Please use the comments section below for your answers.
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?
Hi, I answered question 6, however I couldn't fit it into one comment because it was too long, so I split it into two parts, the second is in reply to my first comment.
ReplyDeleteDuring the English Renaissance, female poets and laureates began to gain notoriety, however poetry (like most forms of creativity at the time) was largely considered a 'male' practice. It was argued that to keep the form 'pure', females should be kept separate (Revard, 1997). Katherine Phillips and Aphra Behn are two examples of notable female poets from the Elizabethan period.
Female poets gained notoriety however, commendation and recognition of them in the period was prefaced. Any praises of Phillips' work for example, mentioned her sex as well as her work as a poet. Much like being considered a 'female comedian' in todays times, Katherine Phillips' work was prefaced with the idea that she was a 'female poet'. Her value was that of a female first, and then of literary merit. The language used even in praise of Phillip's as a poet always diminishes her capabilities by reducing her to a product of her gender.
Language, sex, power and transgression are intricately related, according to Revard (1997). The choice of language used by poets in their Pindaric Odes exercises a specific power struggle, particularly in comparison between the Odes of Cowley and Behn, a male and female poet laureate respectively. The choice of language used to subtly both praise and demean female poets of the time, as mentioned above are an exercise in ‘masculine’ power over the female.
Female power, in the minds of (male) Renaissance writers, was exclusively maintained in her beauty and 'femininity'…"As Cowley noted in his Anacreontic "Beauty," when women contest with men in affairs of love, their advantage of beauty allows them to carry the day. " (Revard, 1997 pg. 20) In terms of wit however, woman were seen as inferior, for if males conceded in terms of wit as well as beauty they would be liable to fall in other areas, therefore renouncing their power. Therefore, female poets of the time were seen as not as 'full of wit' than their male counterparts.
“…Women possess an unfair advantage over men merely because they are women; their sex alone confers beauty, virtue, and fecundity--all female qualities. Now, in aspiring to wit, women conspire to take away the weapon that amorous male poets have used in the battlefield of love to secure themselves against women's natural advantages…”
Cowley (1656) quoted in Revard, 1997 pg. 21
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBehn on the other hand uses this idea of femininity at the time to her advantage in her Pindaric Odes to gain favour or to politely distance herself from writers or ideas, depending on her desires. By adhering to the stereotype in certain aspects she is able to subvert it in others, presenting ideas that could be read as ironic or otherwise, allowing her to undermine those in positions of power from within. (Revard, 1997).
DeleteThis interpretation of the works of Aphra Behn allows us to truly understand the idea that the choice of language plays a significant role in terms of power. As a woman of the period, it would not have been considered proper for her to truly say her true thoughts on matters such as education. By adhering to the language that would have been appropriate, she is able to create what could be read as an ironic statement that could be denied. The transgression of acting outside of the conventions of her sex is an act of power itself, even though she is not in a position of power and must exercise small rebellions to retain a sense of it.
Returning to the modern equivalent of female comedians routinely being regarded as ‘second rate’ and prefaced with the ‘female’ in their identifier as though they do not qualify as a ‘comedian’ in the purest sense. If we consider the idea that what we understand to be stand up comedy today is a relatively new concept, emerging in the UK in the 19th century, but women in the industry today go through the same trials that female poets went through in the 16th century, have we progressed that much in terms of accepting female artists as ‘valid’ producers of their proposed art form?
References:
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.
A particularly good answer, Lauren, and well written. Supplying references would have been a good move.
DeleteHi there heres my answer for question number 2:
ReplyDeleteThe Wife of Bath’s Tale is a story about a knight who is granted a second chance at life after he took away a women’s maidenhead. If he could answer the Queen’s one question, what thing that a women desires most correctly he was free to live his life out in peace. He was given a year to travel and ask women the answer to this question before returning to the queen and giving his answer back. If his answer was right he could then live his life, but if he had not learned the truth within the year the queen would kill him for his punishment. Critics have believed that throughout this tale there are ideas that indicate towards Chaucer being a feminist.
I agree with them because every move the females made within this tale was made after they had checked with the man in their life that they were in charge and the leader. There is an example from when the Queen was asking her king for grace and to have the decision of what to do with the man handed over to her. During this time, we all know that the King was the head of state and Queen’s always came second to them but when the King decided to give the decision of what to do with the man over to the Queen it was a sign of him putting the Queen above himself. Shown in line 895-898 “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 shows Chaucer was trying to show that women deserve to be equal or even a higher status than men. Proving to readers that there is definitely an underlying feminist tone throughout this tale.
Hi Lana, some good ideas of your own here, but no evidence of any research or knowledge of the ideas of other critics or commentators.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi Lana, I agree with your comment because Susan Carter states in her essay written in 2003; “We do not know where Chaucer found the Loathly Lady motif. Whatever source he encountered, whatever transmutation to it had occurred, he evidently appreciated the more immediate destabilization of gender roles…”
Delete“The destabilization of gender roles”, to me this means the ‘swapping over of’ gender roles, which relates to the lines you mentioned (895-898) in the epic poem where the King handed over the decision of what to do with the knight (as punishment for raping the maiden), to the Queen.
