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 Ragnelle identifies 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.
ReplyDeleteThe 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.
ReplyDeleteGeoffrey Chaucer's The Wife of Bath's Tale is a prime example of the Loathly Lady motif.
"The motif of a ugly hag who will under set conditions transform into a beautiful maiden, or more rarely a beautiful maiden cursed to revert to a hideous or inhuman shape under different conditions."
In Chaucer's tale, the loathly lady is hideous and a horrific sight. "There can no man imagine an uglier creature." (Line 999)
Her condition to transform into a beautiful maiden was for the knight to accept her love and give her sovereignty over him. (This implies feminism, which I will talk about later.)
"Then have I gotten mastery of you," she said,
"Since I may choose and govern as I please?" (Line 1236-1237)
The knight submits to her wishes, which causes the loathly lady to transform.
"And when the knight saw truly all this,
That she so was beautiful, and so young moreover,
For joy he clasped her in this two arms." (Line 1250-1252)
Throughout the tale, the knight is under the control of women. This is probably why critics believe it is a feminist text.
From the beginning he is lured by a maiden by temptation.
"By utter force, he took away her maidenhead;
For which wrong was such clamor" (Line 888-889)
In a sense, we could say the maiden had power over the knight. The knight could not hold his urges and committed rape.
He is then taken to court and condemned to death. However, the choice is left to the queen.
"And gave him to the queen, all at her will,
To choose whether she would him save or put to death." (Line 897-898)
This shows that the knight is powerless to the queen. His life is in her hands. The queen and the other women of the court gives the knight a task in exchange for his life.
"I grant thee life, if thou canst tell me
What thing it is that women most desire." (Line 904-905)
"Yet I will give thee leave to go
A twelvemonth and a day, to seek to learn
A satisfactory answer in this matter;" (Line 908-910)
The knight agrees and sets out on his journey to find the answer. With no luck, he reaches his final day. It was then he met the loathly lady and she told him the answer to the question. However, on one condition, he had to wed her.
"Said she, "that thou take me as thy wife,
For well thou know that I have said thy life." (Line 1055-1056)
Yet again, the knight is powerless to this woman, for if he did not agree he would have been executed by the queen.
The answer to the question "What thing it is that women most desire?" (Line 905), was that "Women desire to have sovereignty as well over her husband as her love, and to be in mastery above him." (Line 1038-1040)
No women in the court disagreed. This shows that Chaucer's The Wife of Bath's Tale, may have been a feminist text. Not only do the women have equal power as men, in this tale, the women hold all the cards and call all the shots.
I'm open to discussion since this is my own understanding of the text and its links to feminism. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong!
2. The Wife of Bath's Tale is considered by some critics to indicate that Chaucer may have been a feminist.
ReplyDeleteWhy might they believe this?
There is evidence that states Chaucers interest in feminism within the Tale of The Wife of Bath’s. Though bear in mind, the term feminist is a contemporary term for today’s society in countries where equal rights are valued. In the 1300-1400 when this tale was written it was very rare for a women to make it into literature for reasons such as; social class, looks, power and support. Equal rights were deemed foreign and unheard of.
Within this tale Chaucer creates a world where in my opinion both men and women had equal rights. The evidence of this is highlighted in lines 894-898,
892: By course of law, and should have lost his head,
893: Perhaps such was the statute then,
894: Except that the queen and other ladies as well,
895: So long prayed the king for grace,
896: Until he granted him his life right there,
897: And gave him to the queen, all at her will,
898: To choose whether she would him save or put to death.
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 65)
In rewording this extract, the Queen and her ladies prayed for grace that the king would grant this knights life that deserved death. By granting his life, King Author would then hand him over to the queen and her ladies for their pleasure in deciding what happens.
This is pivotal as to why critics believe Chaucer was a feminist. Here the Queen and her ladies had the pleasure in doing as they wished and prayed. In these days women did not have these rights, the King would do as he pleased without undermining his sovereignty.
Do you agree?
I do not agree with Chaucer being a feminist. There may be evidence stating why he would, but then there is evidence in this abstract that comprises this.
The queen who represents the sovereignty of women here still submits to the king, with a pleading like action and an effort to show thankfulness.
895: So long prayed the king for grace,
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 65)
And
899: The queen thanks the king with all her might.
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 65)
The queen being the representation of women pleaded by praying the grace of her king that this bachelor who belonged to the king’s household would be released unto the queen for her bidding. After receiving what she wanted most she thanked the king with all her might.
I see this as a metaphor for a husband and wife, a husband, who allows his wife something so dare to him, permission. The queen was granted permission to do as she pleased.
From my point of view, if Chaucer was a feminist, he would have written something different wouldn't he have?
What should have been written if he was a feminist:
895: So she asked the king vs. So long prayed the king for grace,
899: The queen thanks the king vs. The queen thanks the king with all her might.
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 65)
-Can you see the two contrasting sentence against one another?
What also caught my attention to the conclusion of this text,
1255: She obeyed him in everything
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 72)
-It seems man holds dominance in this abstract.
1262: And also I pray Jesus shorten their lives
1263: That will not be governed by their wives
(The wife of Baths Tale, p.g 72)
-It seems Chaucer wants men to die sooner before women have a chance to gain control.
This is why I disagree with Chaucer being a feminist. This text more a lease seems he supports mans domination over women and hopes it remains this way.
There is evidence that compromises this*
Delete-Spelling error in the "do you agree", part.
Hey Allan, that is an interesting analysis. I actually never saw the text in that way.
DeleteOn the surface, it seems as if the women are in control, however, after reading your post, my decision may have been swayed.
It's true that the queen, even with her sovereignty, still submits to the King. The King is always the head of the kingdom. Also, when the knight commits the crime, I guess he was also in control of that situation.
Thanks for giving me a new look into the text!
Definitely going to agree that Chaucer doesn't come off as a Feminist in the Bath's Tale.
DeleteIf he was a feminist, I don't think the Knight that was sent out to find "What women most desire" would be taken so lightly. If he were a feminist, I believe the knight might have been executed on the spot.
But that wouldn't really make a decent story, would it?
Totally agree with you on that James, if the story had ended like that, it would not have been much of a story at all!
DeleteWow, I'm starting to change my views on the text now haha.
One thing I found interesting was that the male lead pretty much had his way at the end.
He got away with crime, married and ended with a beautiful maiden or so the text suggests. It could have just been he changed his perception of her and decided to see her as beautiful rather than ugly. (Apparently that is what love can do to you haha)
Thanks for your replies Spencer and James.
DeleteI couldn't say if either of us are wrong, there are no right or wrong answers to this!
We'd only truly know if we asked Chaucer himself haha!
I guess you could say it's a twisted equality. Man does crime, doesn't get /punished/ and there is all that ideal about woman having sovereignty over their husbands and men.
DeleteJust a theory.
Personally, I don't think it even makes sense to compare sovereignty to Feminism. The point of a King is to be the one ruler and leader to his kingdom. He sits at the top of the hierarchy. Feminism is about the equality of women to men throughout certain aspects of society i.e. the right to vote, sexism in society etc. It's about women having equal rights and respect in society that men already have. Not women having MORE rights or power OVER men. (http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/6236_Chapter_1_Krolokke_2nd_Rev_Final_Pdf.pdf)
DeleteSo rather than saying if Chaucer was a feminist, the knight would have been executed on the spot- which actually carries its own issues of injustice, the angle that I would think what the question is referring to is the fact that Chaucer actually wrote a tale that gives light to women as human beings who see the crime this man has committed, and given him the chance to learn from his mistakes.
Back in Medieval times, women lived in a world dominated by men. They were born as property to their fathers, and if they were lucky enough, were passed on to their husbands as wives. Because it was the Medieval times, religion was their source of justice, and their virginity was their only virtue.(http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/medsex/text.htm) Instead Chaucer wrote a tale where women were more than just the beautiful virgin or the lowly whore, but a Queen who understood the power of forgiveness, and an old hag who was more than what she seemed.
Awesome idea Allan, I really enjoyed reading your text. You have came up with interesting explanation which totally convinced me. I too do not agree that he was not a feminist. He needed "women" as a source for his story, and most of his texts includes love which must include women. It seems like he is giving equality for both male and female. However, if you read through the text carefully, I am sure a lot other can identify that he is not a feminist
DeleteThe 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?
ReplyDeleteViewers may believe that Chaucer was a feminist because there are clues in his Fabula or tales. Now days, that both sex are treated equal, however olden days, around when this tale was written (which was around 1340~1400), there was clear difference in "values" and "respect" between men and women. In "The wife of Bath's Tale", there are evidences which shows that Chaucer advocated equal rights for both men and women.
The main theme in The wife of Bath's Tale is feminism as I mentioned above. Alisoun is the main character in this story. In the story, it discusses her 5 marriages. She was very pragmatic about the 5 relationships with his husbands. She uses her own body to gain control over her husbands for money and power. In addition, example in The wife of Bath's Tale is :
919 He seeks every house and every place
920 Where he hopes to have the luck
921 To learn what thing women love most,
922 But he could not arrive in any region
923 Where he might find in this matter
924 Two creatures agreeing together.
925 Some said women love riches best,
926 Some said honor, some said gaiety,
927 Some rich clothing, some said lust in bed,
This is a scene when knight called Woe was thinking about women. The vibe of literature Chaucer have used is very respectable towards women. As I have described above during the time this tale was written, women were not respectable. However, the line 924 - Two creatures agreeing together, shows the equilibrium of the two sex, male and female.
However, I have came to the point where I do not agree that Chaucer is not a feminist. By looking at these texts, He maybe a feminist, but as Allan described above it made me change my mind. Allan has pointed out good explanation. Queen represents the sovereignty of women, but it she still summits to the king which clearly shows that it is not feminism.
There is an error at the end. "However, I have came to the point where i do not agree that Chaucer is not a feminist" It should be I do not agree that Chaucer was a feminist.
DeleteHey Daehun,
ReplyDeleteThis is awesome man, I like how you've looked at the text from another view point, its amazing what things you can pick up on when looking at something again and analysing it.
I too agree that Chaucer is showing some favour or respect towards women in some way, as you have quoted in line 924. He's gone along and created a fictional world, that "what if women had control over us men?", that'll be scary and so he showed an outcome, but still maintained that dominance men had.
Yeah I totally agree with you Allan. I too thought Chaucer was a feminist. However, It only seems like a "trick" towards the viewers after looking at your point of view. Thank you for that!
Delete2. 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 may believe that Chaucer was a feminist because some of the characters portrayed in The Wife of Bath’s Tale hold feminist ideals. For instance; the Queen in the tale suggests that if the Knight whom is about to be executed can tell her what a woman most desires then he may keep his life.
“904 I grante thee lyf, if thou kanst tellen me I grant thee life, if thou canst tell me
905 What thyng is it that wommen moost desiren. What thing it is that women most desire
906 Be war, and keep thy nekke-boon from iren! “ Beware, and keep thy neck-bone from iron”
The idea of letting a Knight live if he can figure out what women most desire may come across as feminism as what women most desire, according to Chaucer, is “to have sovereignty as well over her husband as her love, and to be in mastery above him.”
However, I don’t agree that this makes Chaucer a feminist. The Knight is depicted raping a maiden, and eventually, after his ‘quest’, he isn’t executed. He also marries a woman who he believes to be beautiful, regardless of whether she is or not. This does not come across as feminism, however more so the opposite. I believe that if he was a feminist, the knight would have still been executed and would not have been set free.
At the point where the Knight marries the woman, he very fully believes she is the 'Loathly Lady.'
Delete"This knight answered, "Alas and woe is me! I know right well that such was my promise.
For God's love, choose a new request! Take all my goods and let my body go."
He actually would rather lose all he's worth than marry the woman.
-"The idea of letting a Knight live if he can figure out what women most desire may come across as feminism as what women most desire, according to Chaucer, is “to have sovereignty as well over her husband as her love, and to be in mastery above him.”"
Feminism aside, to allow an offender time to learn and progress from their crime is quite a modern idea, especially for a Medieval author in the 1300s. And to have written a story with a woman being a protagonist, rather than just a beautiful prop to the ever mighty knight, was, on Chaucer's part, a more pro-feminist decision rather than a non feminist one. Although back in those times, feminism as we understand it today didn't exist.
I was actually speaking to James in class about the idea of feminism not existing in that era. James brought forward a good point that the idea of feminism had always existed. I presumed that it wasn't until the 60s-70s that feminism waas created, I would say regulations from the era when this was written restricted feminism but there was feminism nether the less. In regards to Chauncer being a pro-feminist, I would say that he generalised the idea of what Women would want, even to this day that still exists.
DeleteHey guys,
DeleteThis is an interesting discussion you have going here. I think that rather than being pro or anti feminist, Chaucer clearly shows a derailing of traditional gender roles (at least as we have seen depicted in that time). As Julia said, the women in this story play a much larger role than what you might expect. Whether or not this makes him a feminist is an interesting question, and I don't think it's one anyone can answer certainly. I think I'm going with Julia when she says this is a pro-feminist decision, it's definately a step in a feminist direction.
And, I think I might have to disagree with James K, where you said "He also marries a woman who he believes to be beautiful, regardless of whether she is or not. This does not come across as feminism, however more so the opposite." Keep in mind, when he married her she was still loathly. Though he did rape someone, and probably should have been put to death, he wasn't. He was sent out to chase his tail and think about what he'd done (which isn't a fair punishment for rape, which is odd since it was handed down by a court of females) but his real punishment came from the despair he felt at having to marry the lady. This definately paints a mysognistic picture of the Knight (shallow etc), so his punishment for the rape was that he too was reduced to nothing but a simpering mess, which could be interpretted as being on par with what his rape victim felt (personally, I don't think it was enough, the loathly lady should've done some rapey butt stuff to the Knight to see how he liked it). So there is some kind of equality that exists there, although its uncomfortable if you think about it too much.
Hey James W,
DeleteI see your point, that women being handed this case had a decision to do as they wish. There is a sense of equality here.
Could this rather be stated, "Was Chaucer for equality between men and women?", rather than, "Was Chaucer a Feminist", as Julio quoted, "feminism as we understand it today didn't exist.", non equality obviously did exist in the 1300s and it was in favor of men due to women not having power.
Allan
Regardless of what idea of feminism we're using. It is possible that nothing in the Wife of Bath's Tale is related to what Chaucer's views are, at all.
DeleteTaking information of what Characters are saying, (the Knight, the Queen and the Loathy Lady, for example) is only information from their mouths, not Chaucer's.
This doesn't mean Chaucer WAS or WASN'T a feminist. But taking character speech and actions at face value is not Chaucer's views, it is the view of a character.
The text as a whole reflects ideas that Chaucer wanted to put across, so indirectly, through the mouths of the characters, Chaucer's views are represented. The whole point of this analysis is to try and decipher what that message is, as a whole.
DeleteWhile this tale shouldn't be taken so seriously, (In what world would marriage be the consequence of rape, or the challenge to find one answer for a question so broad) To say:
"I believe that if he was a feminist, the knight would have still been executed and would not have been set free.I believe that if he was a feminist, the knight would have still been executed and would not have been set free." is trying to fit a realistic outcome into an unrealistic tale.
I think that the fact that Chaucer actually allowed the females characters to have any kind of say or justice is generous of a male Medievil Author, which is why I still believe he's more of a pro (or proto) feminist.
After reading The Wife of Bath's Tale , I think that from a critical view; Chauncer would be considered a feminist through the role of Knight who seems to want to understand what Women want and also inevitably gives into the women who saves him. The question has to be asked whether this really can be seen as an act of Chaucer being a feminist. It must be taken into consideration that this knight was only out to save himself and given the fact that the women only gave him one option which was to wed him he was forced on a quest rather then actually wanting to seek for his own knowledge, I don't think Chauncer intended for his work to being that of a feminist. I can't see that equality is seen in this story, an example is that the knight gets to live and isn't executed or sentenced for the crime he committed.
ReplyDeleteTo support your guys post I found a couple of quotes which support the idea of Chauncer not being a feminist. Hope this helps
“The Wife of Bath’s Tale” rewards the rapist knight by giving him theanswer to the queen’s question therefore allowing him to live and escape punishment. Hansen insists that the Wife of Bath is the result of a male poet who creates a character to be “a feminine monstrosity who is the product of the masculine imagination against which she ineffectively andonly superficially rebels” (Hansen 35).
In his book, The Wife of Bath: Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism, Peter G. Beidler states that in her essay for his book (pp. 273-89) “Hansen elaborates further on her view that theWife of bath is the product of a male writer who reproduces and reinforces male attitudes”(110). In her essay, Hansen concludes with a powerful statement: “It is critical to remember thatit is Chaucer as male poet, not the Wife as female character, who simultaneously escapes theconstrains of gender and enjoys the privileges of maleness” (Beidler 288).
Hey Daniel,
DeleteThe quote from Hansen was really good. I've been reading quite a few answers to the feminist question, and I think that quote is an awesome rebuttal to my current viewpoint. I guess it really only is a superficial rebellion, as she still insists on marrying him and serving him to her best abilities, "I pray to god that I may die insane Unless I to you be as good and true as ever was wife, since the world was new" (lines 1242 - 1244). And, evidentally, she still insists on marrying a Knight, even though he is a selfish, classist rapist. Was it the status as a Knight's wife she was after? Did she gain that at the sacrifice of getting an actual good man? These are good questions I'm now asking myself, thanks Daniel!
Hey Daniel,
DeleteGood find on the sources that you've provided.
Hansen is straight up against the idea of Chaucer being a Feminist, you can see that she has chosen this point of view from the fact that Chaucer himself is a male, therefore, unless he was gay, supported and reinforced the idea of strengthening male attitudes.
I like your view on this, the view that there was no equality. If there were, we'd see more domination from woman, then from man.
Allan
Thanks for your replies Allan and James, I now find myself asking the same questions. I'm not entirely sure as to whether the woman became beautiful in general, or if it was like a shallow hal scenario; where only the Knight could see her beauty;in the inside so to speak.
DeleteThere are three tales in the Critical Reader - "The Wife of Bath's Tale", "King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman", and "King Henry".
ReplyDeleteIn all tales there is a woman in it and they are all depicted as a "loathly lady". The loathly ladies are all hideous and ugly and generally described as a monster.
In "The Wife of Bath's Tale", the loathly lady follows this motif.
"There can no man imagine an uglier creature." (Line 999)
Her condition in the tale as a loathly lady is so that the knight can change and accept the consequences of his own actions.
"By utter force, he took away her maidenhead" (Line 888)
The knight raped a woman and punishment for this crime was execution. However, the queen decides to spare his life on one condition, if he can find the answer to "What thing it is that woman most desire". (Line 905)
The loathly lady in the tale was the one who held the answer but in order for the knight to know, he had to submit to her and wed her. He agrees and tells the queen the answer, and his life is spared.
He is in woe because she is so ugly and does not want to lay in bed with her. However, she changes his mind by presenting him with to choices - "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 be." (Line 1220-1226)
The knight comes to a realisation and changes, he prefers a wife who will never leave him. As he changes so to does the loathly lady.
"And when the knight saw truly all this, that she so was beautiful, and so young moreover, for joy he clasped her in his two arms." (Line 1250-1252)
The loathly lady transforms from an old, ugly hag into a beautiful woman when the knight accepts her as his wife.
In "King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman", the loathly lady appears again.
Delete"She was the ugliest creature that a man ever saw." (Line 4-5)
From Line's 7 to 17, the loathly lady is described in disturbing detail.
"Her face was red, her nose running, her mouth wide, her teeth all yellow. Her eyes were bleary, as large as balls, her mouth just as large." (Line 7-10)
The sheer detail of her appearance showed how ugly of a creature she really was.
"To recite the foulness of that lady there is no tongue fit. She had ugliness to spare." (Line 19-21)
No words could even describe her, this fits into the loathly lady motif perfectly.
The conditions of the loathly lady in this tale was to be wed to a knight (just as in The Wife of Bath's Tale) because she is the only person who could save King Arthur.
"For your life is in my hand. Only I can prevent your death." (Line 32-33)
"Let me marry Sir Gawain." (Line 60)
King Arthur is reluctant to agree at first but then he did not want to take any chances with death. He then confronts Sir Gawain about it (who is the knight she wishes to be wed with).
"Gawain, I met the foulest lady today; cretainly the worst I've ever seen. She told me she would save my life but first she wants to have a husband. Therefore, I moan. I am woebegone." (Line 110-114)
King Arthur probably expected Sir Gawain to object to the situation, yet he did not.
"Is that all? I shall we her and wed her again, even if she be a fiend." (Line 115-117)
This showed Sir Gawain's undying loyalty to his king. Gawain was chilvaric and a man of honour.
"Though she be the foulest person that ever has been seen on earth, for you I will not hesitate." (141-143)
Even though she could have been the most horrendous and ugliest creature in the world, he did not hesitate to marry her for the sake of King Arthur.
The actions of this knight in this tale has a striking difference to the knight in "The Wife of Bath's Tale". Sir Gawain seem to be a man who could do no wrong, a hero, someone you could admire. However, the one "The Wife of Bath's Tale" committed crime and was woeful.
DeleteIn "King Henry" the loathly lady appears again. She is also described to be the ugliest woman you could ever imagine.
"Her teeth were like the tether stakes, her nose like club or mell, and nothing less she seemed to be than a fiend that comes form hell." (Line 29-32)
Her condition in this was that King Henry submit to her every will. She keeps demanding meat, drink and also for King Henry to lay in bed with her.
"For she's eaten up both skin and bone left nothing but hide and hair." (Line 40-41)
"And she's drank it up all in one draught left never a drop therein." (Line 64-65)
She was a monster, with no manners and an appetite of a beast. She presents to King Henry another condition, for him to marry her. "Now swear, now swear you King Henry to take me for your bride." (line 76-77)
King Henry submitted to her needs however he could not bring himself to sleep with her.
"Oh God forbid, says King Henry, that ever the like betide, that ever a fiend that comes from hell should stretch down by my side." (Line 78-81)
There is no line that says he actually slept with her, but the text suggests he did for the loathly lady's condition to be met.
"When the night was gone and the day was come and the sun shone through the hall, the fairest lady that ever was seen lay between him and the wall." (Line 82-85)
Just as in "The Wife of Bath's Tale", she had transformed from a hag to beauty.
"But never before with a courteous knight that gave me all my will." (Line 88-89)
He had met her conditions of full submission which allowed her to transform. This loathly lady has a resemblance to the one in "The Wife of Bath's tale".
King Henry's actions are similar to Sir Gawain's. They are both seen as chilvaric and willing to cater to the loathly lady's needs no matter how she ugly she was. In "The Wife of Bath's Tale" it is different because the knight does not change his ways until the very end.
Sorry about the triple post, I kept getting something like "You can only post 4000 something characters". Don't really know what's up with that...
DeleteI forgot to mention that this post is for question 1 -
DeleteCite 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"...
In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define “conceits”?
ReplyDelete“The Norton Anthology of English Literature defines the “conceits” of poetics as metaphors that are intricately woven into the verse, often used to express satire, puns, or deeper meanings within a poem, and to display the poets own cunning with words.” (Abrams, 1993)
In my own understanding, conceits seem to be something like an extended metaphor. It is unlike a singular metaphor which only runs through one or few lines of a poem/sonnet. Instead, it is a metaphor which is present throughout the whole text.
For example, Shakespeare’s Sonnet XVIII (Sonnet 18), the conceit is comparing his friend to a summer’s day.
“Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer’s lease hath all too short a date:
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,” (Line 1-5)
Shakespeare first describes the negative qualities of summer, how it is too short, rough winds, and too hot, and comparing it to his friend.
“And often is his gold complexion dimmed,
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance, or nature’s changing course untrimmed:” (Line 6-8)
Shakespeare then says that his friend’s beauty and youth eventually declines just as summer days do. His friend will age and grow old just as summer transitions into fall.
“But thy eternal summer shall not fade.
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow’st,
Nor shall death brag thou wander’st in his shade,” (Line 9-11)
Shakespeare then changes his conceit. He begins to express that his friend’s beauty will not be forgotten. This makes much more sense in the following lines.
“When in eternal lines to time thou grow’st,
So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.” (Line 12-14)
He now speaks of “eternal lines”, which is the poem itself. He explains that as long as the poem is alive (where men can read), his friend will also be alive. Not in physical form but in memory and within this poem.
So in a sense, a summer day is never forgotten, especially when it is a memorable one.
I am open for discussion about conceits, because I am still not entirely sure that my analysis is correct. Hopefully we are able to get an in-depth discussion going!
Reference:
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 6th ed. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc, p.1081.
Shakespeare, Sonnet XVIII
I have done some researches of my own and gave more thoughts towards Chaucer. Was he a feminist? In his poem "Legend of Good women," There are more clues of Chaucer that he may of been a feminist. To support this statement,
ReplyDeleteBe Patient with me, and be not displeased,
Since you see I do it all in honor
Of love, and in the service of the flower
Whom I serve with all my wit and might.
She is the brightest and the one true light
That through this dark world my way has lead
This line really challenged me and almost convinced me to think that Chaucer was a feminist. It is also very important to think "feminism" is only a contemporary term. All the readers of Chaucer's tales and poems argue only in two ways. "He was a feminist" or "He was just not a Anti-Women."
It was really hard for me to make a biased decision or whether to decide if he was or not a feminist. After all the thinking and reading his other texts, I have came up with a final answer.
"Chaucer was a humanist, not a feminist." These two terms might sound quite similar since feminism is part of humanism. However, minor difference that I have noticed was that, Chaucer was interested in all kinds of different people and this includes women. Most of his literature included low class, upper class, king, queen and also medieval women. Medieval women were strong minded people who were very independent. In addition, in all of his texts, love was always included. Different types and kind of women were always needed in his writings.
Reference
http://www.poetryintranslation.com/PITBR/English/GoodWomen.htm