Weeks 4 - 6
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?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete6. What does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteAccording to Revard (1997) the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance was very interesting. We see early in the reading how things such as poetry during that time are arguing against womens rights. We see from Mr. H’s ode, his reaction to Aphra Behn’s Pindaric ode. He seemed to believe that not only Aphra shouldn’t be writing odes to claim rights for her gender, but he also believed that Pindaric ode’s should only be for males. It’s interesting seeing his negative view on this especially as one of the most famous woman poets in the 1680’s used Pindaric’s as a way to honour the king. Pindaric's are known as irregular, loose odes. They were very popular during the late 16th century and continued to be during the 17th and 18th century in England. Abraham Cowley was the inventor of this and it is said that the idea came from Cowley imitating Greek poet, Pindar’s work without actually fully comprehending it, hence the loose, irregularity of the style (Nethercot 1921). Unlike Mr. H, Cowley celebrated women and did so through his Pindaric’s, however still not directly as poets, but instead their beauty and virtue.
Two of the pindaric’s he wrote in 1668 about Katherine Philips, the first was to commend her poetry and the second to honour her death, so it’s odd that Mr. H decided Pindaric’s should be for male use only. It’s emphasised a lot how poetry was a man’s profession, and Cowley explains a males struggle with praising a woman who isn’t a sovereign, mistress or patron, and instead someone who is also a poet like them. They have trouble accepting a woman as their peer in that profession and don’t see them equally. They especially don’t like woman poets if they are successful, often if winning competitions the men still disregard them as being on the same playing field (Revard 1997). It shows mens power over women and we see it so harshly in their language used in their poetry.
We’re later introduced to how sex affected poetry during the English Renaissance. Revard (1997) states that during this era it was practically impossible to be gender blind. Cowley’s use of sex in his poems regarding Phillips became so bold it was like a motif. His pindaric’s became a huge rivalry between the opposite sex’s, and were done so through themes of wit and beauty. Cowley states that men who comply to a woman’s beauty, must comply to her wit due to ‘On Orinda’s Poems”, however he also discusses that due to this, it places women in a sphere in which men judge women as a woman first and a poet second. Even in Cowley’s poem about Katherine Philips’ death “On the Death of Mrs. Katherine Philips,” he solely focuses on her beauty and sex rather then complimenting her poetry. This shows how women were seen during that time especially as Cowley would compliment men’s work for example in his poem "On the Death of Sir Anthony Vandike, the famous Painter,” were he applauded the artist for his work-
ReplyDelete“His All-resembling Pencil did out-pass The mimic Imag’ry of Looking-glass, Nor was his Life less perfect than his Art, Nor was his Hand less erring than his Heart.”
So when it come’s to men they compliment their work first and then second the man himself. On the other hand, Cowley believes that women have an unfair advantage over men because of their sex alone and their beauty and virtue (Revard 1997). It’s said even those women such as Corinna who have won poetry prizes, their beauty was a big contribution, and in Corinna’s despite her winning the Prize of Poetry 4-5 times. Even though men and women were in the same competitions, when women won, men as well as Cowley simply decided that woman for example Philips, was the best female poet. They would completely dismiss comparing men to women all together. Men distinguished men to be more superior, and women inferior when it comes to being a poet, men saw themselves as being more intellectual than women during that time (Revard 1997).
References:
Britannica.com. (2008). Pindaric ode. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/art/Pindaric-ode
Nethercot, A. H. (1921). The Relation of Cowley's "Pindarics" to Pindar's Odes. Modern Philology, 19(1), 107-109. doi:10.1086/387391
Online Encyclopaedia. (2017). PINDARICS. Retrieved from http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/PIG_POL/PINDARICS.html
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
Question 1
ReplyDeleteIn Chaucer’s The Wife Of Bath’s Tale, the Loathly Lady fabula is present. It expresses feminism through the lady being in control, and the interactions between men and women; in this case the Loathly Lady and the Knight.
The theme is seen through the man “making the right decision”, of letting her decide. She has control over him to do this. It feels like he has to do this.
The Knight is desperate to keep his life, so will do anything, he is vulnerable. She gives him the answer after he promises to grant her something in return, which is marriage. This is granted after he says his answer to the court. Once they are married she says:
“Choose now one of these two things: to have me ugly and old until I die, and be you a true, humble wife, and never displease you in all my life, or else you will have me young and fair, and take your chances of the crowd that shall be at your house because of me, or in some other place, as it may well be. Now choose yourself, whichever you please.”
The Knight then says: “My lady and my love, and wife so dear, I put me in your wise governance; choose yourself which may be most pleasure and most honour to you and me also. I do not care which of the two, for as it please you, is enough for me”.
Lady: “Then I have gotten mastery of you, since I may choose and govern as I please?” She then demands a kiss.
He lets her choose and this is what shows sovereignty over the man; the answer of what women most desire. This shows equality, but the lady as decider. Then she turns into a beautiful woman, as a result of the man’s action. They are both rewarded with what they desire.
The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle/ King Arthur meets a really ugly woman, follows a similar storyline. The ugly Dame tells King Arthur to grant one thing, which is to marry Sir Gawain the king’s favourite knight and good friend. She makes him agree before telling all; the rest of the bargain.
