1. What is a fabula, and in what sense is 'the loathly lady' theme one? (you can google this one...)
2. What does Carter (2003) have to say about Chaucer's 'feminism'? In what sense is the Wyfe of Bath's Tale and in what is it not 'feminist'?
3. What according to Hahn (1995) are some critical issues around The Wedding of Sir Gawain...?
4. What does Hahn identify as its Celtic influences?
5. How do each of the three versions I've given you differ, especially in relation to the choice the knight/king must make?
** Alan will take 2+3 **
ReplyDelete1) As far as I could decipher with the limitless resources of the internet, a fabula is "the term used in Russian Formalism for the ‘raw material’ of story events as opposed to the finished arrangement of the plot (or sjuzet " (Wikipedia).
ReplyDeleteThe 'loathly lady' theme is one because it is a character, or "raw material" that is a very common thread throughout the history of medieval literature. It was in Celtic mythology, representing an idea of the goddess, which might very well have been modeled in part after one of the Greek goddesses, Diana, goddess of the hunt, for example. (Carter, 82) She would come to a prospective King, and present him with the task of kissing her in her extremely hideous, "personification of sovereignty," state, and if he did, then he would become King of Ireland. (Carter, 83)
The 'loathly lady' comes up again in Arthurian literature, in "The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle," in which she is again a hideous woman who transforms into a beauty when man overcomes his desire for beauty, and gives over his will to her. In that context, the loathly lady is more of a representation of feminism. "At the heart of "Ragnelle" lies the question of how the unknown, the marvelous, or the threatening is broguht into line with legitimate, normative, idealized chivalric society." (Hahn, 98)
So in that sense, the loathly lady is a themed fabula, because she represents essentially the same ideas and concepts, no matter what context the story she is found to be in is set. She is always a representation of nature, and man's struggle with it, and the wonders that it can provide when trusted.
To add to Alan's point about the critical issues in The Wedding of Sir Gawain according to Hahn (1995), the main issues were the character Ragnelle, her trannsformation and the setting.
ReplyDeleteHahn (1995) says that Ragnelle is an outsider oth socially and sexually. She is of a low social status, which can be seen in her ragged, unkempt appearance (Hahn, 1995) for example "her hair clotted in a heap". Her lack of qualities such as beauty and manners are what she possesses at the end, as well as Sir Gawain.
The transformation of her character is noted by Hahn (1995) as symbolic. He (1995) notes that she plays the double role of beauty and the beast. At the start she is ugly and a threat but also has beneficial knowledge to the king. Hahn (1995) says that this is a critical issue because it is a recurring thing in feminist literature. He calls it the "worrysome duplicity" which often affects women. In my opinion, this can be linked to the way in which female characters are often stereotyped as either beautiful or intelligent, but possessing both qualities is a threat to patriarchal rule. I found it interesting that the "hag" was taken at her word for this reason.
A final critical issue noted by Hahn (1995) is that the poem was set in a forest, which has associations of faiytales and romance. He (1995) that it is a place of recreation, as it is where Arthur and his court go on holiday, as hunting was a common past time of English nobility.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete5. How do each of the three versions I've given you differ, especially in relation to the choice the knight/king must make?
ReplyDeleteIn the first reading, “The Wife of Bath’s Tale,” the knight is asked by the ‘loathly lady’ to love her. But he responds to that request with “my love? Nah, my damnation!” (Chaucer, line 1067) Thus he denies the loathly lady’s wishes because he would be too ashamed to ever love someone so ugly. He can’t even contemplate it. She then gives him a choice- that she could be ugly and old, yet love him truly and forever be loyal, or she could be beautiful and faithless. He gives up in the end, giving over the power to choose to her, which brings the story full circle. Everything had started with him raping a beautiful maiden, and Guinevere giving him the task to find out what women most desire. The loathly hag had been the one to give him the answer : power over men. And with his submission, she becomes a beautiful and faithful woman, because he gave her what she wanted.
In the second reading, on the other hand, the theme is brotherhood and chivalry, instead of what women most desire. Arthur meets the loathly lady on a road, and is told to get her the hand of Sir Gawain in marriage, or she will not save Arthur from the death that is threatening him. Gawain promises Arthur his help without any real details of the woman, and without seeing her, because he is that loyal to Arthur. “Though she be the foulest person that ever has been seen on earth, for you I will not hesitate.” (Hahn, 76) So the choice made is based on chivalry and loyalty, instead of pride and desire.
In the third, “King Henry,” he never really resists the loathly lady, because he was too chivalrous to deny her anything. She asked for “more meat, more meat” (Span, 80), and so he went and killed his best greyhounds, horses, deer, and goshawks for her to eat. And when she asked him to have sex with her, he complied, even though he did not want to, he did not deny her, and was rewarded in the morning when he was laying beside “the fairest lady that ever was seen.” (Span, 80) So his choice was really to be chivalrous, just as the second one was.
So the pattern among the three stories is that chivalry was very prominent in medieval literature, and then Chaucer veered away from it, to poke fun at societal conventions of chivalry and feminism with the use of the loathly lady.
#3 Hahn explains some critical issues around The Wedding of Sir Gawain
ReplyDeleteThese are
1. History of an reward, the social status between people
"In the earliest Old Irish versions, the reward for the hero's offering his favor or maing the right choice is kingship or political dominance.
2. Woman was described as mystery and secret. It is not good for man to know their heart.
"The plot oif Ragnelle, then turns on the transformation of its heroine both physically and symbolically, from an ugly hag to a beautiful lady, and from an enigmatic threat to a fulfilled woman.
(paragraph3)
I needs some interaction please !
Alison : I do think in the story, it looks a trap to encourage the man in the forest.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi, guys. Sorry for interrupting. I don't know what happened to my group (two), we seem to have been splitted into the other groups. Mind I join the discussion here? I will ask the lecturer what happened after he comes back from his nice trip.
ReplyDeleteI would like to add a piece of information to Alan's answers. It is about Q.3
ReplyDeleteAccording to Hahn(1995), the surviving manuscript in a sixteenth-century was written by a neglient person."The scribe leaves unclear whether he employs a word-ending stroke simply as a flourish,or as indication of final unstressed" (Hahn,1995,p.100).
The scribe's formation of 'i' and y are often
indistinguishable. " I have transcribed as y those characters that seem clearly y; when the letter form appears ambiguous, I have rendered it as 'i' in conformity with standard conventions of modern spelling." (Hahn,1995,p.100)
Apart from that,Hahn (1995) also expressed that "capitalization and punctuation are alomost entirely editorial."
At last,there were no stanza breaks in the manuscript of Rangnelle. Although the poem overly used a tail-rhyme stanza general to many other Middle English romances,it didn't have a great number of individual lines. As a result, the stanza divisions were chaotic and unequal.(Hahn,1995). The progress of the story was still clear even though the manuscript appeared to have lacked at least one leaf.
Alan , I hope you don't mind I keep adding comments to your views on Q.3. I am 'homeless' at the moment.
ReplyDelete'Ragnelle'is a European local story that retells the plot of an ugly woman who seeks some kind of sexual favour from the hero and is transformed by his compliance. After fulfilling the woman's wish, the hero usually acquires the information he needs or the power he seeks.
Hahn(1995) states that the setting of 'Ragnelle' was recasted in late medieval English. The ugly lady was supposed to reward the hero with some sort of political power or sovereignty he seeks for his offer/acquiescence in the earliest Old Irish versions.
The folktales setting is different in late medieval English. It emphasizes on the individual love characteristic of romance rather than the field of epic(Hahn,1995).
I consider that the physical and symbolical transformation of the hideous woman in the plot of Ragnelle reflects women's changeable character and the attitude of male towards female in Western culture.
Ragnelle's double role endows her with a deep ambiguity, mixing both charm and revulsion, deadly jeopardy and inspired knowledge(Hahn,1995).
Hahn considers that" such worrisome duplicity often attaches itself to women and femininity in popular romance, and throught out Western culture" (1995,p.98).
The story may hint that women who are less beautiful and intelligent are loathed by the males.
Here are my opinions on Q.2. Feel free to comment on my works.
ReplyDeleteThe proofs of Chaucer’s ‘feminism’ are as follows.
The occurrence of the hideous lady in the setting is the first evidence. “She is humbly related to a set of goddesses, who expand the meaning of femininity” (Charter, 2003.p.82).Chaucer also gave a ‘hunter hunted’ turn to gender destabilization by turning the hideous lady who had quasi-divine power into hunter.
Chaucer’s rapist knight is another proof of ‘feminism’. Although, the knight won everything in the end, his newly beautiful bride had struggle over having sex with him. Carter considers that “the effect of the hag’s quasi-divine power negates her total surrender to her man when she is having fun with him”
(2003, p.92) Carter also believes that “the reciprocation of role play here, the destabilization of personal power, makes the bedroom joy more “parfit” (2003,p.92) .
The last evidence of ‘feminism’ is Chaucer’s interest in the disproportion of gender dominance. “Whatever source he encountered, whatever transmutation to it had occurred, he evidently appreciated the more immediate destabilization gender roles that springs from the loathly lady seen as a personification of the kingdom” (Carter,2003,p.84). The plot of the knight being turned into the sexual victim in the hands of hideous lady from rapist can account for the concept.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere are also my views on Q.2
ReplyDeleteThe Wyfe of Bath’s Tale has the sense of ‘feminism’ as well. Chaucer presented her faith of the reality of knights and maidens in ‘Wife’. She believes that the maidens are “grist for the mill in the chivalric scheme- objects with the limited option of being either rescued or raped” (Carter, 2003, p.86). Chaucer answered this by rewriting the script in which she enabled the ugly woman to suppress and re-educate the erring knight.
The replacement of males from main position of the court with women is another aspect of ‘feminism’ in ‘Wife’. Queen Guinevere was granted by King Arthur to take over his dominance as final judge. The guilty knight’s fate would be controlled by the feminine jury in the court which was “made up entirely of women” (Cater, 2003, p.87). The Wife seized the male sovereign of justice and reassigned it to the women of the court. The displacement of the knights of the court to the place, where generally kept for women further signifies the shift of gender power.
Suggestion of all women have “urgency of the body and the “queynte fantasye” (Carter, 2003. p.91) in ‘Wife’ may be the last demonstration of Chaucer’s feminism. She thought that women usually become fiancées in situations unfavourable to themselves.
‘Wife’ represents the canonical literature of women and heterosexual relations. The loathly crone in the tale has “an active sexuality” that freed from “the Christian yoke of heterosexuality and of authorial censure” (Carter, 2003. p.91).
The tale’s ending is similar to other loathly lady stories though the patriarchy was not reinstated in the court after all. It indicates that gender roles are not the solely option and the female sovereignty may generate happiness.
My last opinion on Q2
ReplyDeleteApart from several demonstrations of ‘feminism’ in Wyfe of Bath’s Tale, there are aspects of anti-feminism as well.
Carter states that “[t] he ‘anti-feminist’ elements… constitute the force behind the tale’s challenge to male domination. When the knight surrenders to female ‘maistrye’, he surrenders not to the romanticized woman projected by male desire, but to the woman conceived in the pessimistic terms of anti-feminism” ( 2003, p. 84).
Kimiko , that's fine. My group members seems to be away for while. As I spoke to Paul before leaving NZ. He told me the discussion will be carried as usual.
ReplyDeleteIf you have doubt or any help. email me for info
which is my full name (alankoon) (shift+2) gmail dot come.
I have spilt up the name using words, it is to avoid spam. Enjoy the holiday
How do each of the three versions I've given you differ, especially in relation to the choice the knight/king must make?
ReplyDeleteIn terms of my point of view, “The Wife of Bath’s Tale,” the knight is asked by the ‘loathly lady’ to love her.
But he reacts to that request with “my love? Nah, my damnation!” (Chaucer, line 1067) it shows that he does deny the loathly lady’s wishes because he feels that he is way too shamed to love someone who looks so ugly. Moreover, She also gives him a choice- that she could be aged as well as not good looking, it does not matter, because will be loved him forever and be loyal of course.
On the other hand she could be famous. Eventually He quit. However according to me the story changes when he quit and gave up the power. It all started with raping a maiden.
“The fairest lady that ever was seen.” (Span, 80) “King Henry,” he never really resists the loathly lady, because he was too gracious to reject her everything. She asked for “more meat, more meat” (Span, 80), and so he went and killed his best greyhounds, deer and horses so that they could eat.
Hence the example between the three stories are that graciousness was very important in medieval literature, and then Chaucer turned away from it, to dig fun at shared get-together of chivalry and feminism with the use of the loathly lady.
Conversely, the subject is gallantry, in its place of what she most desire. Arthur gets together the loathly lady on a path, and is informed to get her the hand of Sir Gawain in wedding, or she will not save Arthur from the bereavement that is frightening him.
Gawain promises Arthur his help without any real details of the woman, and without seeing her, because he is that loyal to Arthur. “Though she be the foulest person that ever has been seen on earth, for you I will not hesitate.” (Hahn, 76), this is the reason why the choice made is based on chivalry and loyalty, as an alternative of arrogance and wish for.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAS far as I can see, we all are agreeing that The Wife of Bath’s Tale has the logic of feminism. As the group member can see Kimiko also points out the similar idea that by reading the story, I can see that from Carter, 2003, p86 that Chaucer presented her belief of the pragmatism of knights and maidens in ‘Wife of Bath’s Tale’. She extremely thinks that the maidens are grist for the mill in the chivalric scheme- objects with the limited option of being either rescued or raped. Chaucer answered this by rewriting the script in which she enabled the ugly woman to suppress and re-educate the erring knight.
ReplyDeleteSeems like we are you doing well by reading and understanding all the terms of these Narratives. I learnt a lot, so many words are still new to me. So good luck with you guys...
ReplyDeleteWhat does Carter (2003) have to say about Chaucer's 'feminism'? In what sense is the Wife of Bath's Tale and in what is it not 'feminist'?
ReplyDeleteAccording to page 81 and 82, as far as I can see, in terms of Carter (2003) articles, I found that, there are many arguable contexts. There are many changes of the gender responsibilities.
Females are not tied up with habitual or traditional responsibilities. I can see on page 86 that, there is a huge difference between male and female. Such as, Carter(2003) describes, as far as knight is concerned, “no great thinker” (page 90).
Also, Knight has no understanding, in other words, no brain or not intelligent, however, female are understandable and intelligent.
By the way, there are some more to add, such as from page 87 to page 90, male cannot select female, however, female can select male in terms of marriage. For example, the female decides. Also knights have to surrender themselves in marriage.
ReplyDeleteHi Group, I do agree with Kiniko in terms of there are aspects of anti-feminism as well. Because, female is the decision maker. As Kiniko one of our members from the group says, "When the knight surrenders to female ‘maistrye’, he surrenders not to the romanticized woman projected by male desire, but to the woman conceived in the pessimistic terms of anti-feminism". It proves that woman is the decision maker clearly.
ReplyDeleteDear group, actually there are more examples, have you seen on from page 82 to page 90. I found that, especially in the court room females, they play the recognized role. From page 82, we all can read that, the wife of Bath is not a beautiful woman, although she changes herself. For example, according to page 84, “”not the romanticized woman projected by male desire”.
ReplyDeleteDear Group, I found Kiniko wrote, "The plot of the knight being turned into the sexual victim in the hands of hideous lady from rapist can account for the concept." It is true, however I would like to add something here, did any of our group memebers found out that, the maid is raped by a sexual killer who stalks her. You will find it on page 86.
ReplyDelete