1. Cite 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"...
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?
Question 1:
ReplyDeleteFocus on the woman's description
King Arthur Meets a Really Ugly Woman:
“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.
Her teeth hung out of her lips,
Her cheeks were as broad as a woman's hips.
He back was as curved as a lute.
Her neck was long and also thick.
Her hair clotted in a heap.
In the shoulders she was a yard across.
Her breasts would have been a load for a horse.
Like a barrel was she made.
To recite the foulness of that lady
There is no tongue fit.
She had ugliness to spare.”
This quote reflects the passage in the original text where the knight finds the old lady for the first time. In the original she is only described as “ugly” however in this text the depth in which the description goes is quite deep. This quote that I have here seems to describe what is meant by ugly or in this case ugliest. Take note of the language being used here it starts off quite mildly “face red”, “nose running” and then gets steadily heavier “hair clotted in a heap”, “breasts would have been a load for a horse” then it gets to the point where the author can’t find anything stronger to describe how ugly she is “there is no tongue fit”. With this it is stating that the vocabulary is at its limits when trying to describe this lady and is implied by the author that describing her ugliness could keep going ad infinum.
It is curious to note the respect given towards this woman compared to the original text where in the original she is described as a “creature” rather than a person even whereas in this extract the woman is described as a “lady”. If you take into account the character viewing the woman which in this case is King Arthur and compare it to his lustful knight it gives a clearer definition to the characters in a sense as King Arthur would be much more respectful as King towards any woman, more repulsed perhaps but still more respectful.
Steeleye Span, ‘King Henry’.
“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.”
In this version there is slightly less description than the previous example because the extract is poetic therefore the description has to be condensed to fit the muse. The use of imagery techniques, in this case similes “her teeth were LIKE the tether stakes”, “Her nose like club or mell,” allows the reader or listener to get a clearer picture of the woman’s likeness makes it much easier to have the same train of thought when imagining her. Notice there is less emphasis on the “ugly” and more on the demonizing. The use of metaphor in the last line exemplifies this “a fiend that comes from hell”.
In this extract it sits in between her likeness to a human and creature. The first part treats the woman as a person referring to her as a “her” then leads onto calling her something non-human “fiend”. In the case of this poem it fluctuates between both calling the woman a “her” at times and then goes to demonise her in her actions:
“For she's eaten up both skin and bone
Left nothing but hide and hair.”
This I believe happens because the extract is being poetic and the flow has to oscillate in between remembering that she is a person to demonising her actions to keep a constant pace throughout.
References:
Critical Reader 2013
Your opinions on ugly women are quite extensive I see.. But on a more serious note, this is an impressive post. You clearly have a good understanding of the characters in each text, and the way in which they're described. Particularly interesting is the way one interpretation describes the hag as "woman, and the other "creature", demoninsing the character like you said. Luckily the both end up beautiful in the end. Yay.
DeleteI agree that the word "creature" is a very powerful use of language in this text as the woman is not even given the dignity of being called a human. This also happens in 'The wife of Bath's Tale", in line 999- "There can no man imagine an uglier creature. In this text, there is no long description of the woman's hideousness, but this one line is still powerful.
DeleteI enjoyed this post because it has some gruesome description and language of this woman compared to how Chaucer described the woman in his story.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2. 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?
ReplyDeleteThere are several reasons presented in Chaucer's Wife of Bath, that may suggest he had a feminist attitude. Firstly, the crux of the story revolves around "the thing it is that women most desire". Even today, this is a quest that countless males embark on, but seldom conquer. According to the story, the answer to this question is "sovereignity". The abilty to makes ones' own decisions, and have power of life and love. When voiced from a female perspective, this theory can appear feminist.
The fact that the king hands the night over to the will of the queen, suggests a female dominant relationship. (Certainly far from the "damsel-in-distress" stereotype I thought more likely to appear in this text.) Also, the hag holds power over the knight in the story. Despite being an "ugly creature", she is knowledgable and strong in comparison to his desperation.
