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)onThe Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle identifies 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 all three tales the Loathly Lady is stated as ugly when she is first introduced
In the Wife of bath's tale:
'There can no man imagine an uglier creature'(L999)
King Arthur meets a really ugly woman:
'She was the ugliest creature'(P1,L4)
King Henry however is the only one not to describe her as ugly. Instead it states:
'And in came a grisly ghost' (L23)
'And nothing less she seemed to be
than a fiend that comes from hell'.(Lines31&32)
At the end of the tales 'The wife of Bath's' and 'King Henry' the Loathly Lady becomes beautiful after she is bedded by the knight and the king.
In King Henry after she was bedded she was referred to as:
'The fairest lady that ever was seen'(L84)
Even though she was referred to as being the ugliest creature King Henry did everything she asked of him. When she asked him to kill his greyhounds and goshawks and feed them to her, he did, then she asked him to take her as his wife; then in the morning after they slept together she was beautiful.
The only tale this does not happen in is 'King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman'.
In this tale the Loathly Lady says to King Arthur:
'For your life is in my hand
Only I can prevent your death'(L32&33)
She then says:
'You must grant me a Knight to wed.
His name is Sir Gawain'(L54&55)
King Arthur goes to Sir Gawain and tells him the tale of the women and of what she asked. Sir Gawain's love for the king was great and he agreed. Due to the other tales we can assume she will become beautiful once they are wed and the marriage is consummated.
Hi Kurt,
DeleteI to agree with that in 'King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Women' that there is no mention of the wedding to Sir Gawain and if the loathly lady turns beautiful as the story ends after he agrees. To which is annoys me as I would have liked to have found out what happened. But then as it seems to be a common feature in the literature during this time maybe there is no need to say anything as it can be taken into context and we can leave on the note of it being humerous that Sir Gawain has accepted the proposal and only see his loyality to the King. It is interesting also to note how the theme of beauty and brains is incorporated in these texts. A more beautiful relationship will be created if people are brought together over intellectual satisfaction instead of looks first. As the King/Knight overcomes his shallowness which is a huge test for thee he will be rewarded greatly with a beautiful wife. Also there is the order of elderly loathly lady to beautiful young women which is interesting that they have used elderly women as hideous instead of just a disfiqured younger person.
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.
ReplyDeleteAs said by Carter (2003) “It is a commonplace when teaching the Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale to stress the anachronism of calling Chaucer a feminist” (p.329). The argument here is that Chaucer has done something different than poets during his time. To make the women in power and the men flawed he must be a feminist. Carter (2003) says “since the knight is a sexual predator rather than an aristocratic sportsman, the turning of the power ratio to make him a sexual victim is acutely appropriate. The rape, so inappropriate for a true hero, signals that Chaucer’s tale is more interested in gender power imbalance than in the qualities that make a good king” (p.334).
The other side to this argument is in the final scene once the Knight and the old lady are married and in their wedding bed - ‘This knyght avyseth hym and sore siketh, But atte laste he seyde in this manere: "My lady and my love, and wyf so deere, I put me in youre wise governance; Cheseth youreself which may be moost plesance And moost honour to yow and me also. I do no fors the wheither of the two, For as yow liketh, it suffiseth me” (L1228 –L 1235). In these lines we hear the final deliberation weather the knight will choose an ugly but faithful wife or a beautiful wife but unfaithful. He cannot choose and says to his loathly wife he does not care which of the two, which ever she chooses will please him. And with this he has completed his quest to find out what women most desire as he has given over his life to his wife and she is to be his master. And from this she grants him his wish to have both, a happy ending to this story. By this twist in the poem Chaucer has granted the flawed rapist Knight his wish which is debated as being anti-feminist.
My own opinion is that I believe Chaucer was a clever writer using irony and going against the norm to create new excitement in literature. Does it really matter if he was a feminist or not?
Reference:
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling the beastly bridge and the hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer’s wife or bath’s tale. The Chaucer Review, 37(4), 329-345. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu
Chaucer, G. (n.d.). The Wife of Bath's Tale. Retrieved January 1, 2006, from http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/index.html 01.01.06
Question 3: Hahn's essay (see critical reader)on The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle identifies the motif of the loathly lady, but argues it has a different purpose than asserting the feminine. What does he think the function of the story is?
ReplyDeleteHahn states in his essay that "At the heart of Ragnelle lies the question of how the unknown, the marvelous, or the threatening is brought into line with legitimate, normative, idealised chivalric society." (Lines 31-33). Basically, he's saying that through the use of Ragnelle as the Loathly Lady, it is demonstrated that through her relationship with Sir Arthur and her marriage with Sir Gawain, the barriers of chivalry are warped (especially with "Sir Gromer Somer Joure [who] represents the forces of wildness and incivility..." (Lines 34-35) ) and the view of the Loathly Lady is shown as a "Beauty and the Beast" figure: both a horrible old hag and (after transformation) a beautiful lady.
However, Ragnelle does more than assert her femininity. She also tries to answer the question posed by Freud: "Was will das Weib?" - "What does Woman want?" (Line 65), which is a difficult question to answer in the actual fabula. Apart from this, the poem is mostly about the centrality of Ragnelle (the Loathly Lady) in the fabula, and how she binds every character and aspect together in perfect harmony, as Hahn states: "This outcome not only unites Ragnelle to Gawain, but to the King and Queen; she then uses this amity to bring Arthur and Gromer to reconciliation." (Lines 102-104).
Another good summary from Hahn: ''By passing among these male characters, she becomes the nexus that ties them all together and makes possible the fraternal and hierarchic bonds of chivalric solidarity'' (Lines 82-84).
DeleteYet when relating back to the question : ''What does Woman want?'', it might be clear that she wanted power. Dame Ragnelle gained power of Sir Gwain with the marriage, but then also was able to gain another type of power over herself from her transformation that set ''her free from enchantment'' (Line 103). Hahn also insinuates Ragnelle enjoyed the control she showed with the reconciliation of Arthur and Gromer and also when ''Ragnelle ends therefore with everyone established in her or his proper place'' (Line 104).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete