Feminist Analysis of the Prologue for the Wife of Bath (Canterbury Tales)

In her Prologue as part of “The Canterbury Tales” by Geoffrey Chaucer, The Wife of Bath offers readers a complex
portrait of a medieval woman. On the one hand, The Wife of Bath is shameless about her sexual exploits and the
way she uses sexual power to obtain what she wishes. On the other hand, by doing exactly these things she is
confirming negative stereotypes about women and proving that women are manipulative and deceitful. Even though
her actions might at first seem to be rebellion against the male-dominated society in The Canterbury Tales, and
more generally, the medieval period for women, there is very little that she does that is truly revolutionary or
empowering for women of her time.
Based even just on her introduction in “The Canterbury Tales” via the Prologue to the Wife of Bath’s Tale, it appears
from the onset that The Wife of Bath from “The Canterbury Tales” simply uses her sexual attributes for personal gain
instead of trying to prove her equal status. In general, this female character stereotype is meant to be seen as a
parody of sorts since she embodies a number of negative female characteristics including stupidity and arrogance;
deceitfulness, and lewdness. Although she is striking back at men it is not for any deeper reason other than personal
profit. It appears that in this section of the prologue to the Wife of Bath’s tale, Chaucer wants his readers to laugh at
this character rather than admire her for her proto-feminist stances on life and marriage.
If the Wife of Bath is a character that is meant to shatter a misogynistic stereotype of women, one could imagine that
she would engage in intelligent and informed conversation with some of the members of her party. As it stands,
however, the closest she comes to this is by offering her twisted understanding of the Bible. Rather arrogantly she
states in one of the important quotes from The Canterbury Tales (and The Wife of Bath’s Tale specifically), “Men
may divine and glosen up and down / But wel woot I express withouten lie / God bad us for to wexe and multiplye /
That gentil text can I wel understone” (lines 26-30). While it can be found in the Bible that humans should procreate,
it is worth noting that she prefaces this statement with a few words about how men sit and interpret the Bible. In her
Prologue in the “Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer, the Wife of Bath is claiming that she too is capable of doing this and
that the text is not beyond her reach. Still, the problem with this is that she is not proving anything about her
intelligence, she is merely trying to confirm or justify her loose behavior with the word of God
Even more importantly than this, in her prologue, the Wife of Bath from “The Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer is not
trying to present herself as a woman capable of independent thought and action because she is merely using the
Bible, a text associated with the male authority, to back up her assertions. In other words, as expressed in the Wife
of Bath’s Prologue within the “Canterbury Tales” by Geoffrey Chaucer, she is simply working within the patriarchy
rather than outside of it and thus only confirms negative stereotypes about women, especially since the insights she
offers are twisted, misunderstood, or simply wrong. For instance, at one point she talks about the Bible again,
saying, “Where can ye saye in any manere age / That hye God defended marriage / By expres word? I praye you,
telleth me / Or where he commanded virginitee?” (lines 65-68). She is simply justifying bad behavior with the Bible
and her botched misinterpretations of it and this makes her appear foolish rather than educated. It confirms the
stereotype of women in medieval times that women are not as capable at understanding the deep meanings and
mysteries of the Bible and that if they are given some education about it, they would only use it to justify lewd or
sinful conduct.
Throughout her prologue in “Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer, the Wife of Bath confirms misogynistic stereotypes of
women since she presents herself as little more than what can quite technically be called a whore. Instead of being
a revolutionary female figure with feminist intentions, she merely seeks husbands who will provide for her in
exchange for sexual favors. For her, a “good” husband is, as she states in one of the important quotes from the Wife
of Bath’s Prologue in “The Canterbury Tales by Chaucer “goode, and riche, and olde” (line 203) and is easy prey
when she decides to pull tricks such as make them think she is out at night looking for his women while she is
having a good time, only to turn this around later for monetary benefit. As she willingly states to her audience, “An
housbonde wol I have I wol nat lette / Which shal be both my detour and my thrall” (lines 160-161). For the Wife of
Bath, money, sex, and marriage are all interlinked and none can exist without the other.
Furthermore, to support this idea about the way the Wife of Bath perpetuates negative stereotypes of women during
the time of Chaucer, it is important to note that in the Wife of Bath’s prologue, if she finds that a particular man is not
giving her enough money, she simply withholds sexual favors from him. While this may at first seem to be a case of
a medieval woman exerting her independence, the only true power she possesses is that of her sexuality—
something that she has realizes is fading with her youth. With her views on money, sex, and marriage, the only thing
that seems to separate her from her from a “woman of the night” is the fact that there is a legally binding contract
behind it all. This is far from a feminist ideal of a solid marriage and is much more closely aligned with ages-old
misogynistic stereotypes of bad women.
When the Wife of Bath states in her prologue in “The Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer, “I would no lenger in bed abide
/ If that I felte his arm over my side/ Til he hadde made his ransom unto me” (lines 415-418) she is not only
confirming the stereotype of women as being obsessed with money and using their sexual power to obtain it, she is
also proving to her audience (both in the text and to the modern reader) that love is not something that an
“empowered” woman is prone to. However, this impression of her is turned on its head and she shows herself to be
a contradiction when she speaks of her last husband. He was a much younger man and beat her, but she loved this
and loved this man because of it. This is an even more perplexing image of woman.
Along these lines, it becomes apparent in even a cursory analysis of “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue” in “The
Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer how, when one On the one hand, the reader understands that this woman has a
complex understanding of marriage, but this is not enough to compensate for the fact that she allows herself to be
beaten up. Even though she does fight back on occasion, in the end she has proven herself not to be at all
revolutionary or proto-feminist, instead she is simply the same version of female that occurs frequently throughout
medieval and other literature. She tries to present herself as strong and independent, but in the end she is even
more a part of the negative stereotype than a normal woman might be.
While it can be argued that the Wife of Bath could be an early feminist character, there are too many aspects to her
that indicate how she is working within the system rather than outside of it. For a medieval woman to be truly
feminist or revolutionary, she must find a way to prove herself in a manner both on part with and independent of
men. The Wife of Bath chooses to use the patriarchal systems of religion (especially through her “discourses” on the
Bible) and marriage to her own benefit rather than seeking more sweeping or meaningful changes.
Other essays and articles in the Literature Archives related to this topic include : Analysis and Summary of The
Canon’s Yeoman’s Tale (Canterbury Tales) • A Comparison The Decameron and The Canterbury Tales •
Representations of Women in Medieval Literature • Comparison of The Book of Margery Kempe and the
Pardoner’s Prologue and Tale.
TEMPTATIONS in Sir Gawain and the green knight
In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Gawain is tempted throughout the action of the text. By far, the most important
temptation of Gawain's is that of his own desire to live.
Gawain knows that the only way that he will survive a blow by the Green Knight is to keep the belt given to him
secret. Gawain has upheld his promise to the Green Knight on all other instances- the kisses given to him did not
guarantee his life.
Gawain is able to be a true knight- he worships both God and his lord (Arthur), holds courtly love for both Guinevere
and the wife of the Green Knight. (Courtly love does not mean romantic love, typically.)
Therefore, the temptations that Gawain must face are:
-the calling of a true knight in the taking of the challenge (refusal shows weakness)
-the holding of the promise to meet the Green Knight in one year (refusal shows dishonor)
-the promise to give the Green Knight all he receives while staying at the castle (shows honor to ones lord)
-the exchange of the blow (shows knightly honor)
-the sexual temptation of the Green Knight's wife (shows willingness to accept both God's law and respect of ones
lord)
In all but one, Gawain is able to overcome the temptations that he faces- the inability to give up the belt.
Sir Gawain’s Temptations
In the poem, "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,", Gawain is a guest at Hautdesert Castle. During his stay at the
castle, three separate hunts take place. These hunts also parallel temptations aimed at Gawain by the wife of the
Lord of Hautdesert Castle. In each hunt scene, a characteristic of the prey of that hunt is personified in Gawain's
defense against the advances of the Lord's wife.
The first temptation of Gawain is perhaps the most difficult for him to defend. This temptation corresponds with the
hunt scene involving a deer. In terms of the hunt, the deer is hunted because it is a staple of the diet, or it is
something that satisfies a person. In the same manner, the Lord's wife views Gawain as art, resembling an animal
that she hunts. She pursues him on the sole basis of her carnal desire. This, her first temptation, is utterly sexual.
She says, "Be it with me as you will; I am well content! / For I surrender myself, and sue for grace, / And that is best,
I believe, and behooves me now. (1215-1217)” She is viewing Gawain much as a hunter would view a deer. She has
no interest in any kind of relationship, and she is not extensively flirting with him as she does in the next two
temptations; she simply wants sex from him, plain and simple. She is, in a sense, "hunting" Gawain; hunting in that
