Tuesday, March 14, 2017
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?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCite 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 Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Wife Of Bath’s Tale, The loathly lady is portrayed to be deceptive as she uses her beauty and power to lure men into giving her what she wants. The loathly lady is first addressed from the knight as “my dear mother”. This shows us that the loathly lady is perceived in a motherly figure. When she gives the knight a choice “to have me ugly and old until I die, and be to 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 me. Now choose yourself, whichever you please”. It is almost seen to be a test, as the knight is faced with this question, he surrenders and allows the loathly lady to do as she pleases. He has initially given her the power.
In the wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, King Arthur portrays the loathly lady to be the most ugliest person that he has met. He initially describes, “Her face was red, her nose running. Her mouth wide, her teeth all yellow.” She talks to Arthur in a way that gives her more power and control, which shows the reversal of the roles. It is portrayed through the tale that her initial goal is to find a husband to wed as she tells King Arthur “think now, sir king. For it must be so, Or you are dead. Hurry. Tell me.” King Arthur does what the loathly lady asks and does not hesitant to ask Gawain, Gawain agrees to wed the loathly in order to save the kings life. He is the hero in this tale and protects the king from the loathly lady.
Steeleye Span’s King Henry follows a narrative view on King Henry and the loathly lady. The loathly lady in this text is portrayed to have “teeth were like the tether stakes, her nose like club or mell”. The loathly lady is strongly portrayed to be a monster as “each frightened huntsman fled the hall”. Initially the loathly lady is seen to have power over King Henry as she demands for more food. The way in which the King went about it was to listen and give her the requests she makes as if he is afraid of her. In the end she turns into “the fairest lady that ever was seen” after King Henry sleeps with her. In this tale the loathly lady uses her disguise to get what she wants, once she has gained control of the King, she turns into this beautiful lady.
There are several variations across the three texts of how the loathly lady is portrayed. She is seen to be manipulative and deceptive as she holds the power over the men in the tale. In across all three tales, I have noticed that the ultimate goal/desire for the loathly lady is to find a husband. Because of this want of hers, it has left created her to become this loathly lady figure that portrays her to be evil. As the loathly lady is portrayed quite badly in these tales, it makes me question what her motives were to act the way she does just to find a husband instead of just being beautiful.
The knights in these three texts are all portrayed have less dominance in comparison to the loathly lady. By initially listening to the loathly lady, they gained a beautiful wife. It is as if they are all portrayed to be afraid of the loathly lady and challenges their strength and courage. In the end of each tale, the knights and the loathly lady got what they initially desired and everyone lives happily ever after.
I am almost convinced that the loathly lady is used to show that there is more to a woman than just looks (although feminism wasn't even a concept when these tales were written). By giving such a stark contrast to beauty, but still holding power (sovereignty in many tales), the loathly lady is able to get what she wants in the end of each tale. Could this be making fun of the knight or "hero" that has to sleep with or wed the loathly lady? This is shown to be untrue by your point that she becomes beautiful in the end, which is a reward.
DeleteIt is almost written to show that the "loathly lady" is someone who craves the attention from men. In other ways, it shows that even the ugliest want the same basic foundations such as love, marriage and family. What you said seems to be right, that it seems to be making fun of the hero/knight. But I think even though we see the knight getting a beautiful women in the end, I believe that the "loathly lady" is also happy.
DeleteThat's a great point! This could then help further answer my question on Chaucer's possible use of feminism. If the loathly lady had the underlying objective to be with and wedded to a man, then the power she holds is really targeted towards gaining a husband; instead of giving sovereignty.
DeleteExactly, although the power that she has gained seems to give her sovereignty as a women. I personally don't know if this is true but the loathly lady like every other women wants to be wedded. As back in the day, the role of a women is to be wedded and begin a family. Chaucer initially twisted the means to portray this idea and it just makes me wonder why he has created a tale that portrays the loathly lady.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2. 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 Wyfe of Bath’s tale, by Chaucer, many argue that he has included a feminist stance throughout. In the article “Coupling the Beastly Bride and the Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s Tale”, by Susan Carter, the author showcases many points throughout the tale, in which Chaucer shows to take a feminist stance.
The authors first argument on Chaucer, is that he “is certainly making play with textuality, with subjectivity, and with the construction of ideas about sexuality…he allows [Arthurs wife] to express radical ideas on gender theory…[which] makes it more feasible that the Wife ‘s tale is centrally about liberation from gender role restriction.” (pg. 81) This argument is in comparison to other loathly lady tales, which do not have a strong focus on switching gender roles.