“If my answer saves your life, let me marry sir Gawain.”
He is so loyal to king Arthur that he would “wed her and wed her again” to save his life.
The variation between these two stories is that, in The Wife’s tale she gets sovereignty through making the decision and the action of the man putting this decision in her hands. Whereas in the wedding of Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnelle the loathly lady gets her way through threatening King Arthur and ordering to marry Sir Gawain in return. There is no question of what women most desire, the question is “will you save your life or is my desire in vain?” He needs to please the loathly lady by giving her Sir Gawain to wed to spare his life. This will determine the answer whether he will carry out her will.
Question 2
ReplyDeleteIn Susan Carter’s scholarly article, she explains that Chaucer is implying feminism through his view of the gender roles within the Wife of Bath’s Tale. It “is centrally about liberation from gender role restriction” (Susan Carter pg 81). This is seen through the motif that the hag becomes beautiful once she gets her own way, opposed to the man always getting what he wants. He still gets what he wants but at the expense of “loathly before lovely”. She gets what she wants through making the man give her sovereignty over her new husband. Carter mentions that it is not only the woman who is captured but the man also.
Carter has discovered through the tale that the knight gets his reward once he is willing to step outside usual gender restrictions, through handing the decision over to the woman.
Carter relates back to the original Irish myths of the Wife’s Tale (Irish Sovranty Hag), which states the lady is “many-shaped”. The acceptance of this earns Niall a kingdom. (Pg 84). Chaucer changes this through making the tale not all about kingship.
In the end the lady “belongs to both worlds being larger than both” (Carter pg 83). Whereas the knight only belongs to the court. From the beginning of the story she has an advantage, being from the forest.
Chaucer included the hag being outside of the court when the knight goes out seeking the answer. When she returns with him to the court where he reveals his answer, she become a part of the court when he agrees to marry her. He brought her into the court to save his life. (The court is dominated by women). This shows that they need each other to get what they want; a balance between genders. Chaucer’s fabula isn’t about the journey to kingship but more about the gender roles, compared to the other versions.
The conclusion of both stories is a wedding; a union between male and female. I couldn’t help but relate this to the Christian/ Catholic belief and tradition of marriage being a bond between man and woman in the name of God. This could be linked to Irish Catholic as the story originated from Irish mythology. In this religion, sex could only be performed/ granted after marriage, and this is what would have taken place after the hag became beautiful.
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.
ReplyDeleteCritics such as Susan Carter indicate that Chaucer may have not necessarily been a feminist, but rather an advocate for gender inequality. I personally agree with this. However, Chaucer definitely did assert the feminine in many aspects throughout his story. An example of this that Carter mentions is Chaucer’s “placing of sovereignty within the personal power politics of marriage rather than in the kingship.” Carter suggests that the rape incident, which is obviously very inappropriate for a true hero, indicates that Chaucer’s story is more interested in the gender power imbalance as opposed to what qualities make a good king, which is normally present in similar tales. Another example of how Chaucer asserts the feminine that Carter states is the transfer of power from the King to his Queen when it came to dealing with the knight who raped the woman. “In theory, Arthur is the ultimate adjudicator, however in the story, we see Arthur concede jurisdiction over the Knight to the queen.” This to me indicates a concern for women and presents a notion for female power. When the queen then commands the knight to go and find out what it is that women desire the most or have his body beheaded, this further emphasizes female empowerment and thus brings awareness to how women may have wanted to be treated or viewed in society. This idea of power can also be seen in how the loathly lady tells the knight that she can transform and be beautiful within 3 days. Carter states “the specification of a three-day period is provocative given that she changes as soon as her speech concludes.” It is suggested that her proposal of a 3-day transformation simulates Christ’s 3-day resurrection, which is an amplification of the hag’s godlike powers.
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?
Hahn’s essay definitely projects a rather different interpretation of the loathly lady to what Carter thinks. He states that the loathly lady’s depiction is a conveyance of her low estate as opposed to a wild monstrosity. He then goes on to mention that her possession of manners, beauty and youth at the end qualifies her as a lady, which suggests that not having these qualities makes you somewhat less of a lady. Further on, he talks about how the question “What does woman want” is often used to express interests and desires that are typically male, therefore defeating the whole purpose of the question. He states that in the case of Ragnelle, “the narrative unfolds in ways that have the heroine clearly serve the interests of the male chivalric society that the poem good-humoredly celebrates.” This suggests that Hahn does not think that this motif asserts the feminine but is rather a mockery of it. Lastly Hahn goes on to talk about how “Ragnelle ends therefore with everyone established in his or her place, and with courtesy restoring the round tables customary mutuality and hierarchy.” She basically fulfills everyone’s wants and expectations which may be a way of conveying the place or role of women in society.
Well answered, Davina. You've captured the argument, a part of it anyway. You comments on Hahn are very well thought out.
Delete'an advocate for gender inequality'? I think this means the opposite of what you want to say!
Thanks Mike and yes sorry I got that the wrong way around. What I was meant to say was, he introduces the roles of genders within society.
DeleteReferences
DeleteCarter, 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), 329-345. doi:10.1353/cr.2003.0010
Hahn, T. (Ed.). (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle.In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete