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?
Despite Paul and Mike hinting that it may not be a feminist text as it is told within the Canterbury Tales and it's almost like laughing at the Irish and how things were done in the olden days, I believe this text does highlight feminist ideas.
ReplyDeleteLet us, just for the sake of the discussion define what feminism is. According to Dictionary.com(n.d), Feminism is: The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
We are not saying this text is saying Women is above men, but - women are equal to men.
Sure in those days, women's rights weren't defined, but I believe in this text, it shows that women are equal to men.
In the stanza (890-893) - It says "And such demand for justice unto king Arthur, That this knight was condemned to be dead,By course of law, and should have lost his head"
This goes to show, that rape in those days was a serious offense. You get killed - even in our modern days, that doesn't happen!
And at (897), A court, ruled by Queen and the wise women enters and she has power over a knight in Arthur's court. His life is in her hands and she gives him a chance - mercy. And Mercy can only be given by those who have power.
From (919), the knight goes and searches the answer for the queen. Here he collects a wide range of answers. As much as some may argue this is silly and is written for good humor, "some rich clothing, some lust in bed" I say this is a good tool for the writer to bring out the message "Hey, women are individuals with different wants, not one is same." I feel as this passage creates empathy for women.
Stanza (From 938 to 943) "For truly, there is not not one of us all,If any one will scratch us on the sore spot, That we will not kick back, because he tells us the truth
Try it, and whoever so does shall find it true;
For, be we never so vicious within, it creates the feeling that women are not to be looked down on. Sure, it says "By God, we women can hide nothing;" (950) Instead of looking at that as a mockery to women, I feel as that could be the equivalent of our modern: "I'm a b**** and I know it." an empowering attitude.
Then of course, the story progresses to the court and he has no choice to be married to the hag. I thought this is a punishment for his crime, as he has taken a maiden's body, he too, has to subjugate his body to someone he doesn't want. The fact that he, who has raped someone, will be (kind of) raped by a women, seems to me, pretty equal standard.
The court agrees this to be justice and thus they are wed.
The dialogue between the hag and the knight, it is very clear who dominates the speech. She tactfully argues and persuades the knight of all his doubts and griefs, ultimately winning his approval. She has power over him and gives him a choice, and ultimately, he gives her the choice.
It may seem anti-feminist for the wife to then submit to him, but in the text, it is he who first submits to her and she 'allows' him to have power over her, making it a consensual act instead of rape.
In the end, it is a happy ending for the two. The knight is happy because he now has a beautiful, young wife and the wife is happy because she received his submission previously. I feel that this text is saying "If you treat each other with mutual respect and give in to another, you get happy endings"
I think this is a feminist or the early beginnings of feminism, where the gender roles are reversed and talked about. It shows women can have power and be equal as men. As when they do, it led to a happier life!
What do you guys think?
Oh damn. You can't edit posts! Above is referring to question 2!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that this is a feminist tale. I think this whole text references women as being more powerful than they may have been led on in history texts. What I was told about in school was that women were seen below women, but in this text it seems to be the opposite. If this hierarchical placement of women is in fact fabricated, then this text definitely demonstrates how Chaucer was a feminist.
ReplyDeleteEarly on in the text it says "Women may go safely up and down" (line 878). This shows that women were viewed in a respectable way. Even today in this day and age, even though women may walk around safely and freely in our culture, there are still cultures where women don't have that freedom or that benefit. For it to appear that women had more respect in this tale in comparison to some countries in our world today shows that in this tale it does pertain feminist views in regards to women's rights.
There is also a section of the text where it shows that the King is beneath the Queen in terms or ruling,
"so long prayed the King for grace
until he granted him his life right there
and gave him to the Queen, all at her will,
to choose whether she would him save or put to death" (line 895-898)
It is clear that in this passage, the King had a decision that he had hoped would take action, but in fact the final ruling is in the hands of the Queen. It's essentially her final ruling that matters. This shows the hierarchical positioning of royalty and the Queen seems to be at the top. This goes beyond the feminist mentality in men and women being equal and shows that women, or this woman in particular rules the kingdom. It is clear that Chaucer favors the rights of woman and this tale is a reflection of that.
