority of the other loathly lady tales concern “issues of kingship” and sovereignty.
Irish Sovranty Hag- ‘Adventures of the sons of eochaid’ hag represents sovereignty “seldom gained without battles and conflicts”, the male protagonist needs to accept what is “many-shaped”- double sided nature of kingship and expanded version of feminity (ugly=strong, independent nature, beautiful= subservient).
In “Corca Laidhe”, the hag is characterised in terms of the terrain, “ A rugged, hilly, thick black head/upon her like a furzy mountain”. She personifies the land and her ‘active advances’ upon the king might be seen as colonialist discourse of the ‘land’s desire to be ploughed and made fertile’ (p.332).
Gower, in “The Tales of Florent” was concerned with providing a model of “knightly excellence” and promoting “ideals of masculine behaviour”. Florent (Emperor’s nephew) keeps his oath to both the family who want to kill him, and the ugly loathly lady who wishes to wed him.
In Chaucer’s “Wife of Bath’s Tale”, rather than simply having a male protagonist with a female obstacle, the story is “gynocentric: the narrator is a woman, the initial victim is a woman and the questioner (which serves as a central plot-line “What do women desire the most?”) is a woman” (Travis, 2001). It is concerned with the gender power imbalance, exemplified through the maidens of court viewed as objects to be “rescued or raped” (Carter, 2003). Chaucer re-balances the tale to an extent by displacing the male from the centre of the court and from the narrative as well.
The loathly lady’s ability to transform her physical state at her own will and providing a choice for the knight to have her ‘ugly and old and faithful’ or ‘beautiful and young and unfaithful’ exemplifies the importance of woman having control over their own body. It is only when the knight relinquishes all his power, “I Put me in your wise governance” (Chaucer, 2006) that the knight is rewarded with a beautiful wife who is obedient as well.
Reference
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the beastly bride and the hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s Tales. Retrieved 5 March. 2014 from: http://muse.jhu.edu.ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/journals/chaucer_review/v037/37.4carter.html
Chaucer, G. (2006). Tale of the Wyf of Bathe/The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (L. D. Benson, Trans.). (Original work published c.1390). Retrieved from http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/wbt-par.htm
Travis, M. 2001. Loathly Ladies: rationalising differences in the characterization of the marrying Knight to the precipitating action. Retrieved March 5, 2014 from: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~ttpbst/me/writing/loathly.htm
Q 2. The knight consumed by lust happened to rape a young maiden, he was taken to the courts where the queen and other females who had authority over the knights consequence, then the knight went on an adventure to discover what women most want in the world in order to save his life, which eventually he discovered the answer resulting in the knight marrying an old hag (The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath's Tale.2008) I do believe Chaucer’s work is highly feminist. The females have so much authority throughout majority of the storyline and the knight who is a male happened to take majority of the suffering. The story did end well as the knight’s wife who was the old hag happened to transform into a young beautiful lady. He still had to go through the process of sharing a room with an old hag as he was obliged to. Stories are influential on what people think, and back in the day when this book was developed it could have potentially changed society’s perception on females being more dominate then males, for a season. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteShmoop Editorial Team. (2008, November 11). The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath's Tale. Retrieved April 9, 2014 from http://www.shmoop.com/the-wife-of-baths-tale/
Although I agree with you that Chaucer's authoritative loathly lady figure was very revolutionary for the time it was written, reading and analysing it in our post-modern context I can still see some anti-feminist sentiment.
DeleteThe dichotic representation of woman, as the loathly lady describes, "ugly and old until I die, And be to you a true, humble wife, And never displease you all my life" (Chaucer, 2006) or "young and fair, And take your chances with the crowd" depicts deeply embedded stereotypes of a woman's physical appearance parallel to her chastity. Not only this, just the mere mention of the loathly lady's physical transformation into a beauty as something of a 'reward' for the Knight, like some trophy wife, would bother most feminists.
And even though the tale concludes with the man's submission to the female gender, the tale's conclusion as a 'happy' one springs from the fact that the loathly lady has changed to "beautiful and so young" and that "she obeyed him in every thing, That might do him pleasure or enjoyment". The knight's submission is temporary, whereas the loathly lady's submission to her husband will last throughout their marriage. It appears that the loathly lady has traded in her wisdom and forthrightness for beauty and obedience in an act of patriarchal matrimony. This again emphasises the tale's idea that the true value of a woman lies in her beauty, chastity and obedience to her man.
Chaucer, G. (2006). Tale of the Wyf of Bathe/The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (L. D. Benson, Trans.). (Original work published c.1390). Retrieved from http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/wbt-par.htm
With regard to the significance of the differences in the ‘loathly lady’ fabula between the texts of The Wife of Bath’s Tale and The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, it is relevant to consider that the cause for these differences is related to the reason that the authors of these texts wrote these stories, i.e. the function of the stories. If this is the case, then the first three questions of the Week 4-6 blog are incontrovertibly linked in terms of first asking us to find variations between texts, then giving us two distinct viewpoints on the purpose of these texts for discussion. In reading the comments that others have published, I feel that questions 2 and 3 should be answered together in comparison to each other.
DeleteAlthough some people may see Chaucer’s The Wife of Bath’s Tale as the work of someone with a feminist perspective, I am inclined to disagree and instead, agree with Hannah’s stance according to Carter (2003) that Chaucer’s purpose for composing the story was to destabilise gender roles. The way by which Chaucer does this is asserting the feminine. An example of this is when the knight was to be judged for his act of rape in the royal court. Instead of being “condemned to be dead, by course of law” (Chaucer, c.1390/2006, line 891-892), the king allowed the queen to make the decision regarding his life. This is in conflict to “generic tales of the loathly lady” where the royal court symbolises the “seat of patriarchal power” (Carter, 2003). Another example of this would be when the knight returns from his task given by the queen to find out what it is that women desire most. There is a “feminization of Arthur’s court” (Carter, 2003), where many women, wives, maids, and widows with “the queen…sitting as a justice” come to hear the knight’s answer (Chaucer, c.1390/2006, line 1027-1029).
In contrast to this, the author of The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle has a different approach to the ‘loathly lady’ motif, which reflects a difference of purpose in composing such a story. Hahn (1995) states that the function of this story is to “explore the ties of chivalry”, honour and courtesy, and a ‘taming the wild’ mentality. Ashton (2010) explains that the popular fiction of the time was filled with “stories about knights, idealized chivalric communities and courtly love scenarios” (p. 14). Ashton (2010) goes on to suggest that chivalry symbolises masculinity, order and restraint, which links with courteous action and speech. Being hospitable, upholding the truth, keeping vows and a polite manner are all part of a set of rules that show chivalrous behaviour (p.46-47). The fact that The Wife of Bath’s Tale talks of rape proves that Chaucer is not focusing on the theme of chivalry (Carter, 2003).
DeleteThe main characters in The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle (c.1450/2014) are all bound by a code of honour, to keep one oath or another made to other characters. King Arthur swears to Sir Gromer Somer Joure “to come again at the end of twelve months” and bring him the answer regarding “what women love best” after their meeting in Inglewood. Sir Gawain is “depicted as an ideal of perfect courtesy that appeals to both men and women” (Ashton, 2010, p. 29). His oath to King Arthur to serve him results in his willingness to marry Dame Ragnell. “I swear by the cross…I hesitate not, to save your life, my lord.” His courtesy to her on their wedding night also shows this model of chivalry, when she asks him to kiss her, but he answers “I will do more than kiss, I swear to God!”
The ‘taming the wild’ viewpoint is based on the model of the early Irish Sovranty Hag tales, where “a true king must leave his court to prove himself in the wild locus of the forest” (Carter, 2003). The ‘loathly lady’, Lady Ragnelle in this case, is at first associated with the ‘wild’, the ‘untamed’, the ‘dangerous unknown’ entity. She lacks “manners, beauty, [and] deference” (Hahn, 1995). The poem states that “She…was the ugliest woman…a hog isn’t as ugly”, “She was very foul and rude…she ate everything.” At the end however, she is ‘tamed’ as she possesses these values after her transformation. She is described as a “gentle lady” and “Wherever she went, Dame Ragnell [sic] won the prize for beauty.” (The Wedding of Sir Gawain…, c.1450/2014). Hahn (1995) states that the conclusion of this poem results “with everyone established in her or his proper place” and therefore the chivalric society is restored.
References:
Ashton, G. (2010). Medieval English romance in context. London, England: Continuum.
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), p. 329-345.
Chaucer, G. (2006). Tale of the Wyf of Bathe/The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (L. D. Benson, Trans.). (Original work published c.1390). Retrieved from http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/wbt-par.htm
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell. (D. Breeden, Trans.). (Original work published c.1450). Retrieved from http://www.lone-star.net/mall/literature/gawain.htm
Great point Kaush, I agree with you that this point was somewhat revolutionary considering this poem was written in the 14th century, hundreds of years before the first wave of feminism. Even though the conclusion may have been in favour of men, giving women that kind of authority as of that time, I believe shows signs of what has developed into feminism.
DeleteThe Loathly Lady is a motif used in three fabula. In the three tales The Wife of Bath’s Tale, The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, and King Henry with some variations. In each tale, the Loathly Lady is changed in the result of gaining of mastery from the hero.
ReplyDeleteAll of the heroes meet the Loathly Lady in different circumstances. The similarities were they were all ugly and have a magical transformation. As Karina says, “The transformation is not contained to the woman's appearance.” The male characters have to change themselves to get the most beautiful woman in the world.
In “The Wife of Bath’s Tale”, the knight first sees the Loathly Lady “where he saw upon a dance go Ladies four and twenty, and yet more; “Vanished was this dance” she appears as a beautiful dancing fairy but he doesn’t know that it was her. But when he came closer, he saw the Loathly Lady as “an uglier creature.”(Line 1100, 1101)
The loathly lady first appears to the knight as a vision of twenty four dancing fairies, “The day had come when he had to turn homeward. And as he went, deep in care, it happened that he rode under the edge of a forest, where he saw twenty- four ladies and more in a dance. Eagerly he drew toward this dance, in hope of learning some piece of wisdom. But in truth, before he arrived there entirely, the dance vanished--he did not know where it went. He saw no living creature there, except a woman sitting on the grass--no one could imagine a fouler creature. (Chaucer, line 999)”
And in Steeleye Span. “King Henry” he sees her as “And in there came a grisly ghost” (line 23). And as the title says in “King Arthur meets a really ugly woman” He met a woman who “was the ugliest creature that a man ever saw”. (line 4 and 5) So in all of the three stories women appears at the ugly creature at the beginning.
In each case, the knight/king/"hero" gave in sovereignty.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in the “The Wife of Bath’s Tale”, he had to find out what all women want and the Loathly Lady gave him an answer. “Women desire to have sovereignty As well over her husband as her love, And to be in mastery above him.” (line1038- 1040) Later, she asks me to choose from “To have me ugly and old until I die, And be to you a true, humble wife, And never displease you in all my life. Or else you will have me young and fair, And take your chances of the crowd That shall be at your house because of me, Or in some other place, as it may well be. Now choose yourself, whichever you please.”
He made a choice to give sovereignty to his wife so she gets what all women want from husbands “mastery”.
“My lady, and my love, and wife so dear,
I put me in your wise governance; choose yourself”
(Line 1230,1231,1232)
“For as it passes you, is enough for me.” (Line 1235)
Then the lady says,
“Then have I gotten mastery of you,” (Line 1236) which is an important line because the female become more dominant.
“I will be to you both—“(Line 1240) It shows that she will be both faithful and beautiful wife after she got the mastery from him.
In, ‘King Arthur meets a really ugly woman’, the King Arthur wants to Gawain marry her because she saved the King’s life, “Without my help, you are dead”. But Gawain had a choice the King says, “I will tell Gawain my predicament”. He passes choice on to the knight – he lets him choose. She was ugly at first “she was the ugliest creature” (Line 4) “she had ugliness to spare”. (Line 21)
But he chooses to merry her “I shall wed her and wed her again, even if she be a fiend”. “You are my honoured king” “To save your life, my lord. It is my duty.”It shows that the King is a master for Gawain.
Gawain gives sovereignty to the both the king and the Loathly Lady.
Hahn says how the loathly lady plays the double roles here. “The plot of Ragnelle, then, turns on the transformation of its heroine both physically and symbolically, from an ugly hag to a beautiful lady, and from an enigmatic threat to a fulfilled woman. Her double role - both Beauty and the Beast - endows her with a deep ambiguity, enmeshing both attraction and revulsion, fatal danger and life-giving knowledge; such worrisome duplicity often attaches itself to women (and to femininity generally) in popular romance, and throughout Western culture.”
In the wife of bath, even after the transformation, she plays double roles “both fair and good” (Line 1241)
She transformed into a beauty when Gawain marries her.
ReplyDeleteIn “King Henry”, he gave horse, dog ‘greyhounds’, birds ‘goshawks’, wine ‘some drink now’ (line 58) ‘a pipe of wine put in’ (line 63), a soft beautiful bed “A bed a bed now King Henry,”(line 66) and finally she wants him to “take off your clothes now King Henry And lie down by my side” (line 74, 75) which shows how lusty she is. Again has a transformed into a beautiful lady. “The fairest lady that has ever was seen “That gave me all my will” indicates that she is a master.
To conclude, each man wins a beautiful woman and the woman gains what women want. Each man is responsible for a beautiful woman, by giving the woman what he want which is the win-win situation.
In "The Wife of Bath's Tale" by Geoffery Chaucer, she teaches the knight a lesson. When the knight finds out that she wants him to marry her. He felt bad; he said, "Alas and woe is me!" which means he doesn’t like to marry her.
She says, “I am ugly, and old, and poor" but she will give "thy love."
"Thou art so loathsome, and so old also, And moreover descended from such low born lineage"
Because even "A lord's son doing shame and dishonour;" she believes that "nobility comes from God alone." She refutes low birth.
"And whereas you reprove me for poverty," refutes poverty
"Now, sir, of old age you reprove me;"
"Now where you say that I am ugly and old," refutes ugly/old
"since I know your delight, I shall full fill your worldly appetite".
Reference:
Geoffrey Chaucer. The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath’s Tale
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
A 'conceit' (or metaphysical conceit) by definition is an extended figure of speech which brings together comparison of two unlikely objects (an abstract idea such as life, death or love with a concrete object) by using " metaphors, simile, imagery, hyperbole, and contradiction" (Wheeler, 2014).
ReplyDeleteIn using a conceit the writer attempts to develop and draw conclusions of shared similarity, at the same time being strongly conscious of the differences between, the compared objects and illustrated imagery to symbolize or convey meaning of the text and build a deeper understanding of the speaker's thought and emotional state.
An outrageous example would be John Dunne's poem 'The Flea', in which the poet tries to seduce a lady to engage in intercourse by arguing that a flea has bitten them both, so already inside the flea is a holy union of both their blood, an intimacy which goes beyond mere sexual intercourse, "This flea is you and I, and this, Our marriage bed, and marriage temple is." (Dunne, 1996) After the lady kills the flea in rejection of his advances he invokes her guilt by saying she has killed him, herself and the flea "And sacrilege, three sins in killing three", and that such a sin is far greater than her "false" fear of committing pre-marital sex.
Wheeler, K. (2014). Literary Terms and Definition. Retrieved from April 12, 2014 from: http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/lit_terms_c.html
Dunne, J. (1996). The Flea. The Norton Anthology of Poetry. Retrieved April 12, 2014 from: http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/175764
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDuring the English Renaissance era the access to education were limited for women of nobility and the right to enter into professions (law, medicine, politics) were prohibited, although they began to practice in intellectual fields previously reserved for men (in this instance, Poetics). By looking closely at the relationship between Poet Cowley and Katherine Phillips, Revard (1997) states two primary reasons to why women were held back.