A feminist can be described as someone believing in equality between men and woman, in all matter of things. The female protagonist in Chaucer's tale, The Wife of Bath herself, undoubtedly fits this description. "She is not subservient and timid. She is not ashamed. And she does not need a man to think for her". (Carosone, M. 2013)As for Chaucer himself, these aspects make it clear why some critics beleive him to have been a feminist. Whether this is the truth or not I cannot say. However, I do beleive that writers tend to reflect themselves in their characters, whether intentionally or not. So it could be that Chaucer channelled his opinions through the Wife of Bath, perhaps hoping to highlight womanly qualities in a male-dominated society.
Sources:
-Carasone, M (2013). Geoffrey Chaucer:Feminist or Not?
http://www.academia.edu/657084/Geoffrey_Chaucer_Feminist_Or_Not
-Chaucer,G. (c.1390)The Wife Of Bath. Critical Reader 2013
-http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism?s=t
Laura this is a great post, however I feel he's also making fun of the idea of woman having a right to choose the punishment for this young knight. When I read the text I felt like it was also like over the top but maybe it was because of language in the text.
ReplyDeleteHitesh, I agree that this is a possibility too. In this early-modern society, irony was probably more likely to appear in writing than feminism was. So perhaps Chaucer was poking fun at women's rights. I suppose it could go either way. Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by "over the top"?
DeleteLaura, I really enjoyed your point on the "feminist" theme that you wrote about however I would also have to disagree with hiteshs comment completely i never got the feeling that the text was trying to "make fun" of the idea of women having the right to select a punishment for the (old) knight. i believe it played more on the idea of a women's right over her husband in such matters as in the tale.
DeleteThis is a good post and covers the details which evidence that Chaucer might have been a feminist. I want to address the second part of this question which is do I agree? In a sense yes but I believe more so in the argument presented by Carter (2003) in that the true ideologies behind Chaucer’s tale is the destabilisation of gender roles. The most striking part of her argument which validates my reason for agreeing with this concept is the following:
Delete“The wilderness backdrop is a reminder that tales of the loathly lady tend to offer a “hunter hunted” spin to gender destabilization.” (Carter, 2003, p. 82)
This is a concept I had not considered until I read this source and it does make a lot of sense. The “hunter hunted” concept is interesting because it plays on the common notion that the hunter (man) goes into the forest and collects the meat whereas here it is the woman who has hunted the man (as seen later in the text). What makes this concept different from feminism is the fact that it does not subject itself to saying that women in power are necessarily a good thing but is simply an observation that can be taken either way like Hitesh has mentioned that it could be Chaucer simply making fun of the fact that a woman is in power.
References:
Carter, S. (2003). Coupling The Beastly Bride And The Hunter Hunted: What Lies Behind in Chaucer’s Wife Of Bath’s Tale. In The Chaucer Review, Vol. 37, No. 4, 2003.
This is definitely a hard question to answer, as proven by everyone's comments, it can be looked at from both sides. Feminism is defined as "The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." When considering this definition, the text could be interpreted as feminist, though it may not have been the intention of the author. It is the queen in the end who holds power over the knights life, as it is her that convinces her husband not to kill him, and instead sends him on a quest to find out what it is that women most desire. This shows the "political" equality that is expressed in feminism as we see a woman in power. We also see the theme of equality at the start of this text- when the knight is punished for raping a woman. If this was a male dominated story, the knight may not have been punished for this act.
DeletePossibly the most important factor in this story that means it may be seen as a feminist text is the quest that the knight is sent on. This is because his life depends on finding out the desires of woman- putting him in a very vulnerable position.
But, as others have already mentioned, the author may have had other reason for including these things in the story line.
Reference:
Feminism | Define Feminism at Dictionary.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism
To quote the text- "that this knight was condemned to be dead/ By course of law, and should have lost his head/ Perhaps was the statue then/ Except that the queen and other ladies as well/ So long prayed the king for grace/ until he granted him his life right there/ And gave her to the queen at all her will/ To chose whether she shall save him or put to death"
DeleteHere we see the powerful position that the queen has been put in. I think this is a strong quote that shows what may be interpreted as feminism. The themes is the text do strongly suggest feminism, but the author may have been using this female-dominant society to illustrate a different point, or to make fun of this type of society as others have suggested.
In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets how can we define conceits?
ReplyDeleteIn the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, conceits is defined as metaphors that are intricately woven into the verses to show puns, satire, or deeper meanings within the poem and "to display the own poets cunning with words." (Abrams, 1993).
I think that today this would be similar to subtext of a story, where it is like the iceberg in the water diagram where there is a story that we see at the surface of the water and then there is a bigger message, hence the part of the ice berg we can’t see under water.
An example given by Abrams is about a flea:
The poet asks his mistress to notice only this flea, to forget everything else as he delivers his argument. The flea has bitten them both, and their bloods mix within its body. The attention paid to the qualities of blood may be noted here and later in the poem (when the woman suddenly gains a stature of royalty [purpling her nail]). This mixing of bloods is somewhat of an insult to the lady, if she is of royal blood and he is not. The description of the swelling of the insect with "one blood made of two" is suggestive of surrogate pregnancy, a perversion of motherhood. Such an allusion is definitely not a pleasant nor natural one, and it would be natural for the lady to kill the flea out of disgust after hearing these lines. The word "suck" in this context would be equivalent to the experience of passion or lust, which leads to the loss of innocence. The man admits that the flea sucked him first, so he has lost his innocence, but he still finds himself honorable, so here he bases his own point of view. (Abrams, 1993)
The flea is used as a metaphor of their relationship. A flea in reality is a insect that jumps out of nowhere and it is irritating and therefore reflects in the example given that having a child especially to someone who is not royal would be unpleasant to her parents, so she gets rid or kills it like it means nothing as killing a flee is easy and takes little effort.
Reference:
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton anthology of English literature, 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton and company, Inc., p.1081.
I agree with your point but I also believe that the flea represents a deeper meaning.I also like how you pointed out that 'suck' has a double entendre on one point of the line it could mean as the flee sucking out the blood of the potential lovers, but like Kisa said could also attend of 'sucking' in a much more lustful way.
DeleteThe Flea also reminds me of the term "love bug" itching at the surface and becoming a scratchy like feeling to his lover.". It suck'd me first, and now sucks thee,
And in this flea, our two bloods mingled bee;" Abramas (1993) also suggests that the poem could tell the tale of the poets pursuit to get with this woman in a sexual manner.However getting shut down from the woman in the lines "Cruell and sodaine, hast thou since
Purpled thy naile, in blood of innocence?". This line indicates that the mixture of blood between the two and the woman then killed the flea and the second line refers to how in those day it was cruel for a woman not to sleep with a male on requested.
As stated earlier it is clear that the flea shows the status of the relationship between the poet and his girl whom he has feelings for.
Reference:
Abrams, M.H. (1993). The Norton Anthology of English Literature,6th ed. New York:W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., p.1081.
Question 5
DeleteUsing the definition that Kisa has given us on conceits I will apply it to what I believe is the most striking example in the sonnet by Shakespeare XVIII “Shall I compare thee to a summers day?” (Shakespeare, 1609). In this sonnet the conceit is the “summer’s day” which is the comparison to which Shakespeare is making to the person in question. What is striking about this conceit is that it defies the notion of giving a metaphorical association due to the fact that a “summer’s day” cannot even compare to the person in question. This message is emphasised most in the second line “thou art more temperate and more lovely.” From this the description goes into much more depth as to why the “summer’s day” cannot compare “and often his gold complexion dimmed”. According to Ray (2010) the notion of “complexion” has been universally accepted by critics and editors that it simply compares the physical appearance of the personified “sun’s” face and the person in question (which is oddly a young man) in the sense that the “complexion” of the sun can be occulted by the clouds which destroys its metaphorical face whereas no such thing happens to the young man. It is curious to note how this ties in with the conceit as this proves the fact that the summer’s day isn’t comparable to the young man in question.
References:
Auckland University of Technology (2013). Literature & Desire Critical Reader.
Ray, R. H. (2010). The Explicator. doi:10.1080/00144940.1994.9938800
hey Kisa, i really enjoyed your post, I'm not really sure that your idea was what the author originally intended but i loved your understanding of the whole thing. even though it might incorrect i still enjoyed your understanding of the text because you actually picked up on something that i never would have. for example your take on the idea of the women being offended by the idea of mixing bloods form different classes such as royalty and commoners bloods. none the less i liked your post it was nice.
DeleteQuestion 3
ReplyDelete“At the heart of Ragnelle lies the question of how the unknown, the marvellous, or the threatening is brought into line with legitimate, normative, idealized chivalric society” (Hahn, 1995, p. 18).
From this quote it can be seen that Hahn believes that the motif of “The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle” is how something from the outside (chaotic) integrates itself within the society (order). In fact all these tales encompass this motif in some way where the ugly, vile woman becomes legitimised in the orderly society after they fulfil her demands. Hahn then goes onto say that the ambiguity is the reward of the person who endures the trial of the woman referencing her to being the sovereignty of the land or the ability to conquer the nation.
“The reward for the hero's offering his favour or making the right choice is kingship or political dominance” (Hahn, 1995, p. 18).
References:
Hahn, T. (1995). The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. In Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications.
It is clear that Hahn believes the lady is a symbol of bigger and greater things. He suggests that agreeing to obey her demands is, for a knight, similar to making a wise political decision. like you said. Allowing her to play the role of both "Beauty and the Beast" , is a reflection of how unknown threats are welcomed into society and altered to become "normative" and "idealized"(Hahn, 1995).
DeleteQuestion 3:
ReplyDeleteHahn (1995) suggests that in the story of The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame that the hero/ the knight instead gets more power rather than what we read in the Wife Bathes Tale by marrying at first an ugly woman but through the truth of what a woman really wants will this vile woman turn into something so beautiful. I also feel that this text focuses more of the reward of what the knight could be awarded such as power and being more dominant.
"Oh, thank you, Gawain," said King Arthur.
"Of all knights, you are the best
That I have ever found!
You have saved my life and reputation forever.
I will never stop honouring you
As long as I am king of the land!" Hahn (1995)
This extract demonstrates that the king will give the “power” to Gawain just like Hahn stated above. As in the motif of the Wife Bathes Tale as the hero/knight is punishment is marrying the vile woman who then turns into someone who is so beautiful. The next passage is from Wife Bathes Tale Chauncer.
"Choose now," she said, "one of these two things:
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.
Now choose yourself, whichever you please”
Reference:
Chaucer G (1390)cited from the Critical Reader 2013
Hahn T,(1995) The Wedding of Gawain and Dame Ragnelle: In Sir : Eleven Romances and Tales. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications Cited from the Critical Reader 2013
sorry hitesh but I'm Pretty sure that in Chauncers a Wifes Bathes tale wasn't really a "hero" but more like the villain of the tale considering the fact that he raped a women.
DeleteWhat does Revard (1997) suggest about the relationship between language, sex, power and transgression in the English Renaissance?
ReplyDeleteRevard’s article focuses on the relationship between male poets in the renaissance period, and their opinions regarding their female competition. He uses esteemed poet Abraham Crowley as an example, highlighting his subtle critical analysis of female poet Katherine Philips. It is clear that Crowley, in traditional Renaissance fashion, believed that a woman’s intelligence would never match his own. Evidently it was impossible to be completely gender blind in this particular era. He goes on to imply that a woman’s poetic talent is not measured by her literary capability, but ultimately by her sex. “The issue of sex is an important motif, the assessment of her actual poetry takes second place”. Philips gained poetic status through her “virtuous wit” rather than her actual ability.
