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?
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”…
ReplyDeleteIn the first tale, “The Wife of Bath’s Tale”, it focuses on a Knight in King Arthur's time who raped a fair young maiden. The Knight is captured, he is condemned to death, but the Queen tells the Knight that he will be spared if he can discover for her what it is that women most desire, and allows him a year and a day in which to find an answer. But everywhere he went, he did not find the answer he was looking for. The answers range from fame and riches to play, or clothes, or sexual pleasure, or flattery, or freedom. When at last the time comes for him to return to the Court, he still lacked the answer he so desperately needed. Outside a castle in the woods, he sees twenty four maidens dancing and singing, but when he approaches they disappear as if by magic, and all that is left is an old hag. The Knight explains the problem to the hag, who is wise and may know the answer, and she forces him to promise to grant any favor she might ask of him in return. With no other options left, the Knight agrees. Arriving at the court, he gives the answer that women most desire sovereignty over their husbands, which is unanimously agreed to be true by the women of the court, who accordingly free the Knight. The old hag then explains to the court the deal she has struck with the Knight, and publicly requests his hand in marriage. Although aghast, he realizes he has no other choice and eventually agrees. On their wedding night the hag is upset that he is repulsed by her in bed. She reminds him that her looks can be an asset – she will be a virtuous wife to him because no other men would desire her. She asks him what he would prefer – an old ugly hag who is loyal, true and humble or a beautiful woman about whom he would always have doubts concerning her faithfulness. The Knight responds by saying that the choice is hers, an answer which pleases her greatly. Now that she has won power over him, she asks him to kiss her, promising both beauty and fidelity. The Knight turns to look at the hag again, but now finds a young and lovely woman. They live happily into old age together.
Continuation: Where as in “King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman”, the story begins when King Arthur was stalking of a deer by in Inglewood Forest. The king, on his own instructions, becomes separated from the rest of his hunting party, follows the deer, kills it and is then surprised by the arrival of an armed knight, Sir Gromer Somer Joure, whose lands, this knight claims, have been seized from him by Sir Gawain. King Arthur is alone and unarmed and Sir Gromer's arrival poses a real threat to him. Sir Gromer tells the king that he must return in exactly a year's time, alone and dressed as he is now, and give him the answer to a question he will ask, what do women most desire? If the king fails to give a satisfactory answer, Sir Gromer will cut off his head. The question is this: what is it that women most desire? King Arthur returns to Carlisle with his knights, he explains to his nephew what happened to him in the forest and suggests that they both ride about the country collecting answers to this tricky question. So they both do this, riding separately about the kingdom and writing down the answers they receive. When they return, they compare notes. Sir Gawain is still willing, but King Arthur senses the hopelessness of it all and decides to go once more into Inglewood Forest to look for inspiration. In the forest he encounters an ugly hag on a fine horse, a loathly lady who claims to know the king's problem and offers to give him the answer to this question that will save his life, on one condition. That she is allowed to marry Sir Gawain. The king returns to Carlisle and reluctantly confronts Sir Gawain with this dilemma. Soon, King Arthur rides alone into the forest to fulfill his promise to Sir Gromer Somer Joure and quickly meets with Dame Ragnelle, who is, in fact, Sir Gromer's sister and who reminds King Arthur of the hopelessness of his task. King Arthur tells her that Sir Gawain accepts her terms and she reveals to him that what women desire most is sovereynté, the ability to make their own decisions. With this answer King Arthur wins Gromer's challenge, and much to his despair, the wedding of Gawain and Ragnelle goes ahead as planned. Later, the new pair retire to the bedroom. After brief hesitation, Gawain assents to treat his new bride as he would if she were desirable, and go to bed with her as a dutiful husband is expected to do. When he looks up, he is astonished to see the most beautiful woman he has ever seen standing before him. She explains she had been under a spell to look like a hag until a good knight married her; now her looks will be restored half the day. She gives him the choice to have her beautiful at night, when they are together, or during the day, when they are with others. Instead, he gives her the sovereynté to make the choice herself. This answer lifts the curse for good, and Ragnelle's beauty returns permanently. The couple live happily, but for only five years until her death.
ReplyDeleteWhere as “King Henry'”, the song itself is about King Henry's relations with a 'grisly ghost'. He feeds it with his horses and hawks, he lays it in his bed, yet he refuses to sleep with it, and in the morning he finds out that the ghost has transformed into a beautiful lady. The first story was about a knight married to the loathly lady as a consequence to ‘deflowering’ a young woman, the second story is about a knight who has to keep his promise to the lady to avoid getting his head chopped off and further trouble from the lady. Even though the lady Sir Gawain is marrying is, in actuality, his sister.
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”...
DeleteHahn (1995) proposes “A variety of early European vernacular stories retell the plot of a loathly lady who, in return for certain crucial information or power, demands some sign of sexual favour from a hero, and is then transformed by the hero’s compliance.”
The Loathly lady is common in medieval literature and her presence is evident in The Wedding of Sir Gawain, King Henry and The Wife of Bath. They are different variations on the same theme. She is characterised by an unsightly but wise old woman who transforms into a beauty. The loathly lady is an archetype and in each story we are told of her ugliness in various ways. She has been put there to demonstrate how important appearances are in society.
In the Wedding of Sir Gawain there was a detailed description of her looks.......
“Her mouth wide, her teeth all yellow.
Her eyes were bleary, as large as balls,.....
To recite the foulness of that lady
There is no tongue fit.
She had ugliness to spare.”
In Steeleye Span, ‘King Henry’, there was less description......
“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.”
Until we get to Chaucer’s Wife of Bath where there is very little detail about her ugly features.....
“Thou art so loathsome, and so old also,
And moreover descended from such low born lineage”
In each of the tales we are aware of the unfortunate outward appearance of the loathly lady.
In King Henry and The Wife of Bath she transforms into a beauty after sleeping with the King and the Knight.
We do not find out what happens to the Loathly Lady in the King Arthur story. Perhaps it is assumed that Sir Gawain goes through with the marriage due to his loyalty toward the King.
In The Wife of Bath the old hag is rewarded with what she wants which is sovereignty and the knight is compensated with a fair young faithful maiden.
It is not unlike Beauty and the Beast in many ways, where Belle eventually sees past the beast’s hideous facade and shocking temper and he in turn begins to trust her kindness.
Gawain’s loyalty to his King is heroic “I will wed her at the time you set. I pray you worry no more. Thou she be the foulest person, that ever has seen on the earth, for you I will not hesitate.”
Hahn (1995) suggests that these stories deal with issue of duality, from desirability to repulsion, danger to life-saving messages.
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
Thank you for that Mary. That's a lot of examples there!
DeleteWell written summaries, Simon. great for someone who has not read the story. But we need a little more analysis and reference to other commentaries. to get good grades you need to go beyond description or narrative summary to the issues at stake.
ReplyDeleteI'll remember that next time. Thank you.
Delete2. 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.
ReplyDelete“By verray force, he rafte hire maydenhed; For which oppressioun was swich clamour…” I think this is the first time in the The Wife of Bath that we see a hint of feminism. “By verray force, he rafte hire maydenhed” is code for what we would call rape nowadays. Instead of victim blaming, Chaucer follows up with “For which oppressioun was swich clamour”, which essentially means that it was wrong, and people were calling injustice on such actions. If this was not the norm in Chaucer’s time, then he could have been making a statement to try and convince people to stand up for women’s rights.
Another way Chaucer possibly plays with feminism is when he ‘gifts’ the man’s life to the Queen, who then sends him on a quest/journey to discover what women really want. However, I don’t think it is really feminism, as in the tale he spared the man’s life, even after he broke the law and violated a woman. I think Chaucer is less of a feminist and more of an equal rights supporter.
I think Susan Carter’s commentary of Chaucer and feminism “Coupling The Beastly Bride And The Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind Chaucer’s Wife Of Bath’s Tale” supports my belief that Chaucer is less than a feminist and more of a supporter for equal rights. She says “The motif central to the Wife’s tale … makes it more feasible that the Wife’s tale is centrally about liberation from gender role restriction.” To me, liberation from gender role restriction means equality, not feminism. Nowadays, feminism seems to be viewed as women being better than men, so I have interpreted her comment as a way of implying that Chaucer is more for equality than feminism. She also admits that he seems to be less concerned with the idea of Kingship and more concerned with other themes, such as “the gender role destabilization of the vehicle,” and “the allegorical motif,” alluding to the ideas of equality.
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).
' Chaucer is less than a feminist and more of a supporter for equal rights.'
DeleteThis is confused. Feminists do support equal rights. Otherwise this is an effective piece of reasoning.
I've always been confused when it comes to feminism and equal rights as they are often differentiated by the media. Unfortunately, the feminists that make it in to the media are the ones who desire women to have power over men, or as you said in class on the 8th of April, sovereignty. Feminism has such a negative connotation because of these few, that I feel equality is a better way to express things such as equal pay for men and women, etc, etc. I know I'm not the only one confused, after reading Debate a couple of weeks ago, but I do feel that the easier way for myself to understand what feminism really is, is to identify it as equality, especially in a public place like a blog where many different people can see it and interpret it in different ways.
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.
ReplyDeleteIn the tale of the wife of baths tale there is evidence that suggests some form of gender equality or gender role reversal where the female takes the more dominant role of the sexes. A main example of this would be when Arthur gives the role of punishment of the Knight to the Queen.
“Except that the queen and other ladies as well So long prayed the King for grace Until he granted him his life right there, And gave him to the queen, all at her will, To choose whether she would him save or put to death.”
This is where Arthur is essentially sacrificing his power and his decision making abilities (after he has already condemned the Knight to death) as the Queen now has the power to undo this action if she sees fit- as a character she herself is evidence of the gender power swap as she is outspoken, confident in her own decisions and feels free to speak her mind and express her thoughts to her husband.
Feminism in the simplest form or definition can be described as “the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men” (dictionary.com). It can be seen that Chaucer is sharing common links with the idea of feminism and at the very least his work reflects and possess feminist ideals. Despite there not being a feminist movement until at least the 19th century, Chaucer can still have the feminist title applied to his work as Spencer (1983) said that works that move towards obtaining rights for women is a feminist action. However “If Chaucer is not actually endorsing the strident voice he gives to the Wife, he is certainly making with play with textuality, with subjectivity and with the construction of ideas about sexuality.” (Carter, 2003).
This creates a tension as you are unsure if he was a feminist himself or did he just have feminist ideas, there is dispute whether Chaucer actually agreed with what he was writing about. I lean towards the idea that Chaucer used these strong feminist themes in his stories as it created a difference from the other heroic tales of men and their escapades. I also feel as though instead of reinforcing feminist ideas of equal rights for men and women, the Wife of Baths Tale instead shows how women can have power over men, which is fundamentally different from the definition of feminism. I do however acknowledge that with Chaucer mixing things up with gender roles it is a step towards the goals of a feminist movement. Chaucer may not have been a feminist but he does know and understand the principles of feminism as you would have to consciously recognise a power struggle between genders for this story to be written this way.
References.
Carter, Susan. (2003). Coupling the Beastly Bride and Hunter Hunted: What lies behing Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s Tale. The Chaucer Review, Volume 37(4), p81. Pennsylvania, U.S.A.: Pennsylvania State University.
Spender, Dale. (1983). There's always been a women's movement. London: Pandora Press.
What really interested me about your comment was "This is where Arthur is essentially sacrificing his power and his decision making abilities (after he has already condemned the Knight to death) as the Queen now has the power to undo this action if she sees fit". My view was that Chaucer was more of an equal rights supporter than an feminist, however your comment makes me wonder if he was actually both.
DeleteYes, he seemed to have had feminist ideas, but perhaps in the context of his society, because feminism was not around just yet, he was afraid to express those views, which perhaps meant he stayed in a far safer area of equality for all, and this is perhaps why I interpreted the tale different to you.
Equal rights confusion still going here.
DeleteI agree with Ashleigh when she said that shes always been confused between feminism and equal rights, I see very blurred lines between what it really is as it is a very subjective topic due to the way the media and society have portrayed it.
Delete2. 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.
ReplyDeleteSusan Carter suggests that “despite the fact that the Catholic Chaucer presumably is not using the Wife of Bath to present his own views, he allows her to express radical ideas on gender theory and to tell a tale that demonstrates some of what she has theorized. The motif central to the Wife’s tale (that a shapeshifting hag becomes beautiful once she gets her own way) makes it more feasible that the Wife’s tale is centrally about liberation from gender role restriction. Chaucer is more interested in the gender role destabilization of the vehicle, the allegorical motif, than in the issues of kingship that lie at the core of most loathly lady tales. Chaucer’s foregrounding of gender exploits the shapeshifting loathly lady motif as a vehicle for examining the sphere of heterosexual power contestation. Chaucer who plays with its slippage, ambivalence, and reversal of gender roles. Evidence that the loathly lady is humbly related to a set of goddesses who expand the meaning of femininity is available in the settings in which she is found, in the hunting motif ubiquitous to her tales, and in her quasi- divine control. The reformed body of the shape-changer is superlatively beautiful (though not described with much detail), yet the beast who also inhabits her incarnates a femininity that is strong, independent, and active in its ability to desire, violate, and control.
Michael Carosone asks ‘Is she a feminist?’ Yes. She is openly sensual and openly honest; she is open with her beliefs and ideas, and is not afraid to speak her mind. Her strong will to survive is only surpassed by her strong will to defend her position as a woman, and the positions of other women. Yes, the Wife of Bath is somewhat of a stereotypical woman of the Middle Ages. However, that should not diminish the fact that she is also a pioneer for the women of her time because she is ahead of her own time. She is unapologetic. She is not subservient and timid. She is not ashamed. And she does not need a man to think for her. She is bold, proud, and independent. Feminist critics want to read more female characters similar to her.
Helen Cooper argues that the theme of female dominance is fundamental to the Wife of Bath's Prologue. Her characterization as master, or sovereign lord, is particularly evident in the following passage: “Of tribulacion in mariage,/Of which I am expert in al myn age –f/This is to seyn, myself have been the whippe.” (III.179–181)
In her book, Sexual Poetics, Carolyn Dinshaw proposes that The Wife of Bath, herself, in her “Prologue,” even mentions Dinshaw’s argument and theme when she states the following: “Men may devyne and glosen, up and doun.” Readers and critics must realize that the Wife of Bath is confident and speaks out against patriarchal discourse and clerical teaching - such a fact cannot, and must not, be denied. Ultimately, Dinshaw professes that “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” is included in The Canterbury Tales due to Chaucer’s need to voice an opposition to the patriarchal discourse. Such a belief seems to imply that Chaucer was an early feminist who was unable to announce himself as such because of the misogyny of his time; therefore, he voiced his opinions through the Wife of Bath. She also praises Chaucer for writing such a character and tale: “The Wife thus articulates the misogynistic hermeneutic...to make it accommodate the feminine” (pg. 116). The fact that Chaucer was born and lived during the medieval times explains his masculine views of his age; however, through the Wife of Bath, he allows his readers— and maybe even forces his readers— to “imagine feminine desire, feminist readings, and the reform of patriarchy” (pg. 117).
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.
ReplyDelete‘The Wife of Bath’s Tale’ is about a Knight who rapes a young maiden and is eventually caught. The Queen tells him that his life will be spared if he can tell her what women really want in life. The knight sets out on a quest and cannot seem to find an answer until a group of young girls vanish right in front of his eyes. It is revealed to be the magic of an old hag who happens to know the answer to his question.
The story of ‘The Wife of the Bath’s Tale’ uses examples of female dominance as well as gender equality as Chaucer; the author was a renowned feminist. For example, Feminism comes into play when we see that King Arthur passes judgment of the knight onto the Queen. The queen is strong willed and is mature enough to make decisions that she sees fit. Gender equality is also shown with this action because he puts the Queen in charge of the final decision, who in response sends the man on a quest.
