The Notorious Wife Of Bath Essay Research

The Notorious Wife Of Bath Essay, Research Paper

The Notorious Wife of Bath

Upon a first reading of the Wife of Bath.s Prologue, it.s hard not to feel the need to pat her on the shoulder and say .Go-girl!. There.s no denying the impact that Feminism has had on our Millennium-revved society, and the Wife of Bath.s character would certainly have contradicted the oppressive customs of Chaucer.s time. But on closer inspection, it would seem that the Prologue could be considered a medium for an anti-feminist message, under the semblance of a seemingly feminist exterior. She confesses her treatment of her husbands and her tendency to .swere and lyen,. and this self-incrimination invokes a feeling that the Wife is an extraordinarily attractive character by sharing her feminine faults with us, good-humouredly. At the same time, her robust energy and her arguments against anti-feminists; her comments about clerks being unable to do .Venus werkes. and taking it out on .sely wyf(s). in print, are carried further in the Tale, where the ending arguably serves as a climax, summarising many of the Wife.s themes.

In her Prologue, her arguments in favour of marriage show a hearty common sense, but they are suspect . while it is true that marriage peoples the earth and replenishes existing stocks of .virginitee,. her own marriages do not seem to have produced any offspring, and while it may be .bet [.] to be wedded than to brinne,. her marriages, despite her claim that .in wyfhood I wol use myn instrument,. do not seem to have prevented her from .goon a-caterwaw[ing]. and by decision engaging in fornication (.I ne loved nevere by no discrecioun/But evere folwede myn appetit,/Al were he short, or long, or blak, or whit.), which is after all what marriage was, according to her, supposed to prevent.

From the account she gives of her marriages, it becomes increasingly obvious that marriage for her is not quite so beneficial as one might think . the only benefit the husbands get, in exchange for their .purgatorie,. is that of her .bele chose. (which, it must be pointed out, they . with the possible exception of Jankin, who satisfied her better than .bacon. . have to share with other .good felawes.), but it is worth observing that she never speaks of the sexual act as giving the male partner pleasure (except with regard to .daun Salomon. . but she identifies with him rather than his wives: .As wolde God it were leveful unto me/ To be refresshed half so ofte as he!.) . on the contrary, she speaks of the husband.s .dette. to his wife, of .How pitously a-night I made hem swinke!. and of .his tribulacion withal/ Upon his flessh.. Also, while she claims Biblical support for her views on marriage, the support that she cites is conveniently edited to suit her purposes (for example, Solomon did have 700 wives and 300 concubines . but his appetites led to his turning away from God; and the marital relationship specified in the Bible is a reciprocal one rather than the one-sided one she speaks of, tilted in favour of the wife . she conveniently ignores that while .Apostel [.]/[.] bad oure housbondes for to love us weel,. he also exhorts women to love their husbands), and she elsewhere ignores the Bible when it proves difficult to .glose. in her favour (as in her dismissal of its order to dress .in habit maad with chastitee and shame.). Moreover, her behaviour is a demonstration of all the anti-feminist accusations that she (falsely) claims her husband/s of levelling at her (the ultimate irony, since she is proving the truth of these very accusations at the very time when she is making them up). She does dress gaily (cf. Her stockings .of fyn scarlet reed.) . and probably for the same reasons that she goes .walkinge out by night., it is doubtful that she .abides. in .chastitee,. she is devious and deceitful (making up the accusations in order to pre-empt any on the part of the husband/s), she is self-willed (.we wol ben at oure large.) and she is arguably like .bareyne lond. and .wilde fyr. (she has no children, and has .consumed. five husbands).

To see the Wife of Bath.s Prologue as being merely an anti-feminist vehicle would be to ignore the frequent ambiguity that is displayed in the Prologue as the Wife charms her way through her shameless and yet strangely winning confession (it should be noted that she is earlier described as having been .a worthy womman al hir live. in the General Prologue, despite her five .housbondes. and the knowledge that the narrator has of her .oother compaignye in youth,. though he refrains from elaborating in his good-natured discretion); and it would have to be done at the cost of ignoring the extraordinary vigour that Chaucer endows the Wife of Bath with.

It is true that the Wife of Bath.s opinions about women are suspiciously similar to those of the anti-feminists. She claims that .half so boldely kan ther no other man/ Swere and lyen, as a womman kan,. and that for women, .Greet prees at market maketh deere ware,/ And to greet cheep is holde at litel prys.; her own behaviour also follows the exact pattern as predicted by .Theofraste.. However, the difference is that she takes pride in her faults (eg. .Deceite, weping, spinning God hathe yive/ To wommen kindely.; and wives who are able to deceive their husbands (.Bere him on honde that the cow is wood.) are, by her definition, .wys wives.) and that her audacity is subversively attracti