This is a clear reversal of gender roles and a good demonstration of feminism because, to my knowledge; back in those days men were regarded more highly and usually made all the important as well as the final decisions.
Reference:
Carter, S. (2003) Coupling the Beastly bride and the Hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Tale. [essay] taken from course material; Critical reader.
That’s interesting that you say that Lana. I myself am personally pretty ambivalent on Chaucer and the argument of feminism. On one hand I personally highly disagree that Chaucer was a feminist, on the other hand, there is a lot of evidence indicating that he was in fact a feminist.
DeleteThe theme of female dominance is clearly established in the text, It’s highlighted through the Queen and the other maiden’s having the power over what the knight’s punishment should be, the fact that the lady fabula has this supernatural power, as well as her power over the knight, and let’s not forget the prologue of the story, where the lady fabula describes that she has been unashamingly married 5 times – even killed one of them. Carosone, (2015) states that her number of marriages demonstrates a strong indication of a feminist text, as multiple marriages were frowned upon by the catholic church, and the patriachy, which dominated society back then. In today’s society the lady fabula would be considered somewhat of a promiscuous woman, based on the number of husbands. Carter, (2003), states that “It is a commonplace when teaching the Wife of Bath’s Tale to stress the anachronism of calling Chaucer a feminist,” (p. 329). Here, Carter’s argument is that by placing woman in power, and making the man flawed, he is demonstrating his feminist views. Although my argument is that, isn’t feminism about equality, and not specifically the claim that women are better?
On the other hand, In Elaine Tuttle Hansen’s Effective - Feminist Approach, she describes the “Wife of Bath as a rapist being rewarded with beautiful woman, not to mention getting off on his crimes with no real punishment. This almost sends the message that forceful acts of sexual assualt are rewarding.
I am mostly leaning towards Chaucer not being a feminist. My personal argument is that perhaps a woman was trapped in the body of a lady fabula, (like a curse or a spell almost) and needed a man to agree to her demands, in order to turn into a beautiful woman, i.e. to break the spell. To me this indicates male power, and that without a man and his selfless actions, the lady fabula would always remain trapped inside the ugly hag’s body, thus ultimately, it is in a man’s power and abilities that he is able to break the spell and/or turn a woman into something beautiful.
I also discussed above about the physical appearance of the lady fabula, and I said that she’s describe with having ugly physical features, and who is to say that this wasn’t Chaucer’s way of over exaggerating the appearance of an average looking person. He describes the lady fabula as having broad hips and a big butt, i.e. fat, her face is red, and there is a gap between her teeth, (these are common physical traits). For me, it’s an indication of Chaucer’s vanity, and he’s saying if a woman is fat, or is red faced, or has a gap in her teeth, she is horrendous in appearance. So, if I am right in my perception, his description of the lady fabula, demonstrates Chaucer’s disrespect to female beauty and exemplifies his vanity. Would a feminist, discuss a woman’s appearance so savagely? Would a feminist gravitate towards describing establish a female for her beauty only? I understand that feminism now may be different values to feminism them, should the movement even have existed, but I think generally, being a feminist, is respecting women as a whole, and not characterizing them based on physical appearance.
References:
DeleteCarter, S. (2003) Coupling the Beastly bride and the Hunter hunted: What lies behind Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Tale. [essay] taken from course material; Critical reader.
Carosone, M (2015). Geoffrey Chaucer: Feminist or not? Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/657084/Geoffrey_Chaucer_Feminist_Or_Not
Dinshaw, Carolyn. (1989). Chaucer’s Sexual Poetics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Hansen, Elaine Tuttle. Chaucer and the fictions of gender. Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford: Univ. of California Press, 1992.
1. Cite some variations of the lady fabula....
ReplyDeleteThe loathly lady fabula is often depicted as an incredibly ugly woman, often a witch, who has the ability of supernatural powers. The loathly lady fabula is depicted in 3 different variations across the three texts in discussion; Chaucer’s The Wife of Bath’s Tale, Hahns’ The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, as well as Steeleye Spans’ song that also depicts a lady Fabula. All 3 variations, are very similar, and signify that the lady fabula is an ugly hag that makes attempts at giving men what they desire. They also have the common theme of turning beautiful, once they are given what they request from their male subjects. I think across the 3 stories, the central focus is not actually the lady fabula, but rather the male counterpart who becomes the “hero.”
