Geoffrey Chaucer - The Canterbury testimonies - The wife of bath's Prologue

The spouse of tub's prologue is a frank autobiographical confession, with which she entertains the other pilgrims on the journey to Canterbury. If we look to her for clear and logical reasoning, we can be upset. However, we can respect the skill with which she tries to persuade the listeners together with her own character and forceful style of argument.

Her main themes are marriage, and the importance of the real enjoy of a dwelling as opposed to how authorities - especially religious government - might deem that we 'ought' to stay.

revel in, though midday auctoritee

were in this international, is proper ynogh for me

To speke of wo, this is in marriage (1-3)

Some of her arguments, however, will be stated to be legitimate in addition to exciting. The primary subjects she offers with are the right to marry greater than once, and the proper to have sexual relationships for pride, and on those points, she is arguing in opposition to the medieval Catholic church. She argues on the Church's own ground, that of biblical interpretation:

On marriage:

I woot wel Abraham became a hooly man,

And Jacob eek, as ferforth as I kan;

And ech of hem hadde better halves mo than two, (fifty five-7)

And on virginity:

Or in which comanded he virginitee?

. . . conseilling is no comandement.

He putte it in oure owene juggement. (sixty two...eight)

however it isn't the arguments in themselves which provoke us, however, the truth that she is cheerfully and with out guilt residing what many would have referred to as a lifestyles of sin, while confidently proclaiming that she knows more approximately what need to and have to not be executed in life than one of the maximum powerful authorities within the land.

Lots of her arguments, however, are unconvincing and deform the fact. As an instance, she refers to St. Paul to the Corinthians:

I have the energy during al my life

Upon his propre body, and noght he.

right for this reason the Apostel tolde it unto me; (158-60)

The biblical reference has been deliberately distorted - she neglects to say that the husband has the same rights over her frame. Later in her prologue, she offers two incompatible arguments aspect by the side. First:

Thou sholdest seye, 'Wyf, move wher thee liste;

Taak youre disport, I wol nat leve no talis.

I knowe yow for a trewe wyf, dame Alis'. (318-20)

Then, a few traces later:

he is to greet a nigard that wolde werne

a person to lighte a candle at his lanterne;

He shal have never the lasse mild, pardee. (333-5)

Having argued that her husband must believe her to be faithful, she now argues that her husband must not resent her having casual family members with different guys.

If it had been no longer for the good-humored audacity with which she places forward those arguments we would dismiss them, and her, as ridiculous. She has the persuasive art of a salesperson, and even uses the imagery and diction of selling when speaking about her 'wares' and about her attitude to and in marriage.

Winne whoso may additionally, for al is for to selle (414)

Any other rhetorical technique she uses is to put forward the husband's meant arguments against her that allow you to demolish them on her own phrases. The points she accuses the husband of creating had been general complaints towards girls taken from a textual content on marriage by the Greek truth seeker Theophrastus (370-285 BC), which was a frequently-used source of material for medieval satires on girls.

She argues, for example:

Thou seist to me it is a greet meschief

To wedde a povre womman, for costage;

And if that she be riche, of heigh parage,

Thanne seistow that it's miles a tormentrie

To soffre rent satisfaction and hire malencolie. (248-52)

She additionally accuses him of having stated all this while inebriated, as a consequence making it impossible for the husband to disclaim it.

Thou comest hoom as dronken as a mous,

And prechest on thy bench, with ivel preef! (246-7)

another device she uses is to contain the audience inside the argument, with terms which include:

Wher can tell ye see . . . (fifty-nine)

. . . I pray yow, telleth me. (sixty-one)

Telle me additionally . . . (a hundred and fifteen)

. . . say ye no? (123)

The implication of such terms is if no person can disagree, she needs to be right.

She also wins agreement with the aid of implicitly flattering people who agree. For example:

A wys womman wol bisie lease evere in oon (209)

Ye smart wives, that kan understonde. (225)

This knoweth every womman that is wys. (524)

those asides imply that any girl who agrees along with her need to be smart, and hence, implicitly, any who disagree should be foolish.

The spouse's rhetorical techniques gain the desired consequences. The listeners can not put forward immediately counter-arguments, and if we believe her within the dramatic scenario of speaking to the husband, then by the time he will have realized the fallacy of her argument and idea up a response she will be able to have recommended half of a dozen greater arguments. She compensates for her lack of integrity with cunning and speed, getting her manner by using exasperating her opponent.

The spouse is far extra than a comic caricature; she had intensity, and her human sensitivity is revealed in some approaches. If we had been to assume that she was blind to her faults, and not able to examine and recognize herself, we might be some distance less inspired by using her than is the case. However, there's ample evidence to indicate that beneath her boisterous and bawdy outside she is a shrewd responsible woman.

In a passage showing that she has self-understanding, she confesses to her very own deceitfulness and claims that her manipulative strategies are a part of a present from God which all women percentage.

For al swich wit is yeven us in oure birthe;

Deceite, weping, spinning God hath yive

To wommen kindly, whil that they may stay. (four hundred-2)

If it were no longer for her ability to detachment her account might be humorless and self-condemning, but she is aware of what she is doing and takes responsibility for her movements. She knows that not absolutely everyone will look upon her attitudes and behavior favorably:

but Crist, that of perfection is well . . . (107)
. . .
Speak to hem that would stay parfitly;

And lording, with the aid of your level, that am nat I. (112-three)

subsequently, if we still experience any tendency to condemn her, we should take into account that she makes it clear that, on the time of speaking me, her chief goal is to entertain:

As taketh not agrief of that I see;

For my entente isn't always but to play. (191-2)