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 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?
Q4. In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the work of Abrams (1993), the term 'conceits' refers to the poetic metaphors woven into verses as keys to unlocking the deeper meaning within poems. These keys may used to express 'satire, puns ... and to display the poets own cunning with words' (p. 113).
For example, in Sonnet XVIII, Shakespeare uses conceits as a means to liken the natural beauty of a woman to the beauty of nature itself. He emboldens this idea by describing the woman's warmth to be 'more lovely and more temperate' (line 2) than that of the summers day; that unlike the inevitable end of warm sunny days, her beauty continues to shine for eternity.
It seems the epitome of the conceit appears in line 11 'nor shall death brag thou wander'st in his shade' - even in the face of death or in her dying days, her beauty will continue to remain for as long as 'men can breathe, or eyes can see' (lines 12-13)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteReferences:
DeleteAbrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., p. 1081.
Shakespeare, Sonnet XVII
Hey Courtenay,
DeleteThis is a really good entry. I've tried to keep a little bit of distance from the Shakespearian part of Weeks 4-6 because it gives me a headache. I was curious about this question though, and you've answered it really well. I'm definately slightly smarter after having read this, and for that, I thank you.
James.
Hey james,
DeleteI will admit I did find it difficult to come to terms with Shakespeare because i only knew the text on a surface level, but with conceits it is so much easier to understand the hidden meanings in his texts and I'm pleased to hear I've helped you understand the question more.
If you (or anyone else in our group really) compare sonnet XVIII to Sonnet CXXX, you can see the irony between the two texts in his depictions of the mistress - the former being full of flattery and comparisons to nature whereas the latter describes her as someone less beautiful than nature (ie. lines 1-3 'my mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun; Coral is far more red, than her lips red; If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;) - its almost as if the sonnet is an anti-love poem.
Another thing iv noticed with poets that use conceits is the reason and intellect used as opposed to emotion and mysticism. Is this something anyone else has noticed?
Awesome post Courtenay,
DeleteSimple and straight to the point. To be honest I never even heard of the word conceits until I briefly read about it in the given texts and you've defined it really well! Great use of examples to help explain what you're talking about. Nice :)
Hey Courtenay, really good post. I did the same question and I think that we both have similar points and yes I think that the metaphorical idea in this sonnet was to show after the comparison her beauty would be everlasting as the things he compared her to could fade away.
DeleteCite 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"...
ReplyDeleteConditions of the lady:
Chaucer’s lady is ugly and old, as first described in lines 999 and 1000, “There can no man imagine an uglier creature. At the knight’s coming, the old wife did rise.” Interestingly, Chaucer doesn’t go any deeper into her ugliness until she has requested the knight take her as his wife (1054, 1055). This contrasts with the other depictions of the lady.
Hahn’s version depicts the lady as immensely ugly, but does not mention that she is old (and in fact, makes no reference to her age at all). Rather, he lists her grotesque features (red faced, runny nosed, wide mouthed, yellow-toothed, clotted haired, wide shouldered, and barrel like) and goes on to say “To recite the foulness of that lady there is no tongue fit”. Interestingly, Hahn’s lady sees no transformation (at least in what is included in the reader).
Despite the differences between these two, that Chaucer’s lady is old and ugly (perhaps one could interpret this lady as being ugly because of, rather than in addition to, her old age), and Hahn’s lady is just extremely ugly, Steeleye Span’s depiction is much more otherworldly. This version sees the lady as a supernatural entity, referring to her as “a grisly ghost” and “a fiend that comes from hell” and in fact she is much more than a human woman, “her head hit the roof-tree of the house, her middle you could not span.” This type of description definitely leaves us with the view that this lady was not a human lady, but rather a horrid gigantic entity unto itself.
Actions of the hero:
Chaucer’s hero is the least heroic of any in the three versions. Not only does he willingly commit rape, he also seems to show remorse only in the wake of his punishment. In lines 901 to 912 the Queen hands down this punishment – to spend his next 12 months in pursuit of the answer to the question “What thing is it that woman most desire” – and in the following stanza expresses his regret at being stripped of his freedoms in favour of this search “…and sorrowfully he sighs; But what! He can not do all as he pleases” (Lines 913 and 914). So sadly this hero searches for the answer that will save his life, when he is offered it, he makes the bargain to do whatever the loathly lady asks of him. When she requests to be wife, he begs her to reconsider “For God’s love, choose a new request! Take all my goods and let my body go.” (1060, 1061). The thing that concerns me about this “hero” is that he is rather un-heroic through the entire tale. Not only has he forcefully raped a maiden, he has also showed no remorse for the act, only remorse that he has been punished. He speaks horribly to his new wife. It is only when he has fully conceded to her that she makes the transformation, thus giving her what she most desires; “sovereignty as well over husband as her love and to be in mastery above him” (1037 – 1040). And so, Chaucer’s lusty Knight is rewarded only when he learns to practise what he has learnt on his quest.
Hahn’s version presents the hero as a much more honourable man. Not succumbing to the apparent repulsiveness of the lady (although, he hasn’t actually SEEN her…), he vows to wed her in order to show his loyalty to Arthur. “I shall wed her and wed her again, Even if she be a fiend. Even if she were as foul as Beelzebub.” Hahn’s version of the story definitely presents the most heroic hero. One can conclude that once the lady had transformed, Gawain would be rewarded for his loyalty and belief in the king.
In Steeleye Span’s fable, the lady transforms herself after King Henry has been so courteous as to “give her all her will”, which, from his point of view, he did out of fear. This version stands out, as it’s the only version where the lady doesn’t see the hero for what he is. While Henry cowardly concedes to the lady’s will, she sees his actions as courteous.
Hey James!
DeleteI would agree too, that the most heroic of the three would be Hahn’s knight, I like the fact that it didn’t matter who he was to marry but that he had honoured his place and role as a knight by being loyal to his master/King, always. Great post and inclusion of selected parts of the texts and also for drawing on a possible conclusion that the knight in Hahn’s version would be rewarded for his loyalty to the king when his wife would transform, as the text excludes the ending.
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 are certain pieces of evidence in the text that most definitely depict some kind of equality or reversal of roles between the sexes. For example, Arthur turns the punishment of the Knight over to his queen, after Arthur had decided to put him to death “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.” (Lines 894 to 898). This gives equal power to the Queen, or perhaps greater power, as she has the ability to undo Arthur’s condemnation. The lady herself could also be seen as evidence of this gender reversal, as she is quite outspoken, and speaks defiantly to her new husband.
While Feminism encompasses a diverse array of beliefs and ideas, it could be most simply defined as “the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men” (dictionary.com). According to this simplified definition, Chaucer could definitely be described retroactively as a feminist, or at least as having feminist ideals. Although “feminism” wasn’t a movement or a specified mode of thought until the 19th century, this title could still be applied to Chaucer on the grounds that (to paraphrase Spencer, 1983) anything that moves or works to obtain woman’s rights should be considered a feminist action, even if they did not apply the term to themselves. According to this idea, Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s Tale could be considered a feminist text, although “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).
Personally, I believe Chaucer employed these themes in the story because it made for a better tale; a change of pace from stories about brave kings and heroic men. As for the anachronism of claiming Chaucer as a feminist, I am not sure this is an agreeable claim. Chaucer may have mixed things up with gender roles, but the tale is really asserting that woman can have control over men, which is fundamentally different from woman and men having equal rights. That being said, I think that this is a step towards feminism, and I think it’s unlikely that Chaucer would’ve told the story the way he did if he did not recognise the heterosexual relationship as involving a power struggle, itself indicative of an equal share of power.
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.
