The Wife of Bath's Tale as a Counter-Version of the Arthurian Romance Tradition - Research Paper Example

The Wife of Bath's Tale as a counter-version of the Arthurian romance tradition Introduction The wife of Bath and Tales from Chaucer’s Canterbury is without doubt one of the foremost literary works from the mediaeval period and the main character “The wife” (Alison) is arguably one of the most extensively discussed and studied women characters. Her attributes sharply contrast with the submissive and docile nature that was characteristic of women in that particularly patriarchal historical period. She is depicted as Bawdy, lusty strong-willed assertive and manipulative as well as intelligent by any standards. She stands out by virtue of the fact that she does not allow men to control her life and instead takes deliberate measures not only to manipulate and control them but to shape her own destiny. She commences her tale by first describing herself as an expert in marriage owing to the fact that she has been married five times and lashing out at critics who claim it is unchristian to marry so many times. She cites some of the Old Testament figures such as Abraham who had several wives and uses this to justify her having many husbands in her lifetime; Vladislava notes that several of her quotations are not entirely accurate which he attributes to her inability to read. He therefore posits that one of the ways through which women are disenfranchised is their ignorance and even the most “successful” like Alison are lack the basic skills to enable them access the information their menfolk can (Vladislava 35). She tells a story of a knight from king Arthurs court who comes across a young virgin in the woods and rapes her, he is taken to the king who finds him guilty and sentences him to death. However, the queen and other women beg for his life and king Arthur’s mercifully acquiesces to their demand, however in return for his life there is a condition. The knight shall be given 12 months to find out what women really want and if by the time of that period he will not have come up with the answer, he will be put to death (Carosone 3). The knight begins he is quest and travelled all over the country asking women what it is they want, he gets hundreds of answers but none of them is correct, some women say they desire, money others powers sexual satisfaction and many others (Chaucer 920). After 12 months are over the knightheads back to Camelot dejected for ailing in his quest. On the way, he comes across an old hag who asks if she could be of assistance, he tells her his predicament and asks her the question. She promises to give him the right answer but makes him promise to fulfill a wish that she does not specify; she tells him that the thing that women want above all others is to be able to control and have power over their men (1010). She accompanies him to the palace and when he renders that answers to the queen and the ladies of her court, he is pleasantly surprised when they agree with him and he is finally allowed his freedom. His rejoicing is however cut short by the hag declaring that in return her secret wish is that he marries her; he pleads and begs that she take anything his material possession but not his body. She remains adamant and insists that he keeps his promise and he miserably agrees and they are married, later when she enquires about the cause of his misery he says he is sad because he has to spend the rest of his life with her ugly poor self. She however talks to him about the importance of real “gentillesse,” and noity and argues that true poverty lies not in appearances or wealth but in covetousness (1445). She finally asks his to choose between her remaining ugly but faithful an good or that she should transform to a beautiful young woman but not promise fidelity or goodness. The young man tells her he trusts her judgment and she should choose what is best. Thereby having given her what all women desire which is control her man the woman rewarded him by turning into a beautiful young lady and promising to remain faithful and good (Ingham 38). According to Carosone, from a critical perspective, the story serves as a brilliant counter version to the traditional aristocratic male values that were embodies in literary tradition during the Middle Ages in which the male character was always seen as the center of the plot with all events going around him (3). In the Arthurian context, the man was seen as a noble and infinitely wise being towering over women who were mostly viewed as needy creature in need of salvation which invariably was provided by chivalrous and bold knights (Carosone 3). However, the story of Baths wife appears to overturn the traditional assumptions on several points, for one, the setting in which the story occurs is highly matriarchal which contrast with the historical setting and the fates of the men appear to be entirely in the hands of women. The major decision makers are women and men the king included seem to have been relegated to the peripheral. Despres rightfully suggests that Chaucer waters down the traditional functionality and role of the man especially in the accidental or deliberate reference to the knight as a chivalrous one, this is despite the fact that he commits and act that is probably the furthest one can go from chivalry by raping a young maiden (Depres). Therefore, it is likely that the title of chivalry does not extend past representing the fact that the knight was mounted and in reality, he was just a common rapist who did not know, nor care what women wanted. The punishment meted out by the queen bespeaks a sense of poetic justice as the knight is required to seek what it is that every woman wants otherwise forfeit his wife for raping the girl. Based on her attributes and character, it is easy for one to see why the wife of bath is looked upon by many as a feminist model, she is wealth and financially stable which sets her above most of the women in the predominantly patriarchal society (Rosemary and Reisman). She justifies her using her sex as well as manipulating the various men in her life through methods that would otherwise be looked upon as immoral even by today’s standards. Y?ld?z argues that by virtue of marrying and successfully bending five husbands to her will, she has become independent and wealthy; she travels and drinks as she wishes answering to no man (Y?ld?z). Owing to the aggressiveness and the strength of the female character, Chaucer is described as one of the original feminist centuries before the term was ever coined, nevertheless this opinion is not universal since some critic has suggested that the prologue is actually anti-feminist rhetoric (Plain and Sellers 16). This position has been supported on the grounds that despite the fact that the female protagonist is depicted as influential and powerful, it is however argued that she achieve these attributes by objectifying herself. By using her sex to gain power over men critic have accused Chaucer anti-feminine veiled as feminism; consider the fact that the Hag is only ultimately acceptable to the man after she has become a beautiful woman. Although the man apparently learnt his lesson by allowing the hag to choose whether she should be ugly and good or beautiful and bad, the decision was not necessary motivated by a change in the knights attitude but simply because the women made it clear what answer they want to hear. Furthermore, the knight clearly did not love her so the only significance that union could had would be inspired by physical intimacy (Pugh 115). Nevertheless, while this position holds critical weight it utterly in disregard of the many other instances where the woman is empowered and the man emasculated reversing the traditional balance of power between the genders. The women’s approach to solving societal problems is seen as practical and pragmatic than the typical male way in which violence is seen as the solution to every problem and to some extent it is also the cause. Ingham points out that the raping of a maiden is archetypical of men trying to exert their domination over women through force, as punishment the king responds in an equally violent way by sentencing him to death by beheading (Ingham 37). However, the queen proposes a more pragmatic and productive way of dealing with the knight by rehabilitating him such that he cannot only atone for his crime but learns a valuable lesson. The wife admits to using violence against her fifth husband who she hits after tearing apart the text he was reading called wicked wives. He responded by hitting her so hard that she became partially deaf in one ear. The fact that he is an oxford clerk reading anti-feminist texts is evidence of the fact that the negative attitudes about women were propagated by the few educated in society at the time. These were mostly men and through their learning to which women rarely had access, they could spread misogyny to society. She embodies a side of femininity or rather a masculine side of a woman by being the aggressor and actually throwing the first punch. Her predisposition for violence is a radical departure from the neatly construed tale of aristocratic knights in which the man was the sole purveyor of violence and the women existed for pacifying them. The wife’s interest in female sovereignty has been variously interpreted by critics over the centuries as expansive of a more expansive context than the domestic one some have even read it as a desire for ruling over a nation. The latitude of female sovereignty from a legal and political perspective is further evinced the manner by which the judicial aspects of King Arthur is overturned since legally the man should have been put to death. Conclusion Ultimately, the narrative refocuses the reader attention to the recuperative potential of the female sovereignty. The knight is in distress after injuring a lady and he is sentenced to death, however the integration of the queen and the ladies of the court save his life quintessentially this revises the standard Arthurian romance trope in which the gallant knight saves the lady in distress. The man is put in apposition of distress and his salvation comes from female sovereignty, which is the other side of the contextually convectional trope. Works Cited Carosone, Michael. Geoffrey Chaucer: Feminist Or Not? Academia edu. n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2013 Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. and Ed. Nevill Coghill.  Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1966. Despres, Denise L. "Feminist Readings in Middle English Literature: The Wife of Bath and all Her Sect." Comparative Literature 49.1 (1997): 87-8.  Ingham, Patricia Clare. "Pastoral Histories: Utopia, Conquest, and the Wife of Bath's Tale." Texas Studies in Literature and Language 44.1 (2002): 34-46.  Plain, Gill and Sellers, Susan. A History of Feminist Literary Criticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2007. Print. Pugh, Tison. "Queering Genres, Battering Males: The Wife of Bath's Narrative Violence." Journal of Narrative Theory : JNT33.2 (2003): 115,142,228.  Rosemary, M and Canfield Reisman. “A Feminist Perspective on The Canterbury Tales”. Salem Press. 2010. Web. 25 Nov. 2013 Vladislava, Vaneckova.Women in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales: Woman as a Narrator, in the Narrative. 2007. Web. 25 Nov. 2013 Y?ld?z, Nazan . A Medieval Madwoman in the Attic: Chaucer’s Wife of Bath in The Canterbury Tales. n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2013 http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/probing-the-boundaries/wp content/uploads/2012/07/yildizmadpaper.pdf. Read More