Before beginning my discussion of gendered language in Chaucer’s writing, I would like to emphasize that the concept of gendered language is biased in itself. How can we pin a gender to voice? Is a feminine voice more gentle and expressive, while a masculine voice is more brute and direct? These characteristics are stereotypical of their respective genders, but they cannot define the gender of a voice without declaring credibility in bias.

Another thing to consider while analyzing gendered voice is the distinction between the content of what is said and the actual phrasing/diction. As I cannot justifiably gauge the gender of phrasing/diction, I will focus on content. If we compare the prominent themes in “The Prioress’ Prologue/Tale” and “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue/Tale,” we see purity and corruption respectively. A prioress is essentially a leading nun — clearly, religion is her guiding maxim. The prioress’s story lauds the celibate innocence of the young boy who is murdered and praises Christianity throughout. Alma redemptoris, a Christian Latin song that pays tribute to the Virgin Mary, allows for a miracle that delivers momentary life to the murdered boy. Contrarily, the Wife of Bath preaches a life of sex and manipulation. While she claims to be a Christian, religion clearly does not guide her actions. More than anything else, she wants is power over men. The Prioress and Wife of Bath are both female characters, but the Prioress emphasizes religion and purity while the Wife of Bath asserts her power as a woman using sex and connivance.

Despite the contrasting morals of these two characters, both women portray ideals influenced by their gender. The prioress attempts to uphold the pristine, socially-desired image of a woman. Her story reads in a similar manner to hagiography, introducing a miracle produced by the Virgin Mary. Importantly, the mother of the murdered child in her story is not able to find her son — and she ends up sobbing helplessly. This demeaning depiction of a helpless, devoutly religious woman contradicts the presence of the Wife of Bath and the woman in her tale. Instead, the Wife of Bath denounces the credibility of men and perpetually displays the idea of women controlling men. The Wife of Bath offers an empowering feminism — a novel idea during the Middle Ages.

While the Prioress conforms to the societal standards of femininity, the Wife of Bath challenges theses norms and defines her own version of womanhood.

 

Chaucer’s “Physician’s Tale” follows the story of knight, Virginius, and his beautiful, chaste daughter. The tale tells of an unlawful justice, Apius, who becomes infatuated with this daughter and hires a man, Claudius, to capture the likes of the daughter by means of trickery. In a court of law, Claudius claims that the daughter was born a slave to Apius, but Virginius stole her when she was a baby. Unable to prove himself innocent, Virginius pleads guilty, promising his daughter to Apius. However, before delivering his daughter to Apius, Virginius decapitates her, taking her life before Virginius can take her maidenhead. Interestingly, the daughter sacrifices herself willingly, pledging her allegiance to God and the purity that had directed her life.

“The Physician’s Tale” certainly represents violence against children, through the act of Virginius killing his daughter. The story justifies this violence by angling it as a solution — a way to protect the daughter’s chastity. Furthermore, this justification is fortified by the support of the daughter: she agrees with her father — she must die before her virginity dies.

In our modern society, violence toward children is hardly ever justified. While parents may spank or hit their kids by means of discipline, anything more physical will likely probe investigation/ intervention. In our modern society, parents are meant to protect the lives of their children. Perhaps this reflects a distinction between our current moral code and that of the Middle Ages — perhaps during the Middle Ages, upholding religion (and thus virginity) was more important than protecting physical life. This difference also perpetuates the Christian idea of eternal life after death — in “The Physician’s Tale,” protecting the daughter’s chastity ensured greater benefits in heaven than if she committed sin and lost her virginity. Morals have evolved and customs have changed, but it is certain that our modern period cherishes and protects the lives of children more than the medieval period did.

Before I delve into my exploration of medieval characters, I would like to acknowledge that the ideas I will discuss may be influenced by a sort of implicit bias. As “The Man of Law’s Tale” does not describe the physical traits of its characters, my theories are shaped only by my background knowledge of medieval peoples.

To begin, I presume that the physical characteristics — such as the skin color, eye color, hair color and stature — of medieval peoples would be comparable to what they are today, as these features are influenced by genetics. As the majority of people do not migrate to distant homes in their lifetimes, the traits they possess and pass down through generations remain in the same geographical region. Thus, when I imagine a person from northern England, I see light skin, light eyes and light hair. Expanding this view to general northern Europe, I see the color of these features begin to vary. Contrarily, when I imagine a person from Syria or the more general Middle East, I see darker skin, dark eyes and dark hair.

