The Virtue of Alisoun
Virtue denotes morals. Morals denote an underlying code of right and wrong. Alisoun of Bath has a definitive code of right and wrong. It may not fit with the church, or the society in which she lived, but she stood up as an example of what women should be within her society. She seems to be of the mindset that the time has come for women to not be submissive, that they should not settle for a lonely life after the death of a spouse and they could be happy. She seems to epitomize what she assumes other women feel, think or want from life, but are too afraid to claim for themselves. Alisoun is motivated by the struggles she has been through as a young wife, and she grapples with the idea of her equality with men, both within her marriages and her business life. Although she struggles with her own equality with men, she strives to convince her audience of the equality of men and women, by portraying the ridiculousness of the inequality that is ever present within the church, marriage, and society. While Chaucer's Alisoun seems to be out of the norm for the women of her time and despite the teachings of the church, her main purpose is to show incredible virtue through her prologue about her own life, in the tale of the knight, and in her attempt to prove women's intelligence and superiority, passion and sexuality, and power.
What makes Alisoun virtuous, moral, and ethical? Is it her stories of her marriages? Is it her accounting of prose and verse of her time? She is questioned at every turn of her prologue and her tale is somewhat unbelievable, since it did not fit within the masculine thoughts of her day. The popular thought of her time was that men were “rational, intellectual, spiritual, and therefore, [the] higher side of human nature”, and women were considered “irrational, material, earthly, and therefore, [the] lower side of human nature (Greenblatt, et al 2006). According to Cullity, Alisoun's actions should be assessed by the “states of character from which they (the actions) issue” (1999). Virtue is thought to be “moral values of action are to be derived from those of character” (Cullity, 1999). If this is true, then by her true character as an adventurous lady who is willing to stand up as a witness for the weaker sex, in front of the dominant sex; Alisoun is by her right a virtuous lady.
Alisoun's first purpose seems to be to show her intelligence with her display of rhetoric in front of an audience of men. Her intelligence and superiority is further shown as she quotes bible scripture and sermons. She debates with the friar, thus showing her knowledge of the bible. She simply states, “That gentil text kan I wel understonde”(Greenblatt, et. al., 2006, p 257), which means she understands the bible and it's stories. She quotes the fact that Jesus never went to but one wedding, how the Lord had spoken against the Samaritan to be wed five times, and how the bible says that the husband should leave his mother and father and “cleave” to his wife. Her point in quoting the scriptures is made in line 32 when she states, that even through the stories in the bible, there is still “no nombre mencion made he” (2006). Not only does Alisoun show her intelligence of scripture, she shows and defends her virtue in getting married five times. She reproaches the men in the audience, showing their double standard: that it may be okay for men to marry several times, but it was irredeemable for her to marry five men.
She displays intelligence in her knowledge of anatomy, both male and female. Although, she uses her knowledge of anatomy to amuse the audience of men. She argued that the man's male anatomy was not made just for urinating, or to show a male different from a female, but to get an heir and to “That man shal yelde to his wyf hire dette” (2006). By this statement, Alisoun meant that man shall yield to his wife's debt. The purpose of Alisoun referring to anatomy in public is to support her argument and to show her knowledge, however discussions of anatomy were usually saved for academic environments, not out in the open. Does discussing the genitalia in a public arena show Alisoun to not be virtuous? It may have been uncommon to speak thus in public, especially by a woman, but it helped to support Alisoun's argument, and opened dialogue between her and the men in the audience.
Not only does Alisoun know of the science of anatomy, she knows of astronomy and the patriarchal thought of virtue. She refers to Ptolemy in lines 186-189, “Whoso will not be warned by other men/ By him shall other men corrected be,/ The same wordes writeth Ptholomee;/ Rede it in his Almageste, and take it there"(Greenblatt, et al, 2006). Her purpose in mentioning Ptolemy is to further the conversation she was having with the Pardoner, who asks of Alisoun why he should marry if women are to be like her and what authority does she have on this subject. According to Laird of The Chaucer Review (2000), Ptolemy was a theoretical astronomer, while Alsioun was a “practica” experience (practical experience). Laird quotes Boethius from his book Consolation of Philosophy, “[gives] the subdivisions of each of the principal divisions and explain[s] that the first sub-division of practica concerns virtue” (2000). Boethius was not the only person to believe that virtue and morality were the first of the practical sciences, per Laird. The most powerful argument on virtue and practicality Laird quotes from Gundissalinus, “The usefulness of practica is in knowing how to act in this life so as to hope for eternal life in the future, and the ethical part of practica, is the science of ordering one's acts in accord with the decency of soul for an uncorrupt and morally beneficial life”(2000).