I totally agree with you Jen on this part of the story,
"My lady and my love, and wife so dear.
I put me in your wise governance;
Choose yourself which may be more pleasure
and most honour to you and me also" (line 1230-1231)
that this dialogue could potentially be seen as her being submissive to the Knight, but in fact he in turn becomes submissive to her. He refuses the chance to be in charge and actually allows her to have the control in this part of the text,
"Then have I gotten master of you," she said
Since I may choose and govern as I please?"
'Yes, certainly, wife," he said, "I consider it best." (line 1236-1238)
I think this proves the equality between men and women and also could show men appreciation for women. This could be the Knights perspective on marriage and his understanding that once a wife always a wife, why wish for her to be something she is not so leave the choice be up to her.
I think this text has very feminist ideas within it, I think if Chaucer truly was a feminist, this text really reflects that.
It is interesting to note that the loathly lady in the end, does promise to be a good, never displeasing wife. In this sense it may seem as this text sees patriarchy as a good ending. But according to Carter (n.d) the loathly lady incorporates feminist principles of control in sexually active flesh. I believe even if the loathly lady became a never displeasing wife, it does not necessarily mean she is below the husband. She may have sovereignty and power over some things, while the husband may have another. For example, in her role in sex. Carter also writes of the loathly lady's active sexuality. I agree with Carter that her active sexuality breaks her out of the rigid gender roles and establishes pro-feminist views; that women can be sexually active and there's nothing wrong with this. In the story, it's pretty obvious that the knight is happy with her. According to Carter (n.d), female sovereignty may bring happiness.
ReplyDeleteBefore I read your post Emma, line 878 stood out to me, since it is in the beginning and the introduction of the text it establishes positivity for women. I completely agree that women in this day and age do not have that freedom of feeling safe at all times, which is a shame especially because it is a basic physiological need to feel safe and secure. So, that line alone plants a positive thought and promotes respect towards females in general, therefore makes the audience think that Chaucer is a feminist.
ReplyDeleteEven though feminism is a main focus and question of Chaucer in this text, he is also stereotyping women and reinforcing somewhat negative tropes of women. This is seen when the knight first starts on his journey goes around asking what they most desire, some the women giving typical answers like
Even if this is satirical text about gender roles, feminism is being used by Chaucer regardless of it meaning to be seen in a positive or negative connotation. In the beginning Chaucer does seem very pro-feminist. If you look that lines 897-912, the queen has been given complete power in the knights prosecution. Being that this is an old text, it goes even further in reversing the gender roles of women by giving the queen the power, and thus silencing any other authority. She wasn't even questioned of her motives. As Susan Carter stated in her article, that "gender roles are loosened, dissolved, and resolved", which does support the notion that women do have legitimate power, maybe even more so than the men at least in this text.
I believe the tale promotes qualities of feminism too. I don't think Chaucer's tale was written to be patronizing or condescending towards women. I would like to think of Chaucer as being innovative and having a view on women that was ahead of his time!
ReplyDeleteFrom my own research of Geoffrey Chaucer I found that in 1357, Chaucer became a public servant to Countess Elizabeth of Ulster, the Duke of Clarence’s wife. Perhaps 'The Wife of Bath" tale was inspired from personal experiences living and serving with the Countess -Which could have given reason to Chaucer wanting to write a tale that promoted feminism and about women in power. This is only a theory of mine but I do understand Paul’s theory - taking the time period into consideration, the text could be seen as condescending text due to the fact the idea of "feminism" didn't really exist.
I think it was a powerful statement what Jen said the first comment about stanza (890-893) - "And such demand for justice unto king Arthur, That this knight was condemned to be dead, by course of law, and should have lost his head"
Jen; This goes to show, that rape in those days was a serious offense. You get killed - even in our modern days, that doesn't happen!
I totally agree with you on this statement, its giving power to woman basically protecting them and holding the idea of virginity in high regard. I think it illustrates the importance of woman and the deadly punishable crimes of hurting women.
Also why I think Chaucer is a feminist is because he makes a women character the ‘not-so-typical’ hero. The old but knowledgeable hag ends up saving the life of the Knight, despite having the return favour of the Knight making her his bride.
Chaucer’s clever role reversal and almost symbolic parallel in events and AHA! The tables have turned now as the knight begs the old hag to take his material possessions instead of his body, much like a certain rape scene at the start?
I also believe that the listing of women’s desires, starting from line 925 to 934
“Somme seyde wommen loven best richesse
Somme seyde honour, somme seyde jolynesse
Somme riche array, somme seyden lust abedde
And oftetyme to be wydwe and wedde”
That Chaucer has properly thought about ‘what it is that women most desire’ in order to write this tale. Sorry Mirielles, I do have to disagree with you here, because I think Chaucer hasn’t stereotyped women, I think that Chaucer has come up with some very plausible answers to what it is women most desire: some wanting money, some lust and a good sex life but most of all, wanting appreciation, love and power over her husband – And let’s face it, I as a women wont argue with that.
I definitely believe Chaucer ‘The Wife of Baths’ Tale’ promoted feminist ideas. Hell yeah, girl power.
Alrighty, for our next week's question: 4:
ReplyDeleteConceit, as defined by the dictionary is:
1. Something that is conceived in the mind; a thought; idea:
2.imagination; fancy.
3.a fancy; whim; fanciful notion.
4.an elaborate, fanciful metaphor, especially of a strained or far-fetched nature.
In our context of Elizabethan and Jacobean Sonnets, I would say it is safe to say we use definition 5 as our main definition.
According to Nordquist.R (n.d) "Conceit is a fanciful figurative device that's intended to surprise and delight readers by its cleverness and wit. Carried to extremes, a conceit may instead serve to perplex and annoy."
Lastly according to The Norton Anthology of English Literature, (1993) conceits is defined as "metaphors that are intricately woven into the verse, often used to express satire, pus, or deeper meaning within the poem."
It seems many acknowledge Conceit as an extended metaphor which the poet cleverly uses in his poems to intellectually delight the readers.
It is interesting to note there are two different types of conceit: Metaphysical Conceit and Petrarchan Conceit.
Metaphysical Conceit is, according to According to Hall.C (n.d) " Metaphysical conceit is noteworthy when a seemingly absurd gesture of parallelism begins to render as startling appropriate and makes the reader look at something in a totally new way." John Dunne is a famous metaphysical poet, who uses interesting objects to compare his emotions and ideas with. In our text, "The Flea" he uses the flea as the metaphor for his lust/world of the lovers/honour of his love. (Abrams, M.H, 1993) Where at a first glance, you would not think of liking love to a flea. It is his comparison to two dissimilar things that makes John Dunne a Metaphysical poet.
Petrarchan Conceit is, according to the University of Victoria's Department of English (1995) is a conceit that is "used in love poetry, exploits a particular set of images for comparisons with the despairing lover and his unpitying but idolised mistress"
According to Hall.C (N.d) "Conceits figure heavily in sonnets, and contrast more conventional sensual imagery to describe the experience of love."
The difference between Metaphysical and Petrarchan Conceit can be summed thus:
"Petrarchan conceit may describe a woman’s eyes as “shining like the stars in the night sky,” while the metaphysical poet, namely Richard Crashaw in this example, described a woman’s eyes as “two walking baths; two weeping motions, portable and compendious oceans.” (Hall C. n.d para.2)
In our text, Shakespeare's Sonnet XVIII, right from the start:
"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" (l.1) establishes a Petrarchan conceit (extended metaphor) linking his love to a summer's day. Through out the sonnet, this metaphor of summer's day extends, "darling buds of may" (L.3) "Summer's lease hath all too short a day (L.4) "too hot", (L.5)"eternal summer" "(L.9).
Cont...
ReplyDeleteSonnet CXXX
After reading this sonnet, I felt amused and that this wasn't the usual love sonnet, filled with lovely metaphors and seeing their beloved as some sort of Goddesses. Yet, this poem was sweet and showed love. In a way, it mocks the rest of the sonnets, those that use Petrarchan conceit by turning what could have been a petrarchan style sonnet into the opposite.
"My mistress's eyes are nothing like the sun" - This could have been "My mistress's eyes are like the sun"
According to Sparknotes Editors (2007. para. 4) "Sonnet 130 mocks the typical Petrarchan metaphors by presenting a speaker who seems to take them at face value, and somewhat bemusedly, decides to tell the truth. Your mistress’ eyes are like the sun? That’s strange—my mistress’ eyes aren’t at all like the sun."
In a way, the conceit of this sonnet, is that his love for his wife does not need fancy metaphors and conceits. That he loves his wife as she is; not some goddess that people will falsely say their love is. His wife does not need those false metaphors to be beautiful in his eyes.
I believe the conceits, the metaphors of the sonnets that are used by poets are the best ways to 'unlock' the sonnets and understand the meaning within. Conceits are keys, metaphors that helps us see the idea behind the poet's head. For example, the flea in Dunne's "The Flea'. At first I was confused to what he was talking about, then I looked at the flea more carefully. Starting with the questions: What is the flea? What are the characteristics of the flea? What happens when the flea dies? Then it slowly came to me what the writer was trying to say to his love. "What you fear, denying me, is as of little consequence to your life and honor as of this flea."
I also thought it was interesting to note that Shakespeare used Petrarchan sonnet style in the Sonnet 18, then had this anti-Petrarchan conceit writing the sonnet 130, perhaps he got sick of comparing women to this amazing Goddesses and just bluntly said: "Women are pretty without having to look and smell like a flower, like the sun."
Reference:
Conceit. [def. 2,3,4,5](n.d). In Dictionary.com. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conceit
Hall.C (n.d) What is Metaphysical Conceit?. Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-metaphysical-conceit.htm
Poetry Foundation. (2013) Conceit. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/glossary-term/Conceit
SparkNotes Editors. (2007). SparkNote on Shakespeare's Sonnets. Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/shakesonnets/section9.rhtml
The UVic Writer's Guide. (1995) Conceit. Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://web.uvic.ca/wguide/Pages/RhetConceit.html
4. In the context of Elizabethan and Jacobean sonnets, how can we define "conceits"?
ReplyDeleteTo first understand what conceit is in the context of analysing text; conceit is used as a formula of language that unlocks the meaning of a poem.
For example, as we discussed in class, in Spenser's sonnet "Fire and Ice" the conceit can be seen in the first line "my love is like to ice, and i to fire". The conceit here is that Spenser is using the opposing forces of ice and fire as a metaphor of his and his love's desire. If we break down the line and the metaphor we can see that when it comes to desire- the strong and passionate is generally related to heat and the colour red, so he is saying that his desire for this woman is like fire- strong and unyielding. On the opposite side he says that the woman is like ice, meaning she has no desire for him, because when someone expresses no interest or opposition that person is described as cold and distant.
When we look at poetry, or a text that use metaphors and other literary devices, we need to look at language itself and first think of what we know about language itself in order to deconstruct a text.
The simpler definition of conceit is that it is just an extended metaphor. A conceit can be introduced in the beginning of a sonnet and used throughout the rest of the poem. Going back to the "Fire and Ice" sonnet, that comparison of love and those elements start in the first line and run through the whole poem. All of the sonnets that are in the critical reader have some sort of metaphor or at least simile, so conceits are very common poetry and effective at projecting more meaning into something. As Kathleen Lea (1925) stated, "to conceive of a conceit the imagination must be in a partial state of excitement". With this we can think of metaphors as not only being another way of describing something but as an elevated view of that subject. There is still a problem with conceits because they can end up being "too gay to last, or too heavy to be born" (Lea, 1925), so conceits can easily fall flat and be lost by the reader, for which the author must stay conscious of.
As seen in Shakespeare's sonnet CXXX, he uses conceit in the opposite fashion: to express contrast of the subject. This is pulled off by continuing the conceit through the whole poem and only by the last line, we know its a false conceit; "As any she belied with false compare" (Shakespeare). Metaphors and conceits are very powerful in their ways of portraying a different meaning of something, and if we go back to Elizabethan era of poetry we can see these literary devices in their prime.