A main element in this story is that the old woman has the power of transformation and she uses this power to transform into a beautiful, young lady. This in itself reinforces the idea that Chaucer has ideas that women are just as or potentially more powerful than men. The transformation indicates that the woman can bend and manipulate herself to suit what the man wants and in doing so, controls him via lust. The Knight’s desire and hunger once the woman has transformed is ultimately his downfall as the old hag now has power on him.
Feminism is described by dictionary.com as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.” With this is mind we can see that Chaucer has intertwined feminist theories as well as his own thoughts into this story. As Jess has said, Arthur sacrifices his own decision-making in favour of the Queens who in fact has power to undo the verdict that the King has reached. This is a very important idea because we see that Chaucer has truly grasped the ideas of feminism as well as gender equality. I believe he was a bold, courageous man who was ahead of his time in regards to the topic of feminism.
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?
ReplyDeleteThe Wife of Bath is a platform for Chaucer to endorse that women should have more rights and this story is a way of giving this view a voice. It appears that he used this tale to spread reformist ideas. The ideas of women being equal to men would give an indication that this is how Chaucer feels, but he uses a cover of calling The Wife of Bath mad and mocks her extremist attitudes to cover his reputation, as it was not at all normal for a man in Chaucer’s day to have such beliefs. He was unable to express his opinions on feminism so he did it through his character. I believe the tale is feminist and anti-feminist and speaks on behalf of women everywhere. Chaucer was revolutionary to have a character in this time that is not only strong and powerful, but might actually have a brain. It is refreshing to see a story about a robust woman in a time that is so male dominated.
Initially when I was researching this question, I thought it was commendable that Chaucer has used a powerful woman in his story. This woman was not afraid to speak her mind openly. She was sensual, enjoyed sex and questioned the bible. I soon realised I am coming from the viewpoint of a 21st Century young woman. The Wife of Bath may be a good role model today for younger women as she is strong, independent, and determined, however in Chaucer’s day she would have been criticised as vulgar, promiscuous and extremely radical. She conducted herself in the opposite manner of a virtuous woman who would be quiet and submissive and would have been deemed a disgrace and insane due to her views on sex, religion and marriage.
Perhaps Chaucer was not a true feminist and The Wife of Bath is a simple cry for equality among the sexes, for in these times even the highest ranking of women were unable to participate in the same behaviours as their male counterparts. Men were unaware of the needs of women emotionally and intellectually.
I like the way you bring in the varying perspectives, Mary. How a character may be seen at the time, and how we view them now. but you know he could have been allowing the woman to express her viewpoint in order to disapprove of it.
DeleteContunuation of question two:
ReplyDeleteThe Wife of Bath is an extremist and her actions may lead us to consider this tale to be a way of Chaucer portraying a world of complete female domination, particularly when she states that the thing women most want in their lives is to hold power over men. Maybe secretly it’s always been the same, from women in the middle ages to the 21st century woman. At the end of the tale there is a radical turnaround from preaching gender equality to total domination of all males.
The Wife of Bath prays to Jesus even though she has scorned Christianity throughout the entire prologue. “And I pray Jesus to cut short the lives of those who won’t be governed by their wives.”
Chris Huskey (n.d) suggests that Chaucer is possibly making an attempt to spread new ideas such as role reversal for that time using themes such as a woman marrying several times, the last of her husband’s being half her age, travelling the globe, making her husbands jealous with flirtatious behaviour, without necessarily supporting them himself. He does this with a clever attempt at ambiguity where he raises issues of gender equality and women’s control over men. In the next breath he depicts the Wife as being rather mad and eccentric which leaves the reader to decide which is right. (mseg.info)
Is Chaucer simply making fun of The Wife of Bath? Finally men are awarded a pristine female who is submissive after having obeyed women completely and trusted their judgement implicitly. This goes against everything that had been preached. This does not acclaim The Wife of Bath in her goal in preaching feminism, but demotes her character to less intelligent and mocks the entire subject of feminism.
The wife is shameless, illogical and irrational which seemed to be quite ordinary traits of this time. She appears to love her fifth husband Jankyn the most favourably because he treated her worst.
“I trowe I loved hym best, for that he/Was of his daungerous to me.” (Chaucer, p. 513-514).
And yet she desires “sovereynetee” in her marriages.
Parker notes, “The wife of Bath is a character not in harmony but in conflict with itself.”(p.98).
So after considerable research and pondering the question of whether Chaucer may have been a feminist, I have come to a conclusion that Chaucer has very cleverly disguised his own clear views in ambiguity. He has done the full circle. He has ridiculed women as gossips and men as not being as intelligent as they might like to think they are. He has depicted the character of The Wife of Bath to be lewd and over the top with complete female domination, and yet favouring the husband who treated her worst. So with the swings and roundabouts I do not feel clear about the issue of Chaucer’s inclination for feminism, however as I first mentioned I feel his intention was to spread new ideas and he has been very successful with doing so.
It is interesting to see how a work continues to speak to us throughout time.
Reference List
Huskey, C. (n.d). Thoughts on The Wife of Bath. Retrieved from http://www.mseg.info/ib/wife.htm
Parker, D. (1969). Can We Trust the Wife of Bath. The Chaucer Review 4.2.