ReplyDeleteFirst reason is that women have an unfair advantage over men because of their beauty (in which they always came out victorious in an "armortory contest" between the two genders). Where women had their natural beauty as a "weapon", the use of the "brain" or wit was a monopoly of men. Should women become in possession of both it would mean their dominance over men and an end to the purity of the poetic medium.
Secondly women have a natural proclivity towards creativity because of their physiological capacity to bear children. Should women expand their creativity beyond the domestic sphere, and into an intellectual one, men feared that it may threaten the social constructs of domesticity and family.
Close reading of Cowley's pindanric ode to Katherine Phillips, which used courtly language and "overblown compliments", reveals a smokescreen of the institutionalized and societal sentiment of female inferiority. Throughout his ode to Phillips Cowley equates Phillip's skill and ability as a poet to qualities of the female gender, and "makes no direct reference to her poems or translations". By confining Phillips to her beauty, virtue, fecundity, all qualities specific to her gender, she is a women first, and a poet second and never an equal to other male poets.
According to Ram (n.d.) the "Renaissance brought with it a new way of thinking. It was thought men and women could do anything and be anything they wanted to be, that their capacity for knowledge was limitless" therefore women of the elite class were taught (by male tutors at home) in languages, classics, mathematics and other academic subjects. However they were still considered the weaker sex defined by the restrictive and assigned qualities of their gender and their duty to serve and depend on men.
Ram, B. (n.d.). Gender Roles In Elizabethan Society. Retrieved April 15th, 2014 from: www.facultyfiles.deanza.edu/gems/pesanojulie/genderroles.ppt
Revard, S.P (1997). "Katherine Phillips, 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.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1.
ReplyDeleteReferring to the story of Steeleye Span, ‘King Henry’, King Henry was casually slaying a deer for meat which suddenly an earthquake struck which the loathly lady appeared and was described as grizzly ghost (Steeleye Span, 1972, track 6). The loathly was quiet vicious described through her level of uncontrollable hunger and thirst which King Henry had no other option to be obedient to her (Steeleye Span, 1972, track 6). In comparison to the story of king henry and the wife’s bath tale, the knight from the wife’s bath tale happened to rape a young maiden which he suffered in consequence to his wrong action (The Canterbury Tale: the Wife of Bath’s Tale, n.d). Whereas in the storey of king henry, the loathly lady just appeared and dominated King Arthur with the power she had. There was a variation based on the reasons of the loathly ladies appearances to King Arthur and the knight.
Referring to the wife’s bath tale, the knight was forced to marry the old hag within the story which he cried out loud and pleaded for the old hag to take his material possessions and not his body. Whereas within the story of the weeding of sir Gawain and dame ragnell (The wedding of sir Gawain and dame ragnell, 2012) states, “Without hesitation, Gawain, the most noble of knights answered that he would marry her in a minute, even if she was a devil, if it would help save Arthur’s life”. The difference of the two previous tales is the level of emotion each character of knight is going through.. The knights of both stories went through the same deciding process towards marriage, but the variation occurred on their emotional approach of responding to the old hags for marriage.
The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.studyguide.org/gawain_and_lady_ragnell.htm
Steeleye Span (1972). King Henry. On Below the Salt [CD]. US: Shanachie.
SparkNotes: The Canterbury Tales: The Wife of Bath’s Tale. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/canterbury/section10.rhtml
Qestion 4
ReplyDeleteThe metaphysical poets have recognition with sharing a concern for metaphysical speculation, as well as recognition for their use of poetic conceits. A figure of speech involving two objects which are linked together with the help of similes or metaphors is defined as a conceit (Conceit – definitions and examples, n.d)
Question 5
A provided example of a conceit can be understood from Andrew Marvell’s text “To his coy mistress”. According to (Andrew Marvell: To his Coy Mistress, n.d) “My vegetable love should grow Vaster than empires, and more slow”. Referring to the previous statement, the conceit is identifies through the simile’s within the text. Marvel describes his emotion of love which states the comparison of how he currently loves (vegetable love), and how fast his love will grow (Vaster than empires).