It was thought that when it came to gender rivalry, women would always have an advantage over men when concerning matters of virtue and love. Complimentary texts agreed that women “capture hearts”, but certainly not through the use of poetry. Women were accused of using their sexual appeal to overpower males. Beauty was obviously seen as an advantage, but when it came to wit, Crowley believed that the female intellect (particularly that of Katherine Phillips) was not something to be credited. He drew parallels “linking her wit to her beauty and confining her to a sphere where she is judged as a woman first and a poet second”, suggesting that a woman is only as witty as her beauty allows. Conclusions were drawn about women based on their sex and appearance, in favour of their poetic ability.
Another issue Crowley presented was the question of creativity. He had queries as to whether women should “exercise creativity beyond the domestic sphere.” He believed that women were given the creative ability to produce life, and that they should be content with that, rather than pursuing intellectual acts like poetry. Basically, he felt that women were gifted with a womb, and in return men were given their academic brains. Any woman attempting to use both organs artistically was, in his opinion, ungrateful and greedy. “Nature gave women creativity for the procreation of children”, not the creation of literature apparently.
Although Crowley never criticises Philips’ work directly, he raised questions to discredit it. His opinions made it clear that he thought himself above her in the poetic world. This was the general consensus when it came to academic talent in the renaissance period. Women were not yet at a stage where they could be considered equal rivals for male poets. Writers were categorised by their gender above anything else. Poetry is likely only one example of how women were somewhat powerless in this period, because of their inferior reputation and the male perception of femininity.
Source:
Revard, S.P (1997). Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn, and the Female Pindaric in Representing Women in Renaissance England. Edited by Claude J. Summers and Ted-Larry Pebworth. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.
I agree with what you've written Laura, as women in this era were restricted and had limited rights to be qualified or educated or become poets. Women were basically seen as the role of women in that era first (e.g beauty, love, grace) and then poets last as they were excluded from writing and creating a poetic genre. But even if they were successful like Laura mentioned Katherine Phillips who was a successful poet in the Pindaric genre, she was still treated unfairly and was excluded of being called a poet, "the acceptability of a woman pursuing learning and contesting in the domain of poetry that had been almost exclusively male" (Revard, 2009).
DeleteSo Revard, would be saying that in the English Renaissance society, they were basically all about the dimension of power distance which is defined by Hofstede as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed equally (Hofstede, 1994). So in this society it would have had an index of a high power distance So they basically inequality was accepted and who ever held the power, in this case the Male, was good and always right and were the most "educated" therefore controlled what ever was considered high end. Even though women like Katherine Philips became a well known poet she was still put down because she was born to be a women who the only power that women could have is their beauty, child birth, grace, etc (so basically their power ends with their body.)
References:
Hofstede, G. (1994). Vultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: Penguin.
Representing Women in Renaissance England, edited by Claude J. Summers and Ted-Larry Pebworth, pp. 227-41. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1997.
Revard, S. (2009). Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn, and the Female Pindaric. Retrieved on June 12, 2013, from http://www.oocities.org/hargrange/philipsrevard.html
Question 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.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly enough when I first approached this question my impression of Geoffrey Chaucer's “The Wife of Bath's Tale”, I believed that the texts showed ideas of anti-feminism which just assumed I felt reflected Chaucer's beliefs as an anti-feminist but when i researched deeper in the text I discovered that Chaucer could actually be seen as a sort of medieval feminist. In order to better my understanding of the theme of feminism in Geoffrey Chaucer's works in “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” I managed to read through “The Wife of Bath’s prologue” hoping to shed some light on whether Geoffrey Chaucer was a pro-Feminist.
The wife in the Tale or “the loathly lady” can be considered as a sort of feministic character. She is openly sensual and very honest. In the prologue she is open with her beliefs and ideas, and is not afraid to speak her mind. As a female character she described as a strong willed and defensive when it comes to her position as a woman. The idea dominance was weaved throughout the wife of Bath’s tale showing moments of strong female dominance that could be seen pro-feministic. For example when the knight was called upon the court for his vile crime an was sentenced to death it was Queen Guinevere interceded on behalf of the Knight and asked the King to allow her to pass judgment on the Knight. The passing of judgement over the knight from the Queen Guinevere displays a powerful woman as an authority figure and is seen as merciful for not allowing King Arthur’s execution.
Another example can be seen at the end, when the Wife of Bath is making clear that the knight must submit to the authority of a woman by having him
However it is made obvious at the end of both the prologue and the tale that it is not dominance that she wishes to gain with her husband but a kind of equality or medieval traditional statues of serving her husband as his wife.
Such a belief seems to imply that Chaucer was an early feminist who was unable to announce himself as such because of the misogyny of his time; therefore, he voiced his opinions through the Wife of Bath. Dinshaw shows that Chaucer cannot be labelled an antifeminist, automatically.
Antifeminist;
Hagen questions why the Wife of Bath, or maybe Chaucer himself, notes the “discrepancy of character that allows an apparently strong-willed female speaker to give a rude, aggressive, and insensitive male character (the knight) his heart’s desire” by rewarding him with a lovely young bride. While the Wife's prologue was interesting, the tale caught my interest more this time than the last time I read it, because I realized, this knight rapes a girl, and then is pretty much praised for it. Granted he is threatened with death if he does not answer a question, but when he does, he is married. At first the woman is an old crone, but when he answers her question correctly, she becomes a beautiful woman. I felt that this resolution rewarded the knight and it bothered me. I see that he has given his power to a woman and agrees to answer to her, but is his dignity taken away? He has a beautiful wife who is faithful, so I don't think so. Maybe it's just me thinking to hard... lol.
REFERENCES:
C, Geoffrey (1987). “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue.”
K, George Lyman.(1912)"Chaucer's Discussion of Marriage." Modern Philology 9
A, Jokinen (2012) Luminarium: Anthology of english lituriture. Retriced 6 may 2013 from http://www.luminarium.org/medlit/wife.htm
1. Cite 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"...
ReplyDeleteThe Lady in Chaucers "The Wife of Bathes Tale" Story is described more as beautiful, whereas in the modern English version she is the lady is mainly described as a ugly ‘creature’ with some gruesome descriptions and just ending the story with how ugly she is, like Kevin mentioned before.
In Chaucers story it is like he is trying to say that Men, like King Arthur in this story, would rather go for women who are beautiful on the outside but are unfaithful, rather than a woman who is good to him and has saved his life but is hideously “ugly.” For example when the loathly lady says:
”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,
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.
Now choose yourself, whichever you please." (Critical Reader, 2013, p. 83)
But then back in that society the only power that women had to be a “successful” woman or a woman who had everything was mainly her Beauty due to the fact that they weren’t seen as educated. Women had to rely on her beauty to live through the society.
“Is this the law of King Arthur's house?
Is every knight of his so aloof?
I am your own love and your wife;
I am she who has saved your life,
And, certainly, I did you never wrong yet;
Why behave you thus with me this first night?
You act like a man who had lost his wit.
What is my offense? For God's love, tell it,
And it shall be amended, if I can." (Critical reader, 2013, p. 83-84)
It’s like she has to explain to him how beautiful she really is on the inside. She was his lifesaver and he behaves like he has gone mad just because she is not beautiful. Chaucer also seems like he is taking the woman’s side in this text as he mainly praises the loathly lady and makes King Arthur look like he judgemental (a douchebag)
Reference:
Chaucer, G. (2013). The Wife of Baths Tale. Literature & Desire, Critical Reader 2013. (p. 83-85). Retrieved from https://autonline.aut.ac.nz/bbcswebdav/pid-2513184-dt-content-rid-4451052_4/institution/Papers/166101/Publish/Lit%26Desire_Critical%20Reader_2013.pdf