Another argument by Carter is the clash between institutional order and the forests, where the loathly lady presents herself and resides in. “The generic loathly lady’s beastliness signals that she belongs in the wilderness; her unstable flesh is chaotic like the forest’ (pg. 83) The mythical forests are a common setting in many of Chaucer’s tales, including mythical creatures such as fairies. However, the court as an institutional power clashes with this idea, “[in which] the court shows his craft in giving the Wyfe subjectivity.” (pg. 82) The two main powers within this tale became the King’s wife, as well as the loathly lady: both women.
The reversal of gender role is also Carter’s argument for the shapeshifting loathly lady motif “as a vehicle for examining the sphere of heterosexual power contestation.” (pg. 82) The loathly lady holds power throughout similar tales, by having the control to give sovereignty to a ‘worthy man’. In this tale however, “the hag belongs to both worlds, being larger than both, with an immoderation and extravagance that test her male partner and tacitly measure him as less than herself.” (pg. 83) Chaucer seems to therefore put the loathly lady as holding the ultimate power over men, which is what happened in the end of the tale; the knight gave the loathly lady the choice as to when she should be beautiful, and when she should turn back into a hag.
Although these arguments made by Susan Carter are convincing, I still do not agree that Chaucer took a feminist stance in his Wyfe of Bath’s tale. My first argument for this is that the knight presented in this tale does not represent the characteristics of an honorable and heroic knight from other tales. The knight is described to be “a lusty bachelor”(line 883) to the king Arthur, with no other characteristics to follow. I am convinced that it was Chaucer’s intention to poke fun at the concept of a knight for a king Arthur tale, in which there is no thought of this knight being a true hero; “That on one day came riding from hawking…He saw a maiden walking before him…By utter force, he took away her maidenhead;” (lines 884-888)
(Cont. in comments)
The wife of king Arthur is another example of how Chaucer does not give equality to women. In order to get the right to decide the knight’s fate, the wife and her maidens “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,” (lines 895-897) and then “The queen thanks the king with all her might.” (line 899) I do not believe that the queen was depicted to be a powerful ruler in this tale, because she had to beg for her right to judge the knight.
ReplyDeleteThe last reason that I do not believe Chaucer had feminist intentions, is how he described what women really want throughout the knights adventure to find the answer for the queen. The ideas given by both men and women to the knight were demeaning, selfish, and in some cases still putting the male as the women’s greatest desire. “Where he might find in this matter Two creatures agreeing together. Some said women love riches best, Some said honor, some said gaiety, Some rich clothing, some said lust in bed, And frequently to be widow and wedded.” (lines 923-929) Feminism is equality between man and woman, which is not what Chaucer has exhibited throughout this tale. He made it seem like women want to hold power over all, which would be a complete reversal of roles and repeating the problem; women want sovereignty over themselves, not over men, which was not shown throughout this tale.
Well written ideas and thoughts here! I can understand why you don't believe that Chaucer had feminist intentions although there are many reasons presented in the texts that you have read that show feminist intentions. A huge aspect of the tale revolves around the loathly lady being in control, the loathly is initially the person that initiates the actions and takes control of what she wants. Which in those days, I can imagine those traits to be expected from men. If this tale was presented through modern day tale, I would not see the huge argument within these tales, but ultimately because these tales were written and told in a certain era in time where females were not as hugely influenced as the "loathly lady".
ReplyDeleteI think that the time this tale was written was an influence on its intentions. Feminism wasn't even a concept back then, so the idea of switching roles with women was where Chaucer was trying to 'poke fun' at the Irish tales. It was a laughable concept; which is why I think the loathly lady plays such an important role in this tale.
ReplyDeleteI agree! and I think its quite interesting that Chaucer had the bravery to create a concept so outstanding that its influenced many folk tales. I think the loathly lady in these tales replace the male role. This could initially be Chaucer's "laughable concept" of predicting the future roles between men and women back in the era.
Delete3. Hahn’s essay 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’s essay on The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle argues that the centre of Dame Ragnelle is the question of “how the unknown, the marvellous, or the threatening is bought into the line with legitimate, normative, idealized chivalric society.” Dame Ragnelle, who plays “both Beauty and The Beast”, represents the unknown and the threatening. She is unattractive in every aspect which therefore marks her as an outsider to the court, both socially and sexually. The court also fear that she may be a sexual predator. “To recite the foulness of that lady There is no tongue fit. She had ugliness to spare”. What labels Dame Ragnelle as a hag is that she lacks anything that would certify her as a lady e.g. manners, beauty, respect, etc. By the end of the poem, she possesses the qualities of a lady and marries Sir Gawain who fulfils her heart’s desire.