she is pursuing Gawain for the sole purpose of making him her trophy. If he falls prey to this temptation, then she
has slain him. In his reaction to the lady, Gawain acts much like a deer. He first tries to entirely ignore her, but this
tactic was unsuccessful. Then, he stealthily avoids her advances, not directly confronting her, but subtly
downplaying the magnitude of her advances, until he could cleanly escape.
The second temptation of Gawain is easier for him to defend against. This temptation corresponds with the hunt
scene involving a boar. Boars are not so m... r Gawain and the Green Knight was written in the
fourteenthSS ir Gawain's Fault in "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight":
What's all the fuss about anyway?
A question of life, death, and ethics in the 14th Century:
What happens when a Kantian mind meets a Machievellian body?
Sir Gawain lied and kept the green girdle, so what? He wanted to live. Is that so wrong?
>From the first time I read Sir Gawain and the Green Knight I have been troubled by the question of whether or not
Sir Gawain was right or wrong in lying in order to keep the girdle and save his life. He was torn between honesty and
his own life. The question he was forced to ask himself was "what did he value more: his honesty or his life? Many
scholars have struggled with this question for centuries, as well as the questions of why Gawain made the decision
that he did, how guilty he "really" felt for his actions, and what the poet is trying to tell the reader through Gawain's
ordeal.
When I was growing up I was told to always be honest. I was only "grounded" twice in my lifetime: once for not
telling my mom where I went one afternoon and once for telling her a lie. I was in Kindergarten and broke a candle
(don't ask me why or how). I blamed it on the cat. I couldn't stand the pressure of my mother's intense interrogation
that consisted of simply asking me how the cat could possibly brake the candle which was surrounded by a
hurricane lamp. My guilt was so overwhelming that I broke down and told her the truth. Thus, I was introduced to the
concept of "grounding" and the importance of honesty. I was taught at a young age that the foundation of any
relationship is honesty and without it, a friendship can only last so long and its roots go go only so deep.
But honesty is not everything. My mother would probably ground me again if I did not lie to someone to save my
neck. There is another side to the question about Sir Gawain's decision to not give Bertilac the green girdle. While
honesty should be highly valued, it may be unwise to undervalue life itself. In almost every culture death, as well as
Gawains' culture, death is recognized "as a terrifying thing which men and animals alike try to escape by every
device in their power, regardless of dignity or duty" (Burrow, " The Third Fit" 37). It may be even more difficult to
place an overriding significance on the value of honesty in light of life's alternative: death.
"...images of death permeate the medieval world" (Clien. 55).
A modern reader of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight should gain an understanding of what death means within the
"cultural milieu" which surrounded the Gawain writer. Wendy Clein in her book "Concepts of Chivalry in Sir Gawain
and the Green Knight" describes the chivalric approach to death as an uncomfortable and awkward marriage
between the warrior's code on one side and Christianity of the the antithetical side. The warrior code calls for the
knight to "defy death in acts of heroism and thereby gain worldly fame" (55). However, the Christian doctrine
demands that the knight surrender worldly fame and accept death as a "passage from this imperfect world to
eternity" (55).
If knight is to gain fame and fulfill the warrior code that is so deeply engrained into the psyche of a warrior, he must
play with death. This is what war and tournaments are all about. It is about looking death in the eye and not flinching.
Once a knight can do this he has fulfilled the warrior code of a knight, at least for the moment.
The Christian approach to death is much different from the warrior approach to death. While some parts of the poem
may appear be simply "Christian in harmony with pre-Christian nature belief and ritual", the issue of eternity and how
to live life can be quite cacophonous (Speirs. 85). The Christian is called to reject the worldly glory that is offered by
the world of the knight. However the knight who gives up worldly glory is not left without any honors or glory. These
tempoal glories are replaced by the "spiritual rewards" that are enjoyed by the saints.
While it might appear that the two worlds of Christianity and the warrior are mutually exclusive, they can really
compliment each other when human logic is applied. If warriors are supposed to beat up people, and Christians are
supposed to live their lives for God then logic tells us that we can unite these two lifestyles by beating up people for
Jesus. The Crusades were great for these special kind of individuals who desired to maintain their commitment to
the Church while engaging in the thrill of violent adventure. This is one of the unique times when the values of
medieval Christianity and the medieval warrior really compliment each other: when it is time to beat up foreigners for
Jesus.
There are a number of advantages to the spiritual life that
. The st
ory was originally written in a Northern dialect. It tells the story of Sir Gawain's first adventure as a knight.

This section of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight pertains to the agreement between Bercilak de
Hautdesert, the host, and Gawain. Bercilak is to go hunting in the morning, while Gawain sleeps.
Upon the return of Bercilak from his hunting trip, he is to give to Gawain all that he has caught. In
return, Gawain is to return all that he has won in his "hunt." They make this bargain three times, at
the end of each day.

The segment begins with Bercilak showing Gawain the fruits of his hunting trip. Gawain returns the
fruits of his "hunt" by bestowing on Bercilak a kiss. The source of the kiss given to Gawain remains
anonymous. However, Gawain is not aware that Bercilak knows exactly where and from whom
Gawain has received his gift.

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight consists of three hunts, three temptations, and three different
animals. It is not by accident that the first day's hunt is for deer. The deer represents the innocence
and purity of Gawain as a knight. The lengthy and detailed description of the hunt and the capture of
the deer serve to emphasize the symbolism of the deer. The even more detailed description of the
slaughter and butchering of the meat further emphasizes the symbolism. It can be inferred that the
butchering of the deer is similar to the fate that awaits Gawain when he meets with the Green Knight.
The next day's hunt is for a wild boar. The fierce animal is symbolic of Gawain's reactions to the
increasing advances from Bercilak's wife. The boar is fierce and much more difficult to catch and
kill, just as Gawain is steady in his resistance to temptation. Bercilak is aware that Gawain is resistant
to all temptation at this point. Gawain is true to his reputation of a chivalrous, worthy knight.

The third day's hunt is for the wily and cunning fox. This is symbolic of the clever way that Gawain
resists temptation. However, Gawain is tricked by Bercilak's wife into taking the Green girdle. The
acceptance of this gift represents Gawain's fall from perfect chivalry and knighthood, since he lies
about it to Bercilak.

The language used in this passage from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is not particularly difficult
to interpret. However, it is necessary to have read the entire story in order to understand the this
section.

r Gawain and the Green Knight was written in the fourteenth century by an anonymous poet who was
a contemporary of Geoffrey Chaucer. The story was originally written in a Northern dialect. It tells the
story of Sir Gawain's first adventure as a knight.

This section of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight pertains to the agreement between Bercilak de
Hautdesert, the host, and Gawain. Bercilak is to go hunting in the morning, while Gawain sleeps. Upon
the return of Bercilak from his hunting trip, he is to give to Gawain all that he has caught. In return,
Gawain is to return all that he has won in his "hunt." They make this bargain three times, at the end of
each day.

The segment begins with Bercilak showing Gawain the fruits of his hunting trip. Gawain returns the
fruits of his "hunt" by bestowing on Bercilak a kiss. The source of the kiss given to Gawain remains
anonymous. However, Gawain is not aware that Bercilak knows exactly where and from whom Gawain
has received his gift.

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight consists of three hunts, three temptations, and three different
animals. It is not by accident that the first day's hunt is for deer. The deer represents the innocence and
purity of Gawain as a knight. The lengthy and detailed description of the hunt and the capture of the deer
serve to emphasize the symbolism of the deer. The even more detailed description of the slaughter and
butchering of the meat further emphasizes the symbolism. It can be inferred that the butchering of the
deer is similar to the fate that awaits Gawain when he meets with the Green Knight.

The next day's hunt is for a wild boar. The fierce animal is symbolic of Gawain's reactions to the
increasing advances from Bercilak's wife. The boar is fierce and much more difficult to catch and kill,
just as Gawain is steady in his resistance to temptation. Bercilak is aware that Gawain is resistant to all
temptation at this point. Gawain is true to his reputation of a chivalrous, worthy knight.

The third day's hunt is for the wily and cunning fox. This is symbolic of the clever way that Gawain
resists temptation. However, Gawain is tricked by Bercilak's wife into taking the Green girdle. The
acceptance of this gift represents Gawain's fall from perfect chivalry and knighthood, since he lies about
it to Bercilak.
The language used in this passage from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is not particularly difficult to
interpret. However, it is necessary to have read the entire story in order to understand the this section.