The wife of Bath knowing the work of Ptolemy's Almagest shows her high intelligence because the work she mentions was translated in Latin, and was “a very difficult and demanding work which, being theoretical, appeals only to a certain sort of mind” (Laird, 2000). Alisoun more than likely read this work because of her role in the business world, since it was a piece on math and astronomy. What ever her reason for reading it is not known to the reader, but it leads the audience and the reader to the knowledge of her encompassing knowledge equal to or above and beyond the knowledge of most men of her time.
Some critics claim that Alisoun is sexually aggressive in nature, that she glorifies “fleshly delights and gratification of physical desire” (Long, 1986, p 277). This makes her appear weak and unsubstantial to the misogynist of her time. However, by the mere evidence of her speaking in front of a crowd of mostly men shows her strength and perseverance. She's able to satirically show men the absurdity of their beliefs toward women. As already noted, Alisoun was a well-read individual, and of this reading it is pointed out that she was well versed in fairies and elves. As Paloma points out in her article, both of these subjects “combine idealism and eroticism” (1975). Alisoun also mentions virgins and incubuses, and Paloma once again points out that these “customs reflect female fantasies of sexual fulfillment” (1975). As is obvious by the events of Alisoun's telling of her marriages, she has not found this romanticism nor erotic fulfillment, and she warns the wise wife not to expect it in marriage.
“Medieval moralists consistently upheld the sovereignty of the husband over the wife, even though most granted equality to the wife in the payment of the 'carnal debt'” (Long, 1986, p 278). Long continues by stating, “The wife's equalitarian idea is a scandal, but that does not necessarily make it immoral” (1986). If “moral good is adherence to the natural order” (1986), then does this make Alisoun irredeemable because she travels outside of the natural order of medieval hierarchy? Long uses Thomas Aquinas's Aristotelian-Christian synthesis as support for his argument. Aquinas apparently thought that God had sovereignty over man, and that the “inequality of created things is from God” (1986). Alisoun flips the idea of masculine sovereignty over females on its head when she purposes that she uses her sexuality as power and sovereignty over her husbands, and she uses the tale of the old hag and the knight to show woman can have mastery over men. The idea of female sovereignty was a foreign thought for many of the men in Alisoun's audience.
Foreign or not, Alisoun portrays it as common place. In her marriages, Alisoun uses her sexual favors to gain mastery and sovereignty over her husbands. She stated, “I have the power durynge al my lyf/ Upon his propre body, and noght he” (2006). In English, she is stating she has the power during her life over his (the husbands) body, and not he. She continues her discussion of control, “I wolde no lenger in the bed abyde,/ If that I felte his arm over my syde/ Til he had maad his raunsoun unto me” (2006). This too is meant to show her audience that she had the ultimate control over her husbands. At least she had this control until she met and married her fifth husband. Ironically, Alisoun loved her fifth husband more than all her husbands, although he beat her and raped her, as evidenced in lines 515-520:
Whan that he solde han my bele chose,
That thogh he hadde me bet on every bon
I trowe I loved hym beste, for that he
Was of his love daungerous to me. (Greenblatt, et al 2006)
As Carruthers states in her article, Alisoun gives “freely, consciously, as a token of perfect love, a sign of pure faith, a pledge of true “gentilesse”” (1979). She seems to not take her own advice with this husband, or either is able to speak as an authority because of what she has endured with this fifth husband.
