Category: Wife of Bath

Based upon England’s medieval era, the Canterbury Tales, one of Geoffrey Chaucer’s most popular works contains 24 stories or as people like to call them satires, based upon corruption, problems and stereotypes that occured back in the late 14th century. One of the most acclaimed stories within the Canterbury Tales is the tale of the Wife of Bath, one of the most memorable characters within Chaucer’s stories due to her detailed description and scandalous personality which can almost be compared to a real character. The story portrays a flirtatious woman who is ungovernable, with a strong sexual desire, who believes she’s an expert of love. She is considered to be an independent woman who doesn’t abide by the rules given by society and. Although the story of the Wife of Bath presents many signs of feminism and women’s freedom, the main theme among this story is gender equality. Chaucer presents many literary devices within his story to make the tale more significant. The use of archetypes such as the color pink, a cavern and the struggle with social norms helps the reader analyze more in-depth the character of the Wife of Bath.

The Wife of Bath is presented to be a very flirtatious and feminine woman. One of the archetypes that resemble the Wife of Bath is the color pink. Not only her physical description but also the way she dressed made this character flirtatious. “Hir hosen weren of fin scarlet reed, …’’ Back in the days a woman dressed with the color red which was a symbol that represented passion and sensuality as well as the gap within her teeth. Femininity is another word that suits the character of the Wife of Bath. She was well known for being an excellent seamstress. She wore extravagant colors within her dresses and also she loved wearing tons of cloth under her hat. She was a very independent woman who sought no men for approval on whatever she had to do. As opposed to other women during that time, if her husband disrespected her she wouldn’t stay quiet, which explains why she was married a couple of times. Although it may not be as clear, she wanted men and women to have equal rights. People tended to criticize women but not men for doing the same things such as having multiple wives. Not content with the situation, the wife of bath struggled following the social norms.

Another archetype that might be associated with the Wife of Bath is the struggle with the social norms. Back in medieval times women could not express their ideas. Their main role was cooking, staying home, cleaning and taking care of the children. The Wife of Bath did not usually follow the rules of society. She liked having authority within the marriage, and almost preferred those who were submissive to her. She married a couple of times although back then women were criticized and label for doing so, but the wife of bath being who she is, she didn’t care about what other people had to say about her being married more than once. As opposed to every woman back then she wasn’t suppressed and was considered being a bold and strong character because she didn’t stay quiet.

One of the archetypes I found similar to the personality of the Wife of Bath is a cavern. The significance of a cavern can be sexual luxuriousness and lust. She even encouraged other women to have more than one partner if they needed to. In the prologue she claims that even though God and St. Paul believed that maintaining their virginity was the best thing to do, she wouldn’t like to be a virgin. She believed that virginity only those who were called to live their lives just as God did. It was known that she had a strong sexual desire and she thought that the only way of getting what she wanted was by pleasing men. In many parts of the story it is clear that she was in search of another source. She would use her body to manipulate guys into getting whatever she wants.

Although the character of the wife of bath brought many controversies to the readers back then, many might say it was one of Chaucer’s best characters within his stories. She is one of the few women back then who was strong and was not afraid to speak before her husband. She was bold and fearless and she didn’t like any man telling her what to do. Her way of going against all norms within the society was a way of saying that she wanted equal rights. Since men could do things without being called names and judged, why couldn’t women speak up and do the same things without being criticized?

The Cantebury Tales, composed by Geoffrey Chaucer during the fourteenth century, investigates the stories told by different characters for a prize of one night at the Canterbury Inn. One character specifically, the Wife of Bath, recounts to a story which article against the present norms of the fourteenth century. While the Wife of Bath difficulties the social standards of the fourteenth century, the possibility of a development attitude can likewise be seen close to the finish of the story through the exchange between the Knight and the Old Hag. The Wife of Bath makes utilization of the character’s characters and the general circumstance of the story to restrict the present normalities of the fourteenth century just as showing the idea of a development mentality.

Before The Wife of Bath’s story starts, various variations from the norm in her way of life would already be able to be seen. Immediately, the Wife of Bath makes reference to that, ”There’ll be no marrying for me this year!”(Chaucer 6) Be that as it may, during the fourteenth century, ladies were typically expected to and sought after marriage at a youthful age. In spite of the fact that The Wife of Bath’s choice to not wed again is unordinary since it was exceptionally wanted among the individuals who pursued Christianity. Also, all through the real Tale of The Wife of Bath, the idea that ladies are mediocre compared to men is dismissed. Before the Knight’s condemning, the Queen requests that the lord will.

Not exclusively does The Wife of Bath’s Tale item to the social standards of the fourteenth century, yet the possibility of a development outlook can likewise be seen through the story’s result. Close to the finish of the story the knight is looked with a choice whether to have his significant other stays old and monstrous yet faithful or, youthful and wonderful however unfaithful. Again the knight leaves the decision to his better half expressing,” I leave the matter to your wise decision.”(Chaucer 407) Not exclusively does the knight’s choice test the state of affairs of this time however, it likewise shows a development mentality as he utilizes past understanding to base his judgment. At long last, the use of a development outlook can be seen during this current knight’s condemning from the sovereign. The sovereign awards the knight, ”A twelvemonth and a day to seek and learn”(Chaucer 85) In any case, the knight goes over shifting answers yet, in any case, keep on looking for a definitive thing ladies want. In spite of the knight’s disappointment from fluctuating answers, his remaining parts on the mission to respect his code of chivalry.

In various occasions all through, The Wife of Bath’s Tale, it is apparent that the norms or normalities of the period are always tested. Numerous cases in the story make circumstances in which the possibility of ladies being mediocre compared to men is broken. The Knight’s condemning and his choice to give his better half a definitive decision exhibits the social difficulties all through the story. In conclusion, The Wife of Bath’s Tale additionally exhibits the possibility of a development outlook through the knight’s learning on past choices. Generally speaking, The Wife of Bath’s Tale settles on the use of the circumstances and decisions that the characters must experience to challenge norms and show a development outlook.

In both The Book of the City of Ladies by Christine De Pizan and Wife of Bath by Geoffery Chaucer, the female protagonists show their power by behaving in ways typically displayed by men. In this essay, I will argue that both women in these stories are powerful in the way that they possess traits that are commonly viewed as masculine. Some may argue that these characters portray negative stereotypes of women that aren’t truly powerful, however, I believe both Christine and the Wife of Bath behave in powerful ways.

In The Book of the City of Ladies, Christine Pizan draws her power from being adequate to men. The Book of the City of Ladies shed light on the strength and unification of all women. This text constructs a strong feminist argument that goes against the patriarchal society in which it takes place.

The Book of the City of Ladies follows the interaction between the author, Christine, and three allegoric figures who represent different virtues. One day while reading a book, Christine is saddened by the writing, which she considers to be an unfair portrayal of women. In response to this, Christine says “no matter which way I looked at it and no matter how much I turned the question over in my mind, I could find no evidence from my own experience to bear out such a negative view of female nature and habits,” (Pizan, 783). From the text, it’s clear that women in this story were often subjects of oppression from their male counterparts. Christine’s narrative suggests that women in this text were objectified and treated as second class citizens by men. Christine is then joined by three allegorical female figures representing three virtues: Reason, Rectitude, and Justice. These women tell her “our aim is to help you get rid of those misconceptions which have clouded your mind” (Pizan, 785). The women instruct Christine to build the City of Ladies. They tell her she is to populate the city with the most intelligent, seasoned women. Once they have completed the city, Christine speaks to the women of the city, reminding them to uphold the principles that lead to the construction of the City of Ladies. The city serves as a sanctuary for women where they can be free of oppression from men.

In The Book of the City of Ladies, Christine draws her power from being equal to men. In doing so, Christine defends her rights as well as the rights of other women to live peacefully. The City of Ladies serves as a gentle celebration of women. By creating the City of Ladies as a safe space for her kind, Christine did something that was previously only done by men, this action is a power move in itself.

Geoffery Chaucer’s character, the Wife of Bath, shows her power by behaving in a way that was only seen as masculine at this time. The Wife of Bath begins with a group of pilgrims sharing stories while on their quest to visit the shrine of Thomas Beckett. Of these storytellers was the Wife of Bath, or Alyson. From her tale, we learn that the Wife of Bath is a wealthy woman and has been married five times. We also learn of the abuse she subjected her husbands to. The Wife of Bath admits that her first three husbands were favorable mostly because they were of old age, wealthy and submissive — easier for her to manipulate. She admits to using her verbal and sexual advantage against her husbands to trap them in compliance. The Wife of Bath reveals that she once accused her husband of having an affair, starting an argument in which she would bombard him false accusations. She staged these fights because she knew her husband would quickly feel bad and give her whatever she desired. She even admits to taunting her husbands by refusing to give them sexual satisfaction until they fulfilled her financial desires. The Wife also depicts herself as sexually experienced, and believes in women having multiple sexual partners, as men did. To be this confident in one’s sexual experiences was something only men did in this story, therefore the Wife of Bath is displaying her power by behaving equivalently to men.

The Wife of Bath is a powerful character not only because she is a strong, knowledgeable woman, but because she behaves similar to how powerful men are assumed to be able to do so. Her story implies that she lived a blissful life, which was uncommon for a woman during this time. After all, the Wife of Bath is partially deaf as a result of being beaten by a previous husband, so the fact that she is living happily is somewhat of a power move. The Wife of Bath is frightening to the other pilgrims because she is a woman who holds traits that were only displayed by men at this time. She is stubborn, intimidating and unapolagetic, she wants sex, financial oversight, and authority. She is someone who has overcome the limitations imposed upon her in order to rise up above oppression. These traits are some that would typically be seen by a man in a story like this. By giving the Wife of Bath these powerful characteristics, Chaucer makes a statement against the views of his time by saying that a woman can do anything a man can. The Wife of Bath’s source of power comes from dominance, fear, manipulation, role reversal, and just plain sneaky tactics that have allowed her to take advantage of her husbands.

Some may argue that these characters portray negative stereotypes of women, however, I believe both Christine and the Wife of Bath behave in a powerful way that celebrates women and their strength. Both characters demonstrate values that were previously thought to only belong to men. Christine is brave, smart and celebratory. The Wife of Bath is strong, clever and unruly. The female protagonists in The Wife of Bath and Book of The City of Ladies are both two powerful women.

By writing women in roles of power, both Chaucer and Pizan challenge the patriarchal views that were so heavy during this time. The lives of women in these texts often consisted of oppressive treatment and forced seclusion. By showing the complications that these women were forced to endure, both Chaucer and Pizan tell the stories of women who hold power against their male counterparts. In these stories, both Christine and the Wife of Bath serve as examples of women who defied what society told them to do. In these stories, the female protagonists hold their power by behaving in ways typically reserved for men. Through their work, Chaucer and Pizan confirm that both women are powerful in the way that they both display traits that are commonly viewed as masculine.

Annotated Bibliography

Mead analyses how out ‘of all the prologues the most notable for wit and originality is the Prologue of the Wife of Bath’s Tale [as] nothing exactly like it had been seen before and nothing exactly like it has been seen since.’ Despite its long length with only 4 lines less than the general prologue, Meads highlights how ‘there is no waste material in it [as] nothing clogs the movement but every word adds its own touch to the whole effect.’ Furthermore, the importance of The Wife of Bath to Chaucer himself is illustrated when he mentions it his other works such as The Merchant’s Tale; ‘we may then say that Chaucer had been all his life unconsciously preparing The Wife of Bath’s Prologue.’ Mead’s take on Chaucer’s choice to perhaps interweave his own views and reflections of his own life in The Wife of Bath’s Prologue creates a more personal and realistic reading for the reader of Chaucer’s work. Therefore, this also allows the wife of bath’s image as a shrew which is intentionally created by Chaucer to appear more authentic to the reader. ‘The shrew is no novelty in life or literature.’

Mead then continues on to showcase Chaucer’s versatility as a writer as ‘[he] can still be delicate and pathetic but there is no false note in his sentiment’ as The Wife of Bath Prologue can be seen as ‘an early account of the taming of a shrew’. Mead also remarks how Chaucer ‘has moved away from the spirit of the earlier part of Roman de la Rose with its attenuated sentimentality and over-wrought and thoroughly absorbed the spirit of the later part of the Roman de la Rose- the part added by Jeun de Meng.’

Mead sees the women in Chaucer’s earlier poems to ‘[have] that flawless perfection which is often too seldom attained in this earthly life.’ as well as appearing as ‘pale, bloodless shadows when put beside the Wife of Bath.’ it appears that ‘Chaucer certainly [has not seen] one of them.’ Therefore, it illustrates how ‘the Wife of Bath [has] brought him back to earth, for she was of the earth earthy, and she was proud of it.’ This self acceptance of a persona that would’ve been heavily rejected during the society that Chaucer was writing in presents her as ‘one of the freshest and breeziest [out] of all of Chaucer’s characters.’ This due to her having ‘all the brazen assurance of an untamed shrew.’ ‘Her talk is very loose and coarse but her gross wit is really an essential part of her character.’ Mead goes further and almost defends the wife of bath; ‘take away that and she would only be a pushing noisy woman, much like any common place shrew.’ However, Mead is aware that the Wife of Bath does not need defending as ‘despite her coarseness, she is satisfied with herself and does not care to be apologised for.’

Mead then decides to touch on perhaps the cause of her coarseness; he doubts ‘that she would [have] hardly understood anything so delicate as the sentiment in the first part of the Roman de la Rose.’ ‘[He] suspect[s] [that] she is a type of the lower class English woman of her day.’ ‘

This links to how ‘so peculiarly alive she is that she almost seems to be fashioned by a living model, and this may be to some extent true.’ ‘Chaucer borrowed all the hints he could get, and that as usual, he turned to the Roman de la Rose’; this a piece of work that which he used to influence and inspire his own work. ‘But along with many resemblances there are many points of difference; and these it may not be superfluous to note, since there is, so far as [he] is aware, no connected amount of them.’ Essentially, Mead views ‘Chaucer’s portrait [as] by no means a copy, but rather a composite of many elements.’

Curry, Walter Clyde. ‘More about Chaucer’s Wife of Bath.’ PMLA37, no. 1 (1922): 30-51. doi:10.2307/457207.

Curry creates a more intense focus on the character of The Wife of Bath herself such as the aspect of her gender; ‘she is so vividly feminine and human.’ She is also ‘so coarse and shameless in her disclosure of the marital relations with five husbands and yet so imaginative and delicate in her story-telling’ The clear juxtaposing adjectives used by Curry in conjunction with each other emphasises the ‘irresistible impulse to analyse her dual personality.’ Curry argues that ‘to the mind of Chaucer, the cause of Dame Alisoun’s peculiarly contradictory character lies not in herself but in her stars; she is in no way responsible.’ Furthermore, Curry takes a deeper look into the astrological influence on the character of the Wife of Bath; ‘her dominant star or ruling planet is Venus[…] [but] in conjunction [with] Mars, one of the most evil planets, [they may] have left their marks upon her body as well as her character.’ After his in-depth analysis of the wife of bath’s horoscope, Curry states that ‘Chaucer’s Wife of Bath is not merely a “typical woman of the middle class” or a type representing the mediaeval shrew, nor is she entirely created out of scraps and fragments from La Vielle and Le Jaloux, two figures found in Le Roman de la Rose.’ In fact, Curry conveys his view of the Wife of Bath as ‘the living embodiment, both in form and character, of a conflict is astral influence.’

Curry then brings back the focus onto the astrological aspect but brings in the Wife of Bath’s physical appearance and how it reflects her astrological sign; ‘instead of having the naturally beautiful and well-proportioned figure […] which should have been hers under the free, beneficent influence of Venus, she is endowed by Mars with a stocky-built, ungraceful form of medium height.’ ‘In place of the attractive face […] which Venus may have given, she has inflicted upon her by the malignancy of Mars a heavy, fat face characterised perhaps by coarse features and certainly by a suspiciously red or florid complexion.’ Not only is the Wife of Bath physical appearance affected but also ‘the warping of her character which results from the Venus-Mars conjunction in Taurus.’

Kittredge, G. L. ‘Chaucer’s Discussion of Marriage.’ Modern Philology 9, no. 4 (1912): 435-67. http://www.jstor.org/stable/432643.

Kitteredge finds that The Wife of Bath’s Prologue ‘is not connected with anything that it precedes’ which allows the reader to have full focus on The Wife’s Prologue and Tale rather than having to constantly compare it to other stories in the Canterbury Tales. He then highlights how ‘the Wife has expounded her views and with all imaginable zest.’ These views held by the wife also differ greatly from the opinions the society would’ve held during the time that Chaucer was writing the Canterbury Tales. She believes that ‘virginity, which the Church glorifies, is not required of us [and] that our bodies are given to us to use.’ However, she also believes that ‘the saints [should] be continent if they will [but] she does not wish to emulate them nor accept the doctrine that a widow or a widower must not marry again.’ Kitteredge also illustrates the risk-taking and carefree characteristics of the wife of bath as ‘she has warmed both hands before the fire of life.’

She also is able to acknowledge that ‘chastity is the ideal, for ideals sake; but it is not her ideal.’ But Kittredge emphasises that ‘her admission is only for appearances; in her heart, she despises virginity.’ She is also barely able to or not at all able to hide it. This apparent as ‘her discourse is marked by frank and almost obstreperous animalism.’ In fact, ‘her whole attitude is scornful, though good humoured, repudiation of what the Church teaches in that regard.’

However, ‘the Wife is [not] content with this single heresy [as] she maintains that wives should rule their husbands and she enforces this doctrine by an account of her own life.’ Her reference to king Arthur ‘who learned and accepted this as a sound doctrine’ appears to cement her outspoken and differing views on women and their role in the society that Chaucer is writing the Canterbury Tales in.

Hinckley, Henry Barrett. ‘The Debate on Marriage in the Canterbury Tales.’ PMLA 32, no. 2 (1917): 292-305. doi:10.2307/457049.

Hinckley takes an in-depth look into the views conveyed in Professor Kittridge’s Chaucer’s and his Poetry. It appears that ‘Professor Kitteridge treats the Wife’s Prologue and Tale as a polemic on matrimony.’ Contrastingly, Hinckley ‘find[s] her far less bent on heresy and schism than on looking for a sixth husband’; in fact, he believes it to be ‘an exaggeration to call her garrulous and frequently naive discourse an marriage advertisement.’ Furthermore, Hinckley highlights the outspokenness and strong mindedness of the Wife of Bath as ‘she begins by arguing that there is no reason why she should not take a sixth husband’ and ‘that she is ready for a sixth.’ It is as if ‘her defence of matrimony is of surpassing interest.’ The Wife of Bath also appears knowledgeable or even perhaps manipulative as she goes on to ‘state her terms and conditions; she [also] gives her history [and] she quotes the testimony of five husbands as to the satisfaction she has given.’ Hinckley views ‘the rough story of her bullying her husbands seems later to impress her as likely to frighten the game.’ The quote ‘women are as gentle as lambs and a child can lead them if you only let them have their way’ illustrates how Hinckley finds that Chaucer has allowed the Wife of Bath to have assumed ‘a more assuring tale towards the end of the prologue and through the rest of her tale.’ Hinckley also believes that ‘this is the morale of her tale.’ Lastly, Hinckley finds that ‘she gives us a long discourse on ‘gentillesse’, a discourse which experience has perhaps taught her to be a good decoy when hunting for husbands.’ Hinckley’s choice to use the verb ‘hunting’ when describing how the Wife of Bath looks for her next husband conveys almost an animalistic and predatory character that is the wife of bath; her life revolves around this being the main hunt with her prey being the men she finds suitable and has interest for to become her next husband. Her husbands almost appear to be a statistic rather than a life-long partner who she is meant to love forever. To Hinckley, at least ‘this interpretation has the merit of covering, not too closely, the whole harang, both prologue and tale, and giving them a much-needed unity.’