Andrew Marvell: To his Coy Mistress. "Had we but world enough and time." (Cavalier poem, Carpe Diem). (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/marvell/coy.htm
Conceit - Definition and Examples | Literary Devices. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://literarydevices.net/conceit/
2.
ReplyDelete"Alas!" Arthur said, "woe is me
That I should cause Gawain to marry you,
For he will hate saying no.
I've never seen such an ugly woman
Anywhere on this earth.
I don't know what to do!"
"Foresooth," said the king, "never as badly.
Alas! I am at the point of killing myself,
For I would be better off dead." Where the knight is pointing out his disgust with being even proposed such an idea to engage with an old hag.
Here he is writing a tale with indication that no one should want to be forced into marrying an ugly woman.However as the tale unfolds the story unveils itself to reveal more of the truth behind such biased behaviour ( even in story ).
"Gawain, I met the foulest lady today,
Certainly the worst I've ever seen.
She told me she would save my life
But first she wants to have a husband.
Therefore, I moan. I am woebegone."
There are fortunate events to be discovered under the spell of this loathly lady. She can bring the wonders of magic and fairytales through the power of her knowledge which helps him save his own life.
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain
and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and
Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
4.
ReplyDeleteThe Elizabethan context for a conceit would refer to an extended metaphor. Not only were their verses extravagant but classic styles of forming a story through detail and action through emotion. Used to extend and give elaboration to describing a scene,object, situation etc.
Eliot, Charles W., ed. 1909–17. The Harvard Classics and Harvard Classics Shelf of Fiction.
6.
ReplyDeleteRevard (1997) Depicted the attributes of the time between sexes. To be a woman and to be writing poetry was not regarded very highly. Unless of course a male poet was to acknowledge the female poet's work. This foretold the workings that male had power over even the expression through poems and poetry at the time. Dominance in that era by the males would veer the poems and verses in a way that would most likely be viewed by other males. This kept the dominance in the male realm.Even good female writers struggled to have their masterpieces recognized.
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.
ReplyDeleteThere is some prime evidence that Chaucer may have shown motifs of proto feminism through the piece “The Wife of Bath’s Tale”. This poem was written during the 14th century, hundreds of years before the development of first wave feminism (19th century). Therefore the perception of equality and feminism would have been completely different comparing then and now as back then it was rare for women to even feature in literature due to class difference, looks and power which was dominated by men. Even with the distinct differences of values and respect of that time, Chaucer portrays senses of equality within the text. “Two creatures agreeing together (line 924)” shows a hint of equality between man and women in how it is not an one sided relationship, but two sides agreeing to be together, which was a very rare viewpoint of the time Chaucer was living in (1300-1400).
894: Except that the queen and other ladies as well,
895: So long prayed the king for grace,
896: Until he granted him his life right there,
897: And gave him to the queen, all at her will,
898: To choose whether she would him save or put to death.
The Queen and her ladies prayed for grace that the king would grant this knights life that deserved death. By granting his life, King Author would then hand him over to the queen and her ladies for their pleasure in deciding what happens.
This is one of the main reasons as to why critics believe Chaucer was a feminist. Here the Queen and her ladies had the pleasure in doing as they wished and prayed. In these days women did not have these rights, the King would do as he pleased without undermining his sovereignty.
904 I grant thee life, if thou canst tell me
905 What thing it is that women most desire
The idea of the queen also being in a power of sovereignty in deciding the fate of the knight also shows some sort of empowerment towards women. The queen has the authority to spare the knights life if he can tell her what a women most desires
.
Through these points I believe that for the time of the text being written, Chaucer is somewhat revolutionary and can be considered a proto-feminist.