The power of mastery was not just displayed in her prologue, Alisoun also shows this odd feminist thought of mastery over men in the tale. She seems to be talking about herself when she tells the tale of the the ugly woman and her husband. She seems to be saying that women, no matter what they look like should be obeyed by their husbands. The knight in the tale appears to be Jankyn, Alisoun's fifth husband, who is young, while his wife is older and seemingly wiser. The hag seems to give her husband sovereignty by giving him a choice, but she ultimately has sovereignty over him. The hag states, “Thanne have I gete of yow maistrie,"quod she,/ Syn I may chese and governe as me lest?" (2006). He gives her mastery by simply stating yes. Ironically, Chaucer chooses to have the young man marry an older woman, similar to how most females of his time were forced into marriages with older men, like Alisoun was with her first husband.
Barrie Ruth Straus had this to say about Alisoun:
Seeming to accept the official designations rather than presenting herself as without authority, she claims the authority of (and for) what official discourse labels practical experience, the experience she has endured in the private realm
of marriage: “Experience, though noon auctoritee/Were in this world, is right ynogh for me/ To speke of wo that is in mariage” Insistently presenting her experience with her empirical sample of five different husbands...The wife invokes her knowledge of her own experience of the private, female, domestic world, a knowledge not considered of the same order as authorized knowledge. (Straus, 1988)
This argument does hold water, if one sees Alisoun as an authoritarian of the subject of marriage. She, by her own admission, has been married since she was twelve years old, and has gained a business and many riches through the deaths and lives of her husbands. However, she used her sexuality, or withheld sex in order to gain these advantages.
Some critics have tried to debunct the idea of Alisoun's virtue. Reid believes her to be “a scandal, except in her own terms...and should be dismissed” (Long, 1986). On the other hand, Long calls Alisoun a “dionysian iconoclast” who tears down obstacles and builds “new moral paradigm[s]” (1986). While most critics have negative things to say about the character of Alisoun, some feminist find her charming, and an exemplary example of feminism in the reverse role of man. Kittredge describes her as “vividly feminine and human, so coarse and shameless in her disclosures of the marital relations with five husbands, and yet so imaginative and delicate in her story-telling” (Curry, 1922). While it is true that Kittredge is not a feminist, his view is very different than most of the masculine persuasion.
Alisoun knows right from wrong. She knows scriptures and the words of popular authors of her time. She advances her theme of equality, which she has struggled through all of her married life, by telling the audience about her own marriages. She spoke as an authority on marriage, love and passion. She portrayed her lack of submissiveness through her prologue and her tale of the misguided knight. Her lack of submissiveness does not denote lack of morals on her part, but a sense of strength and superiority. She sets herself above the men of her time to be a voice for women thought to be submissive and inferior. She preaches equality for men and women within marriage, business, and church doctrine. She is not epitome of what is normal for medieval women, and seems to reject the misogynist philosophies of her day. Her virtue lies in her intelligence, her sexuality, and her experiences of power within her marriage.
References
- Carruthers, M. (1979). The wife of Bath and the painting of lions. PMLA 94(2). Retrieved on September 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable.461886.
- Chaucer, G. (1380). The Canterbury Tales. In Greenblatt, S., et al. (ed 8). The Norton Anthology of English Literature (pp216-316). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Cullity, G. (September 1999). Virtue ethics, theory, and warrant. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2(3). Published by Springer. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable.27504095.
- Curry, W. C. (March 1922). More about Chaucer's wife of Bath. PMLA 37(1) pp 30-51. Modern Language Association. Retrieved September 27, 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/457207.
- Laird, E. (2000). The astronomer Ptolemy and the morality of the “Wife of Bath's Prologue”. The Chaucer Review, 34(3). Retrieved on September 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable.25096095.
- Long, W. C. (Spring, 1986). The wife as moral revolutionary. The Chaucer Review, 20(4) . Retrieved on September 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25093965.
- Paloma, D. (Spring 1975). The fate of the Wife of Bath's “Bad Husbands”. The Chaucer Review, 9(4) pp 303-319. Penn State University Press. Retrieved September 27, 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable.25093320.
- Straus, B. R. (Autumn, 1988). The subversive discourse of the wife of Bath: phallocentric discourse and the imprisonment of criticism. ELH, 55(3) pp527-554. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved on September 27, 2010 from htttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2873182.
No comments:
Post a Comment