References:
DeleteLea, K. M., (1925). Conceits. The Modern Language Review, XX, 389-406.
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.callutheran.edu
Its funny that you reference different types of conceits Jen, because in my research I found some as well… but I found many different ones. In a Journal article called The Lyrical Conceit of the Elizabethans by Raymond Macdonald (1917) he gives a huge list. Although this text is quite old, I found it quite interesting to hear the interpretation of a conceit from the past. The lists he gives is that there are Verbal conceits which within that have imaginative conceits, metaphor-simile type, personification type, and the myth type – which often has the composition of a narrative fiction (1917)
ReplyDeleteThen there is the Logical conceit which s the paradox type which of paradoxes of the lovers experience, his pain is pleasure, his pleasure is pain. A lot of what we have been reading like the one your reference Mirrielles, the one about fire and ice. And then within the logical conceit spectrum there is a logical metaphysical type. And when researching a lot of these are very similar, I guess its just a very in depth analysis of them.
The way Alden describes a conceit is that it is an “elaboration of a verbal or imaginative figure, or the substitution of a logical for an imaginative figure” which ties into the idea of the conceit being an elaborated metaphor, but Alden's reference of the two is that a conceit is a poor metaphor that least to no useful end (1917). Alden continues to say that a conceit “with so considerable use of an intellectual process as to take precedence, at least for the moment” or a normal poetic process” (1917). It’s funny to see the opinion of a conceit from early 1900’s.
Why both you, Jen and Mirrielles give modern definitions of conceit I dug more around the history the understanding of it. Through the research of the past it seems that there isn’t a definite definition of conceit, but rather ways to describe what it is, or what it is like. “English poets and critics of the metaphysical period never defined the conceit”(Van Hook, 1986). It appears that conceit is more or les a rhetorical structure, it seems to have the same form as a metaphor but is well established as being something different.
A metaphor as we know is how we gain access to “some novel or rare experience that comes from new perfection in harmony, which is to say beauty” (Van Hook, 1986). I agree with this statement, I think that both metaphors and conceits unlock this beauty, this comparison between two obscure things that really help to elude the emotion of pain or love or anything else they can be used for. As Van Hook says, “The conceit is its capacity to short-circuit the intellect’s habitual guardian function, allowing the poet to access to an imagination unencumbered by its customary obligations to truth and possibility” (1986).
“The conceit has the unparalleled power to surprise he mind at first encounter in such a manner that cannot be a diligent judge of the things which the poets images propose” (Van Hook 1986). Most conceits have this astonishing way of using comparisons that often at first are confusing, but once understood, have this becoming way of unlocking such passion and emotion.
I definitely agree with both you girls when you say that a conceit is just a form of a metaphor, but I think it is so much more. Conceit is used by poets to “illustrate his theme as he expresses it” or her for that matter (Holden). The conceit “functions symbolically as a means to express the importance (Holden). I think the conceit is almost the feeling, and the metaphor is the tool that is used to explain the conceit.
References:
Alden, Raymond Macdonald. "The Lyrical Conceit of the Elizabethans." Studies if
Philogy. 14.2 (1917): 129-138. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. .
Holden, R. Bradley. "Academia.edu." Shakespeare's Sonnet 3. Heldref Publications, n.d.
Web. 11 Apr 2013.
Van Hook, J.W. ""Concupiscence of Witt": The Metaphysical Conceit in Baroque
Poetics." Modern Philology. 84.1 (1986): 24-38. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. .
Sorry, I'm just going to jump in here and add to the feminist discussion. And then I'll make a post about question 4. I haven't been very well, so I know I'm late and it's probably frustrating in what has be a tidy discussion and organised discussion on your guys part. So extra apologizes from me!!
ReplyDelete-----
I agree in some ways that Chaucer’s text can seem feminist, especially in all the ways you guys listed. I think especially with the conclusion that you reached, Volucris, with the Knight and his wife reaching mutual and equal respect for one another, equality being what feminism is all about.
However I don’t think that Chaucer was a feminist, I think he was a humanist. He was a student of human nature and liked writing about all people, regardless of gender and social status. It was unusual for the time were usually only ‘important’ people made it into literature.
While in his time, some men had access to formal education and woman, regardless of social-standing, didn’t, that didn’t mean that woman had no education at all, as long as you broaden what the term ‘education’ can mean. I think in the Loathly Lady, Chaucer argues that people need all kinds of learning, benefiting from the input of all of society’s diverse members. This is particularly shown when the Queen gives the Knight the option to learn and be educated by woman. It’s not necessarily a case of woman getting an equal say, it’s a matter of Chaucer wanting to highlight that everyone in society has a different view to offer, worth seeing and considering.
Hey Che, I hope you’re feeling better!
ReplyDeleteIf we were to go back to Chaucer being a feminist, it’s really interesting for you to say he was rather a humanist than a feminist. There are mixed views, some call him anti-feminist based on the fact the despite he raped a girl, he was rewarded in the end, (Hansen, 1995, Page. 35),the fact that it’s called Wife of Bath, and she is always referred as the ‘wife’ of a man instead of having her own identity. (Hansen) and the fact the rapist knight is the centre of attention. (Beidler, 1996, page. 288) So maybe he wasn’t a ‘feminist’ but more, like you said a humanist; and wanted to focus on equality for all humans.
But on personal level, I still believe he was a feminist. The knight goes around looking for the answer, it doesn’t say what class people are or where they are from – he gets his answers from women. He is educated and bested by a women and in no way he is glorified.
If you think about it, his times did not allow him to be a feminist. He couldn't go around yelling "Equal rights for woman" or "Woman are like us" especially as the devout christians believed women were to serve men.
Chaucer is not someone you immediately think "Feminist!" but my view is in line with Hagen (1991) “While one might hold Chaucer responsible within his limitations, one ought not blame him for them. Even if his experiment in feminist hermeneutics is inchoate, he was thwarted by limitations that his critics are beginning to grow beyond only now, six hundred years later.” He attempted to give women a voice, he attempted to create the audience to see in a view of a woman. Just the question: What do women want? seems to shout out "We need to understand women more."
He may not be the very definition of a feminist, but he cautiously expresses feminist ideas in his tales.
Mann (1991) compares that all the positive role models in the Canterbury Tales are women and the map characters are flawed. "the CanterburyTales contains not a single example of the story-type that embodies its ideals in the central figure of a male hero. Instead, the tales that mediate serious ideals are focused on a series of women: Constance,Griselda, Prudence, and Cecilia."
"Like her creator, she criticizes through comedy,she weighs authority against experience and experience against authority, she is aware of the sexuality in textuality and she jollily subverts the conventions of male authorship." Martin, Priscilla (1990)
In a time where misogyny ruled rampant in the country, Chaucer created a small ripple. Did he do it on purpose? Maybe? Maybe not. But no one can deny that his story did touch on the question; what is inside a woman and what do they want?
The first step in equality is to try understand another. In our modern days too, if you look at racism for example, how does one get over prejudice on another county? We first try to understand them. We ask the question: What do they want? How do they think? And from then we understand another - prejudice disappears.
And Chaucer, in his stories, started those questions!
References:
Beidler, Peter G. 's study (as cited in Carosone. M n.d, page 4) Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism: Geoffrey Chaucer: The Wife of Bath.Boston: Bedford Books, 1996
Carosone. M (n.d) "Geoffrey Chaucer" [Feminist or Not]: Retrieved April 18, from http://www.academia.edu/657084/Geoffrey_Chaucer_Feminist_Or_Not
Hagen, Susan K. (as cited in Carosone. M n.d, page 10)
“The Wife of Bath: Chaucer’s Inchoate Experiment in Feminist hermeneutics.”Rebels and Rivals: The Contestive Spirit in the Canterbury Tales. Susanna Greer Fein,David Raybin, and Peter C. Braeger, editors. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1991. 105-24.
Mann, Jill. Geoffrey Chaucer (as cited in Carosone. M n.d, page 9)
[Feminist Readings Series]. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities, 1991
Martin, Priscilla. (as cited in Carosone. M n.d, page 8)
Chaucer’s Women: Nuns, Wives, and Amazons. Iowa City: University of IowaPress, 1990