Moving away from physical attributes to dress, my insight relies solely on A Knight’s Tale, a film presenting Europeans in the middle ages, and my History 100 education of the Islamic Empire. I image Northern Englanders and Europeans alike to dress fairly modestly, in simple patterns, colors and styles, with a notable elegance radiating through the upper class. I also think that more central Europeans, such as Spaniards and Frenchmen, may have worn more ornate clothing, as they were more attached to the global trade market — and peoples like the Syrians.

I image Syrians and other Middle Easterns to dress in bright colors and intricate patterns. From my history curriculum, I also remember turbans to be of popular style. I believe this more evolved style of dress may spur from the fact that the Middle East attain higher social and intellectual development far earlier than much of Europe.

“The Man of Law’s Tale” exposes personality traits of both the Syrians and the north Englanders (although the traits of the northern Englanders in the story may not match the traits of all medieval northern Englanders, and the traits of the Syrians in the story may not match the traits of all medieval Syrians). A big contrast between these peoples in Chaucer’s story is their response to Constance’s religion: the northern Englanders accept her for her Christianity and eventually convert after witnessing the miracles, but the Sultanesse and her cohort denounce Christianity and plan to murder Constance and all her peoples before they even meet the poor girl.

As for my modern day perception of these regions, I do not view the Middle East to be as prosperous as I image it to be during the Middle Ages. I also note that my background and lifestyle is far more similar to a modern day European than a modern day Middle Eastern.

 

How did my personal experience help me to understand the “Man of Law’s Tale”?

Upon reflection of the way my personal experience has shaped my disposition towards different groups of people, it became blatantly obvious that my parent’s view of the world is quite different than my own. My parents are the people that raised me — they imprinted their political beliefs and their morals. But in the process of raising a child, they developed a person (myself) that could disagree with their viewpoints and create her own vision of the world. I think this is largely due to a generational gap. While my parents are quite liberal, they often expose implicit biases that are not politically correct. I think growing up in the 21st century provided me exposure and experience to a fluid, vibrant world. We are rapidly destroying categorical bins for people to be shoved in.

I am only 31 years younger than my parents, but my ability to accept and applaud variation exceeds theirs. Chaucer was writing centuries ago, thus his view, knowledge, and understanding of the world was exponentially narrower than both that of my parents and the world. A focus on the time period in which Chaucer was writing helped me to understand the blatant racism in his story.

It’s crazy to think about a time, such as the 14th century, when religion acted as a science. Everyone in the community would have been living by the same set of values and belief — having any other opinion would have been unheard of (especially because there existed no scientific foundation to justify life). Furthermore, a different religion than one’s own would likely appear to threaten one’s livelihood.

Over the past couple of days, we have watched A Knight’s Tale: a drama/action/comedy film released in 2001. The production is heavily based off of “A Knight’s Tale” from Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. Although it is very clear that the piece replicates the story documented in Chaucer’s writing, it is also evident that the movie was created to match the cultural aspects of its generation: the early 2000s. This distinction between old and new can be paralleled with the terms medieval and contemporary. Furthermore, Chaucer’s writing is the apparatus by which we can classify features of the 2001 film.

Chaucer lived during the 14th century — thus his writing is very indicative of how England (and other parts of Europe) existed at that time. After reading the General Prologue, I know that Middle English — a language quite different than the English we speak today — was spoken. I also have a good sense of medieval cultural aspects, such as clothing and past-time activities. When applying this knowledge of the 14th century to the film, it is clear that the clothing, props and contextual themes can be defined as medieval. However, the language spoken is contemporary. The film score is also contemporary, as it consists of pop songs. The combination of medieval and contemporary elements characterizes this film as an adaptation of Chaucer’s “A Knight’s Tale” — and it also makes the piece quite enjoyable.

This fusion of time periods is clearly shown in the pub scene. William and his companions have traveled to Paris for a tournament. His accomplices sit in a medieval pub, drinking and eating historically accurate cuisine, while they forge a historically accurate jousting bet with a group of Frenchmen. However, the language and mannerisms used are quite casual, mirroring social tendencies of the 21st century rather than the eloquence Chaucer presents in his writing. But how can we know that people didn’t interact like this in medieval times? This juxtaposition of generations provokes an interesting consideration: maybe the connotations of human interaction have never changed. The evolution of language, technology and fashion certainly implies social adjustment, but maybe these adapted facets conceal a sturdy, unwavering foundation of human sociability.

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton