Fradenburg and Freud

Though I at first really disliked the Freudian reading on the Wife of Bath, mostly because Fradenburg spent so much time explaining Freudian theory, I left the class really thinking about it. What really struck me was this idea that we’ve moved from analyzing the author, to the characters, and now the readers.

I’ll  be honest, sometimes I wonder what really is the point to all these readings? If you all are fellow English majors, I’m sure you’ve pondered this question at least once. While we love reading and analyzing, sometimes you just have to wonder what good it’s going to do.

When Fradenburg put forth that she was interested in why we are so focused on the Wife of Bath being modern, it kind of gave me an answer. Though I’m probably not going to find the answer to all of life’s questions by writing a critical essay on some book, but I can at least attempt to find out more about the people I have to share this world with. In terms of Fradenburg’s argument, I think it’s fascinating that we are so convinced that the Wife of Bath is like us, or at least closer because we see her views as ‘modern’. I think her types of questions really a bring a lot to the field on English and help to expand it beyond just the  group of people who are English Professors or students.

Fortune doesn’t always favor the bold….

This week we continued with our first reading of the Wife of Bath, moving on from the prologue into her tale proper. The tale, the story of a knight who is sent out to find the answer to the what women want in order to escape execution, has many parallels with the prologue and read together the two complement each other’s non-traditional view of gender relations and how the power dynamics within mediaeval might be questioned and reevaluated.

The tale begins with a very powerful and violent demonstration of the “hero” as a very aggressive and domineering masculine figure when he rapes a virgin he finds during his travels. The tale hinges on an extreme reversal of fortune that is imposed on the knight in having to submit his power to women throughout the rest of the story: he is saved by the Queen and her maidens from his death, sent on a quest that is totally about women and their desires, finds that he can only find the answer by submitting to marry a women. After going through this long quest he eventually comes to a sort of revelation, that women aren’t objects that he can simply impose his will on, but rather, they have a very definite sense of authority and sovereignty in their lives. He experienced a similar loss of sovereignty as that he inflicted on the girl he raped at the start of the story and through this reversal of positions, the tale comes to the same conclusion as the end of the Prologue with a husband willing ceding authority to his wife and not trying to control her or impose his wishes on her.

Women in power and Sexism

When it comes down to it, The Wife of Bath wants power. She likes to be in control. She states this in her prologue and she implies it into her story as well. She abuses power by using her own sexuality to torture men, yet, there was this one man she was not able to control. To have someone not submit to her power probably infuriated her, but at the same time I think it intrigued her as well. Not being able to control him kept her coming back. That’s why she loved the last husband most of all. He was the one that got away.

This understanding is also very obviously implied in her story as well. She has the story enter with a Knight. Usually they are seen as very noble people, but quickly she strips that away and any other power he may hold over women. And there he is, at the mercy of these women. He has been stripped of his nobility and now is just a pitiful man waiting for the next move by the women. This part of the story is key to The Wife of Bath’s character. The whole concept of women in power and women calling the shots is a big part of The Wife of Bath’s personality and she shows this in her story as well. She also makes the knight off to be the bad guy, having raped the girl at the start of the story. I definitely do no support the knight’s character in his injustice of rape, but she uses the knight as a symbol of all men in her little fairy tale. He symbolizes the abuse they impose on women, and how they do not deserve their power. She purposely wanted to make the lead male of the story a bad man, and therefore, have reason to strip him of power. She wanted to inverse the typical roles usually seen in society. She shows how women can be taken advantage of, and how powerless they are to men at the very beginning when the girl was raped but then, when she strips the knight of his power and makes him submit himself to the mercy of the women, The Wife of Bath shows how women are not as powerless as society may make them out to be. She wants to show how powerful women are.

I think that was her point of the whole story. Even at the end, when the knight had to choose between the beautiful but unfaithful or the ugly and faithful, he was forced to choose at the will of the hag, at the will of women. The hag could do whatever she wanted, but the knight was forced into the marriage. For the majority of the story, he has been at the mercy of women. The Wife of Bath uses this story to show that even if men think that they are more powerful, the women are the ones who call the shots in reality. This would be her ideal world.

Now, going back to her own personal life, the one husband that got away, the ending of her story is quite different from her reality. I think this story is definitely a parallel fairy tale to her reality because in reality, she was not able to control this man when in her story, she was. The knight is obviously her late husband, and she is both the girl victim of rape and the hag in the story. When the knight raped the girl in the story, I would assume this symbolizes all the mistreating he had done to the Wife of Bath in reality. But, the difference is in the story she tamed him by using her own power over men. In real life, there wasn’t such a happy ending. He continues to have a power over her.

Basically, The Wife of Bath seeks power over men, and her story is a fairy tale about how she wishes to obtain power over her late husband. Some might say that her strife for power is a feminist effort, but I wouldn’t say that The Wife of Bath is a feminist at all. I would actually say she is sexist. Usually sexism is seen as the treatment of women as inferiors, but here, the Wife of Bath is treating men as inferior. She strives for superiority over men, and that is not what feminism is about at all. It’s about equality of genders. She doesn’t see men as equals, but rather she sees them as objects. She is sexist towards men.

I think that The Wife of Bath’s character has a few messed up perceptions about power, and she portrays them in her fairy tale. She seeks power over men, but the inability to obtain the power over her late husband drives her insane. Yet, this also just makes her desire for him even more so.

Not Your Typical Tale

The Wife of Bath’s Tale often puzzles me because it is unique and contradictory to other tales of courtly love. Unlike a story depicting a knight’s devotion to his lady
and this idea of chivalry in regards to love, the Wife’s tale disturbs readers
with its unconventional circumstances. First, the Wife describes the days of Arthurian
England in which fairies and elves were prevalent, but priests and friars
squashed this mythical life by blessing everything. The Wife also compares
friars to being like an “incubus” because they sexually pose a threat to
maidens. Most tales of courtly love do not begin with a description of the death of magic brought on by sexually deviant holy men.  After reading this opening for
the first time back in high school, I was thoroughly intrigued by what this
tale would actually be about because it’s apparent from the Wife’s opening
lines that this will be an unusual story.

As if the accusatory tone towards friars wasn’t enough, the Wife goes on to further shock her readers by describing one of Arthur’s knights raping a young maiden he finds alone. This completely shatters the idea of the gallant, chivalrous knight from most stories of courtly love. This rape reveals the dominance of men and their use of power to control and manipulate the other sex, something that is usually not present in
most tales of knighthood. What additionally disturbs me personally is that the
women of the court beg for the power to have control over the knight’s fate and
spare him from immediate death. This knight desecrated one of their own but
instead of having him killed the women give him a chance to redeem himself by
putting him on a quest. Although this quest to search for what women want may
be seen as futile, I still think it is strange that the women would give the
knight any chance of life after his crime, especially in a culture where
killing was common punishment.

The last aspect of this story that truly confuses me is that the knight never really
gets punished for his crime. Although one may argue that the knight must endure
a year long journey to search for something that he couldn’t seem to find would
cause enough distraught and frustration to be punishment enough, I still feel
that the knight doesn’t deserve a happy life with his new young bride at the
end of the tale. His wife rewards him for giving her sovereignty by acting as a
perfectly faithful wife and by transforming herself into a beautiful young
maiden. The knight, in my eyes, gets off the hook by finding the answer to the
women of the court’s question and then he just traipses away to live happily
ever after with his bride. What I want to know is what ever happened to the
girl he raped; did she feel justice was served? It seems to me that the Wife
of Bath is truly forgiving because just as she forgives her husband Jenkin for
hitting her, she seems to forgive the knight for raping the maiden. I doubt the
maiden would be as forgiving as the Wife, but apparently her opinions are not
addressed in this tale.

Wife of Bath: Sex Warrior

This week, we finally started to get into the nitty-gritty of the Wife of Bath text. The prologue to her tale is a story that seems to be in the defense of marriage and the social norms of the time Chaucer lived, but if you go just beneath the surface and poke and prod at the things that the Wife says through the lens of feminism you start to get an entirely different picture of what how what she could be saying relates to the modern day. Her relationships with her different husbands and her exploiting of the little physical power she has over them, namely sexual power, and the huge emotional power she has are in some ways akin to the ideas of female empowerment. Though, unlike modern empowerment these methods seem a little dubious to the ears of most men; even in the text the Pardoner interrupts the prologue to voice the decent that I’m sure most men would feel at being manipulated and controlled. The wife lays out a set of inverted gender dynamics here and it is interesting to look at how similar the manipulation and coercion she endured from her fifth husband is very much the same sort of treatment she used to control her previous four husbands. This parallelism really facilitates a view of what the imbalanced battle of the sexes during Chaucer’s time might have been like and gives us at the very least an idea of what doesn’t work.

Enjoyable readings this week

I personally enjoyed the readings from this week, mainly the Shakespeare sonnet and the second part of our “Biographical and Historical Contexts” from The Wife of Bath.  I would side with the New Critics in their preference for poems that are less straight-forward.  I favor poetry that involves a closer read and some thinking in order to fully appreciate the meaning. The ending of the sonnet especially made the reader think, as it gave question to how accurately the speaker could make such a judgement since he was so ‘frantic-mad.’

I also enjoyed the sources that Chaucer used in writing the prologue and tale for the The Wife of Bath that were discussed in the second assigned reading for this week.  They all centered around love, which I admit I am a sucker for (probably why I favor Shakespeare’s sonnet as well.)  My favorite was the summary of John Gower’s Tale of Florent (and accordingly, since the stories are so similar, the summary of the Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell.) The idea that what women want most, or most desire, is sovereignty over men’s love is spot on (in my opinion.)  Reading the summaries of these sources made me eager to begin reading Chaucer’s work; I hope that I find The Wife of Bath just as interesting!