Feminism. (2013). Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism?s=t
DeleteI too would agree that the tale is leaning towards the idea that women can have control/power over men which is indeed dissimilar to having equal rights for both parties. In Carter’s review on Chaucer’s tale she states that the tale “is more interested in gender power imbalance than in the qualities that make a good king” p86. Also, the fact that the whole court was made up of women only added to the idea that this text has the idea of feminism. Great post!
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.
ReplyDeleteI personally agree with this statement. I believe that Chaucer indeed must have been a feminist after having read "The Wife of Bath's Tale.One thing that indicates the social position that Chaucer holds is from the power that is shown the women posses in the text. In the text we see the knight going to trial in front of King and being ordered to be put to death "By course of law, and should have lost his head" whilst the Queen and the other ladies pray for the Kings grace "Except that the queen and other ladies as well So long prayed the king for grace". And this wish of theirs gets granted. By the Queen ultimately having the fate of the knight in her hands showed that women had just as much power as men and in some cases even more than the men.
We know that at that particular time in society it was unheard of and rare that women had the same place in society and shared the power with the men. "Medieval society, with its wars, territorial struggles, and violence, seems particularly hostile to the exercise of female initiative and power". So by the power that is shown to be equipped by the women in the tale is a way in which we as readers are shown the feminist view that Chaucer held.
Reference
Erier, M. & Kowaleski, M. (1988). Woman and Power in the Middle Ages. Athens, Georgia,.Thomson-Shore, Inc.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn Carter’s review on Chaucer’s tale she describes the working gender code of the loathly lady as being “constructed from ambiguous ideas of feminish flesh”. She then goes on to describe this idea by pinpointing characteristics, so to speak, of a feminist - represents women of English literature, commands masculine, controls medium of language, authoritative, her will must be done, etc, p 92 and after reading all three given texts, some of these characteristics are clearly depicted by the women. Great post Rahul, I also like how you included how women rarely had the same place as men in society in that particular time period - good to know and understand!
ReplyDeleteThanks Sam. Adding to the point about women not having as many right, I have read and watched many films which are set in earlier times that show woman being below men and considered worthy of a opinion. So that's why it was intriguing to see Chaucer giving the female characters so much power.
ReplyDeleteIn the context of the Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define conceit's?
ReplyDeleteConceit is defined as "A fanciful expression in writing or speech; an elaborate metaphor"
In the context of the Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets you can clearly see this expression being used through the writing.
In Shakespeare's Sonnet XVIII the line "Thou art more lovely and temperate" shows him comparing his lover to a summer's day. He talks about her being more lovely than a summer's day and also being more constant. I think the whole sonnet is metaphorical as it compares the woman to summer as he talks about summer being a beautiful time that can change by experiences and time. Though he talks about the woman not changing and remaining beautiful even as time passes by, she will remain the same and never change.
In the Sonnet CXXX through the first line "My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;" we the comparison made between the mistress and the sun as Shakespeare compares his mistress to the sun by saying that she's not as beautiful. Again in line 2 "Coral is far more red, than her lips red;" we see him comparing the coral being far more red and attractive than his mistress. Stereo typically a women with red lips are beautiful
and attractive a trait that the mistress is shown not to possess. Even after all these comparisons Shakespeare tells about how he still loves his mistress even though she doesn't compare to the sun that is doesn't shine as bright and her features aren't as attractive.
And in the sonnet "Ice and Fire" we see the metaphorical aspect incorporated into it. Through the lines 1." My love is like to ice, and I to fire" 2. "How comes it then that this her cold so great" we see the comparison of his love. He talks about how he is fire and burns for the love of this woman who is compared to being cold and having no interest for him . This shows that there is unrequited love between these two, and as he continues to love and want her more and more she doesn't reciprocate the love.
References
Mabillard, Amanda. An Analysis of Shakespeare's Sonnet 130. Shakespeare Online. 2000. (23/05/2013) < http://www.shakespeare-online.com/sonnets/130detail.html >.