Hi Mary,
DeleteI agree with you about how it is interesting to see how a work continues to speak to us throughout time. As I was reading your comment, I noticed some points that seemed to still be relevant today, such as the part where the wife appears to love her meanest husband the most, because he treats her the worst. It reminded me of the modern saying "he's only mean to you because he likes you". I wonder how old that saying is, and whether it stemmed from The Wife of Bath.
I also feel unclear as to whether Chaucer was a feminist. I began thinking he might have been, then I thought he was rather more inclined to want equality, after reading Susan Carter. However after reading the Hahn essay in the critical reader, I feel even more confused than ever because it seems to me as if the underlying theme was an answer to the question, What do Women Want?
I liked how you noted both of the attitude's of the wife, as well as the 'full circle' way of ridiculing both men and women.
Hi Ashleigh,
DeleteYes it's great that you brought up the modern saying "he's only mean to you because he likes you," as I had been thinking along similar lines. There is another saying, "Treat them mean, keep them keen," this too has been around for who knows how long, but at it's essence is a modern spin on what we have discussed.
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?
ReplyDeleteThe first statement relating to the purpose of ‘The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle’ that I have noticed is: “The poem proceeds to establish a stable and benign identity for Ragnelle…” (Hahn, 1995). I do not think that this is the entire purpose of the story, but rather something that leads into the main theme, which is: What do women desire most? Later on in the essay, Hahn states that “It has sometimes been said that the fascination of the question and the wish to solve the enigma of Woman…” with the key word being enigma. An enigma is essentially a mystery, so I think that Hahn sees ‘The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle’ and by extension, the loathly lady, as a means of exploring that mystery. However, it does it in such a masculine way according to Hahn, when he notes, “…it conveys express interests that are typically male…” as in Ragnelle, “the narrative unfolds in ways that have the heroine clearly serve the interest of the male chivalric society…”.
In relation to my last comment, how I thought that Chaucer was for equality, I now think after reading Hahn’s essay, that Chaucer could simply be asking the question that some men would want the answer to: what do women want? As in Chaucer’s ‘The Wife of Bath’, the Queen has sovereignty over the rapist’s life, sending him on a journey to discover what a women most desire. I originally thought that Chaucer was playing with the man, mocking him by sending him on a quest that simply could not be completed. However, after Hahn’s essay, I think it is also possible that Chaucer was simply attempting to answer a question that was plaguing him.
Or, I could be reading too much into it, and Hahn may be the one seeing a text as a quest for the answer to the question, as this is what he may have desired while reading ‘The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.’
One thing I find particularly interesting about Hahn’s essay is that he seems to be contradicting himself. There is a paragraph that talks about Ragnelle as being “the nexus that ties them together and makes possible the fraternal and hierarchic bonds of chivalric solidarity.” It seems to me that Hahn is identifying possible feminism in the motif of the loathly lady, but not wanting to state that outright.
Hi Ashleigh, a very good addition to your posts. I too thought “The poem proceeds to establish a stable and benign identity for Ragnelle…” is the first statement regarding ‘The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.’ This is all related to the main theme of “What do women most desire?” We also both had the same stance on the feminist question, both believing that as opposed to being a feminist, he was more for equality.
DeleteI agree with your idea that Chaucer was playing with the man and mocking him by sending him on a quest that was impossible to complete. I do not however believe that Chaucer was merely writing it to answer a personal question. I also think that as much as he is contradicting himself, it may be deliberate to force a response out of the reader. Your final comment regarding the possible feminism lying in the Loathly Lady, but not wanting to be public about it is a good way to end as perhaps he intended it to be read this way, or potentially not.
In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
ReplyDeleteAccording to various sources, “Conceits” can be defined as an unusually elaborate or extended metaphor or simile that is developed ingeniously, often as the basis of a sonnet or other lyric; but also found in dramatic speeches. Literary figures such as Shakespeare and Ben Jonson, John Donne, George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, Andrew Marvell, and Richard Crashaw were some of the major poets of the early 17th century that were known to called the Metaphysical poets. Their style was characterized by wit and metaphysical conceits, that is far-fetched or unusual similes or metaphors, such as William Shakespeare’s comparison of his lady likened to “a summer day”. Also, he even used eight completely dissimilar things such as “sun” (her eyes), “coral” (her lips), “snow” (her breasts) and “wires” (her hair) to compare with the features of his mistress. The specific definition of ‘Wit’, which Johnson applied to the school, was: "a kind of discordia concors; a combination of dissimilar images, or discovery of occult resemblances in things apparently unlike." Their poetry diverged from the style of their times, containing neither images of nature nor allusions to classical mythology, as were common, and there are often allusions to scientific or geographical discoveries. There is also a frequent concern with religious subjects in their poetry. Conceits and metaphors are very powerful in their ways of portraying a different meaning of something, and if we go back to Elizabethan era of poetry we can see these as the top literary devices of their day in that period in time.
The definition of a conceit stands as of 2011 as a special metaphor, which has surprisingly recognized similarities between two extremely different objects – which agrees with how Simon has described what it is. As Simon has said already there were many literary figures such as Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, John Donne that were known to be called the Metaphysical poets- however Shakespeare could be considered the most successful at applying this conceit technique during the 17th century. The lady that Shakespeare has described in Sonnet 18 is likened to “the eternal summer”, using eight dissimilar things to compare to her features, this proved to be a successful descriptive technique as it is also featured in Edmun Spenser’s work- another poet during the Elizabethan and Jacobean time. “Ice and Fire” by Spenser again uses conceits to convey the relationship between himself and his lover – “my lover is like to ice, and I to fire” and “that fire, which all things melt, should harden ice”. This is an effective way to emotively describe an unrequited love that he has.
DeleteThe secondary form of conceit is a referred to as being metaphysical. Linked to the metaphysical poets of the 17th century where it is considered that John Donne is the most well known of this group of poets. Unlike Petrarchan conceits shared by Shakespeare and Spenser, metaphysical poets drew their conceit inspiration using “witty and surprising comparisons from miscellaneous- technology, alchemy, philosophy, cartography and everyday objects” (literal college). This would shape the poem to be received in a more intellectual and logical way as it could be viewed as an extended metaphor, rather than becoming riddled with clichés as Petrarchan poems often could. One significant example of this would be “The Flea” by John Donne as the poem is filled with creative imagery. The flea, blood and murder of the flea has been used as an analogy for having sexual intercourse and the exchanging of bodily fluids. The poem is speaking to a lady, and you can see him attempting to do everything in his power and will to get her to have sex with, he is trying to convince her that it would not be emotionally changing or significant if she did so (the comparison between sexuality and the flea) By the lady not believing what he is saying, kills the flea- just after Donne asks her to spare the three lives in the flea (his own, hers and the fleas) seeing her kill the flea despite his request not to he asks what sin the flea could have committed other than sucking both of their blood ( a strong metaphor of unmarried sex).
Metaphysical conceits create a witty, dramatic effect for the poem that leaves it to be interpreted far differently from a poem that uses Petrarchan conceits.
Literal Collage (2009), the Petrarchan conceit v.s. the metaphysical conceit. http://literarycollage.blogspot.com/2009/05/petrarchan-conceit-vs-metaphysical.html
In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define “conceits”?
DeleteAs Jess and Simon have already stated, “conceits” are extravagant similes or metaphors intricately woven into the verse (Abrams, 1993). They are used to make a comparison with two dissimilar images or things to add drama.
According to Abrams (1993) the conceits of John Donne are said to "leap continually in a restless orbit from the personal to the cosmic and back again." ...as seen in his poem “The Flea”
“It suck'd me first, and now sucks thee,
And in this flea, our two bloods mingled bee;”
It is said that John Dunne is the originator of metaphysical conceits, which are used in an intellectual way to shock and entertain his readers.
In Andrew Marvell’s ‘To His Coy Mistress’, we can see conceit in a literary context within the poem.
“My vegetable love should grow
Vaster than empires, and more slow
Conceits in terms of sonnets help to make sense in the lines of poetry. In Shakespeare’s sonnets the conceits are easily apparent.
Shakespeare Sonnet XVIII (line 2)
“Thou art more lovely and temperate.”
These are just a few examples that I identified within our texts.
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature,
6th ed. New York:W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., p.1081.
John Dunne, The Flea (1572-1631)
Andrew Marvell, To His Coy Mistress(1621-1678)
Very nice Jessica and Mary. I loved the description and analysis in the second paragraph in Jessica's comment. Mary, I loved your reference from Abrams.
DeleteWhat does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteFemale poets were not widely represented in renaissance poetry, and when they were they were seen as women first, then poets.
Revard (1997) proposes that Abraham Cowley respected his female colleagues, however he initially judged them by their sex and their work was never appraised at an equal level.
Katherine Philips was a flourishing female poet particularly in the genre of Pindaric, yet she was treated unfairly due to her sex. Cowley, who first created the Pindaric genre continued his struggle to commend Katherine Philips’ on her poetic ability, amongst male poets, “she is the best of female poets.” (p.23)
“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.” p.21
In “The Death of Sir Anthony Vandike”, Cowley discusses the artistic ability of the famous painter, beginning with praise for his talent in drawing and then goes on to speak about the goodness within the man.
“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.” (p.21)
Whereas in regards to his odes to Katherine Philips, he dwells on the important attributes of women: firstly virtue and beauty and then wit. He marvels over such a wonder; a woman who writes!
Women were always regarded as inferior intellectually to men, even when they had contributed to literary brilliance. This implies a sexual and a literary rivalry between the sexes.
Revard discusses the role of sex and power in English Renaissance , where women had the power of using their beauty and sexual prowess over their male colleagues.
Behn has used her feminine whiles to entice male writers, particularly in regard to Rochester who she held in extremely high regard. Behn needed “men” to bring her up to date with the Greek translations and the form of Pindaric ode that she wrote – taught to her by Abraham Cowley. She later criticises her country who has deprived women from reasonable education based on their sex.
Behn was vocal regarding the denial of women in Greek and Latin education, which stopped them from being able to read classical authors. She was happy that Creech had translated Lucretius’ work however, so women could now read it.
Revard, 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.
Revard (1997), has suggested that the relationship between language, sex,power, and transgression in the English renaissance made it “almost impossible in this era to be gender blind."
ReplyDeleteDuring this time women were very limited with their rights which created limitations as to what they were expected to be able to do, as Mary has said they female poets were seen as women first and poets second. Revard (1997) believed that female poets were indeed recognized solely for their poetry, maybe not on the same level as a male poet but talent was still acknowledged. Although female poets were accepted their gender would always find a way into part of their judgement and reception by other poets.
One strong example of this as Mary has already established in English Renaissance writer Katherine Phillips “the issue of sex becomes to important a motif that that assessment of Phillips as a poet takes second place.” (Bevard 1997) This is in thanks to the Pindaric ode which in summary was "for an all male preserve of pure poetry'. Despite these Pindaric ideals Phillips found success as poet not without encountering difficulties ‘the acceptability of a woman pursuing learning and contesting in the domain of poetry that had been almost exclusively male’ (p.123). The inventor of the Pindaric genre Abraham Cowley struggled with Phillips success that was his female peer in the poetic profession. Cowley found it easier to praise Phillips for her face value beauty instead of her work. The idea that women were praised for beauty rather than talent was not a new idea “takes the view In fact- a Miltonic one- that knowledge is necessary to the confirmation of virtue and the progress of the soul” (Revard, 1997, page 23)
This is in contrast to the males who Cowley worked alongside who he would first praise for being an artist. The choice to praise a women for her virture rather than her artistry is a direct link between the relationship of language and power – a women is not equal to a male and therefore her work shall not be as good as his own. Revard suggested that if a male were to share praise with a female on a poetic level (an artist speaking to an artist regardless of gender) then he would be acknowledging that they were on an equal level. For many years men have been considered to be superior to women not just physically but intellectually this suggests that there is still contention between genders as well as influencing literary contention- showing the effects in this era of sex versus power.
Revard, 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.
6.) What does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteMale poets overshadowed female’s in renaissance poetry, as women were not heavily illustrated or depicted as the working type. Revard (1997) goes on to say that Abraham Cowley did eventually respect female coworkers but he did judge them upon first inspection. He would nowadays be seen as a sexist as he did base his opinion of women by their sex. As already discussed by Mary and Jess, an example of this would be Katherine Phillips whom worked with Abraham Cowley. He would go on to describe her as “the best of the female poets” not acknowledging her skill as high enough to contend with male poets while also reiterating his rejection and dismissal of females in general.
Cowley then goes on to say that with reference to Katherine Phillip’s; he would only highlight important female characteristics such as beauty and humour. Revard also touches on the roles of sex and power in the Renaissance. I believe Cowley thought what he did because women have been known for using their sexual power to get what they want or to one over their male colleagues. This belief that women can get what they want using their looks and seduction is most likely why men like Cowley would think that women do not belong in the work area, and should that they should be solely used for low maintenance, ‘girly’ activities.
In stark comparison with this, Cowley complemented and accepted his male coworkers with passion and approval for not only them, but their work also. His idea that a woman should be based upon her looks as well as morals and not by her ideas is a common choice taken on by many men. Revard shares the idea that if a man were to applaud a woman, then he would be accepting that his and her work is on the same level while also acknowledging no gap on the intellectual scale between the two sexes.
4. In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
ReplyDeleteDictionary.com defines ‘Conceits” as an excessively favorable opinion of ones own ability, importance, wit etc as well as an elaborate, fanciful metaphor, especially of a strained or far-fetched nature. As Simon has stated, there are many famous literary gods such as Shakespeare, Andrew Marvell and George Herbert who would all go on to be called ‘Metaphysical’ poets. The name given because of the dubious and slightly strange conceits that were used by these men, most famously Shakespeare’s comparison of a (his) lady compared to a summers day.
Metaphysical poets drew their conceit using “witty and surprising comparison from miscellaneous technology, alchemy, philosophy, cartography and everyday objects.” These ideas and creative idioms would mean that they were read on a higher, far more intelligent level. The general idea of Metaphysical conceits in my eyes is to create and effect that leaves the reader interpreting something a lot deeper then what appears on the surface. So instead of merely reading a poem, one is reading an inventive and quite perceptive metaphor.
Abrams (1993) states that the conceits of John Donne are said to leap continually in a restless orbit from the personal toe the cosmic and back again. This is seen in his poem “The Flea.” “It suck’d me first, and now sucks thee, And in this flea, our two bloods mingled bee;” The basic translation of this is in reference to sexual intercourse with the transferal of sexual and bodily fluids. This conceit (as well as many others) was created by John Donne as an intelligible way of shocking readers. This in an entirely deliberate attempt to entertain while also provoking a response from his audience.
ReplyDeleteThe 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.
In all honesty, I believe that it is too easy to see The Wife of Bath's Tale as both, a feminist and anti-feminist tale, as dissecting certain areas of the storyline can prove both for and against feminism.
I do believe that the tale does prove to be more feminist than not and this is for a number of reasons that I will discuss.
Because mythological tales were generally written in a time where men were known to be more powerful and 'superior' to women, The Wife of Bath's Tale can be seen as feminist due to it's 'unusual' take on women's roles that gave females a higher status in society. An example of this is when the Knight, who had raped a maiden, is put at the mercy of a courtroom of women who ultimately decide his fate when they are to judge his answer to the question 'what does a woman most desire'. The true irony of the answer, sovereignty, is that the women of the court end up with the power over the knight.
Another note-worthy reason that The Bath's Tale can be a largely feminist tale is due to the role given to Alisoun, where she is seen as the dominant partner in her relationships, despite her insistence that all she really wanted is equality to her husband. The fact that Alisoun was a character with the ability to determine her own status and how she was viewed (as a dominant woman), particularly within that time, proves that Chaucer had at the very least a view that was for feminism.
Alisoun is also portrayed as a sex-crazed woman with a passion for dominance within her relationships. Although this surely was not a favorable characteristic in a woman back in that time, she has no problem practically bragging about her dominating desires, stating,
"Of tribulacion in mariage,
Of which I am expert in al myn age.
This is to seyn, myself have been the whippe."
The fact that Alisoun considers herself to be the 'whip' in her relationships shows that she is proud of making these desires known. In my opinion Alisoun's unusual pride and sense of self proves that Chaucer viewed her as a strong woman; a view that misogynistic men would not agree with in those times.
I conclude that, although it is a topic that can be argued to the death, it is difficult to judge with certainty whether Chaucer was or was not a feminist. The main reason for this, as Mike had once pointed out in class, is that times are very different and The Wife of Bath's Tale was written in an age where feminism was particularly non-existent. This is why I find that Chaucer did have what we today can consider as feminist views, because The Wife of Bath's Tale portrays women in such a positive light that was considered unusual back then, whether Chaucer himself realized this or not. By today's standards, we can say that The Wife of Bath's Tale can be viewed as a feminist tale, however, this may not be defined in the same way back in a time when the tale was written, despite the large influence of feminism in the story-line.
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 the Wife of Bath’s Tale, I do personally see evidences of gender equality or gender role reversal where the females takes on a more dominant role of the sexes. An example of which would be when Arthur gives the role of punishment of the knight to the queen.
“Except that the queen and other ladies as well So long prayed the King for grace Until he granted him his life right there, And gave him to the queen, all at her will, To choose whether she would him save or put to death.”
It is clear over here that Arthur’s decision making abilities after condemning the knight to his death when he hands over the power to the queen. She is then able to decide whether or not the life of the knight should be spared or not. With her outspoken, confident in her own decisions and ability to speak her mind, it provides evidence to us that the queen is a suited character for such a decision.
First and foremost, feminism is defined as “The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.” (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com) Chaucer shares similar ideals of this in his works especially in The Wife Of Baths Tale. Although the feminist movement did not begin until the mid 19th century, Spencer (1983) had stated that the feminist title being applied, works that move towards obtaining rights for women in a feminist action. Carter (2003) however stated that if say Chaucer did not actually endorse the strident voice he gives to the wife, he is certainly making with play with textuality, with subjectivity and with the construction of ideas about sexuality.
It does definitely create a sense of uncertainty as to whether or not Chaucer was a feminist or just had feminist ideas. There is dispute that Chaucer actually agreed with what he was writing about. I don’t believe Chaucer was a feminist but I do believe he was striving to have something different rather than the usual male dominates all, he opted for something different of providing a strong female character that made its step towards a more feminist movement.
In the context of Elizabethaan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define “conceits”?
ReplyDelete“Conceits” is defined as an excessively favorable opinion of ones own ability, importance, wit etc as well as an elaborate, fanciful metaphor, especially of a strained or far fetched nature, according to dictionary.com. Simon stated in his previous comment that literary gods like Shakespeare, Andrew Marvell and George Herbert would be given the title “metaphysical” poets.
Metaphysical poets drew their conceit using “witty and surprising comparison from miscellaneous technology, alchemy, philosophy, cartography and everyday objects.” Their creative ideas and idioms would go on to be read on a far more intelligent level. The idea of Metaphysical conceits is to create an effect that leaves readers to be able to interpret a deeper meaning rather than what only appears to be. In other words, the reader is not only reading a poem but is reading an inventive and perceptive metaphor.
Abrams (1993) states that the conceits of John Donne are said to leap continually in a restless orbit from the personal toe the cosmic and back again. In his poem “the Flea” it is evident. “It suck’d me first, and now sucks thee, and in this flea, our two bloods mingled bee,” The basic translation of this is in reference to sexual intercourse with the transferal of sexual and bodily fluids. It was this conceit (as well as many others) that was created by John Donne as an intelligent way of shocking readers.
What does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteAs women were not heavily illustrated or depicted as the working type, male poets often overshadowed female’s in renaissance poetry. Revard (1997) had stated that Abraham Cowley eventually respected female coworkers but initially judged them upon first inspection. He would be viewed as a sexist in todays modern world as he based his opinions of women by their sex. An example of this would be Katherine Philips whom worked with Abraham
Cowley but would only describe her as “the best of the female poets” but not exactly acknowledging her skill as high enough to contend with male poets while also reiterating his rejection as well as dismissal of females.
Cowley goes on then to describe with reference to Katherine Phillip’s that he would only highlight important female characteristics such as their beauty and humor. Revard also touches on the roles of sex and power in the Renaissance. In my opinion, Cowley thought what he did was valid as he believed women have been known for using their sexuality to get what they want towards their male colleagues. This perception similar to Cowley’s would think perceive women to be individuals that use their looks and seduction would be not suited for a work area and should be solely used for ‘girly’ activities.
Cowley however complemented and accepted his male coworkers with passion and approval for not only them, but their work too. His idea of women is a common choice taken on by many men too. Revard shares the idea that if a man were to applaud woman, he would be accepting that his and her work would be the same level while also acknowledging no gap of the intellectual scale between both sexes.