In Chaucer’s version, Gawain, a knight is punished for sexually assaulting a maidenhead, and is given a year to discover the answer to “what women most desire,” after searching endlessly without success, he comes across the lady fabula, an old hag, who is willing to help him answer the question in exchange of becoming his wife. Although he agrees, as if would save his life, when it comes to him acting out on his promise, he regrets his decision, saying; “alas and woe is me! I know right well that such was my promise, for god’s love choose a new request! Take all my goods and let my body go.” Here clearly establishes his reluctance to marry the hag, and even admits to her that it is simply because of her ugly appearance. To me, he’s kind of depicted as a bit of a coward, for not wanting to go through with his promise, even though it saved his life, especially because it is the idea of vanity that holding him back from wedding the lady fabula. He even goes so far as to say, take everything I own from me. However, notably, the lady fabula does give Gawain the option to back out, and he says no, I’ll stay with you, which quite honestly, I don’t particularly understand why. Once they go through with the wedding, the lady fabula, turns into a beautiful woman, (possibly the reward of acting in selflessness and going through with the wedding) and the two live a long and happy life.
Hahn’s version, describes King Arthur whose safety is threatened when the lady fabula, i.e. Dame Ragnell demands that she marry Arthur’s knight Gawain. Even though Arthur is reluctant to tell Gawain about the possible arrangement of a wedding between such an ugly woman, and such a good friend, Gawain agrees, as his loyalties to Arthur are far greater than his reluctance to wed to an ugly woman. I think the emphasis in this story is on the knight Gawain. He doesn’t care what the woman looks like, if it means that it would save Arthur’s life, he states; “…even if she as foul as Beelzebub, this is my duty as a knight.” He then ultimately becomes the hero of the story, through again demonstrating his selflessness and loyalties, and kind of takes a bullet, if you will, in which he is rewarded with, by the fabula turning into a beautiful woman.
The third text, which is a song by Steeleye Spans, paints the story of King Henry who is said to have a heart of gold. The lady fabula, who is describes as a hellish creature – again! (we get it she’s ugly), comes to him and his men, demanding cruel, unthinkable requirements, which even though hurts his entire being, King Henry attends to diligently. The next morning, King Henry is surprised that as a result of his kindness and good will, the ugly hag has turned into a beautiful young woman. Once again, there is a clear distinction, in how being selfless towards a horrible woman, can give you great outcomes, i.e. a beautiful woman.
DeleteThere is a lot of emphasis on the appearance of woman throughout these 3 texts. The subject of the appearance of woman is one that is extensively discussed within our society today, especially within media, and assumingly so, it was also held of great high value, during the times that these poems were written, due to it being their central focus. The lady fabula is described as being fat, and having a big nose, and having unruly hair and crooked teeth, such physical traits that we have no physical control over, unless some form of surgery is taken place. It’s essentially saying that if a woman has imperfect teeth, nose and hair, or if she’s overweight, etc. if she’s anything less than perfect, she is effectively deemed ugly. Which brings me to the question, was the lady fabula, physically as horrendous as she was described OR were Chaucer and Hahn (not focusing on Steeleye Sans version of the lady fabula as she was described as emotionally ugly, through her list of demands) being, for lack of a better word, complete assholes, and held high expectations and standards of beauty for women? Maybe the lady fabula wasn’t exactly as ungodly as described, but rather just a average looking person.
Furthermore, the fact that these men in the stories submit to the female, i.e. the lady fabula, I think it’s an indication of two theories; the first being that if you do good, good shall be returned to you. All three stories, depicted a man doing as the woman desired, listening to the needs of the woman, attending to them selflessly, despite it being against their will. The result of their actions was that they were rewarded with a beautiful maiden in return. My second theory is that if you give yourself to a woman, not specifically physically, but ultimately demonstrating to them that you are there for them, a bond of desire and love forms, making that person be deemed as more attractive, like eye of the beholder kind of idea. Maybe, and I’m just thinking things off the top of my head, but maybe it is that the lady fabula didn’t actually physically transform into a beautiful woman, but rather transformed figuratively and metaphorically in the eyes of the male protagonist. I don’t know, just a thought.
Chaucer, G. (c. 1390). The Wife of Baths Tale. Retrieved May 18, 2017, from http://baike.baidu.com/view/73787.htm
DeleteHahn, T. (Ed.). The wedding of sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo. Michigan: Medieval Institute Publication.
King Arthur. (n.d.) King Arthur. Retrieved May 18, 2017, from http://baike.baidu.com/view/10631.htm
Steeleye Span (1972). King Henry. In Below the Salt. US: Shanachie.
2. After reading “The Wife and Bath Tales,” Critics may believe that that Chaucer was a feminist because of the part where King Arthur decided to hand over the power over to the Queen to decide the fate of the Knight, do shows that the writer of this poem wanted to showcase that the Queen was equally as powerful as the King. Citing from the The Wife and Bath Tales, “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.” (Line 894-898)
ReplyDeleteI believe that the reason why Chaucer has painted the Queen as powerful as the King, is to challenge the idea that women was just as powerful as men, because around that era, women strictly had no rights and power as mens did and this Tale kind of question the relation between men and women, the unbalanced relationship between the two etc.
You can truly tell how feminism came a long way from pre-historic times to modern era and we finally get to see women stepping up to authority and challenging their policy of how women can’t vote, how women have low wages, how women aren’t allowed to be in the government sector and all those other stereotypes women are being labelled as.
Reference
Critical Reader