Andrew Massaway

Allen, Shirley S. “The Griselda Tale and the Portrayal of Women in the Decameron.”    Philological Quarterly 56 (1977): 1-13.  

The title of Shirley Allen’s article states that her aim is to explore the portrayal of women in the Decameron.  Allen argues that Boccaccio expresses for women as human beings with free will.  She uses the 10th tale of the 10th day as an example of how the women were suppressed and expected to do whatever their husbands asked of them.  She also uses Chaucer’s Clerk’s Tale as a way to compare the tale to another work.  She also makes the connection of similarities between Chaucer’s “Clerk’s Tale” and the 100th tale of the Decameron.  Allen also analyzes the characters in the Decameron and even compares Boccaccio to his character Dioneo in saying that they are similar if not the same person.  She explains the purpose of the author in describing that, “Boccaccio regards women as persons in their own right and not just as sources of happiness or suffering to men…” (Allen 6).  She then goes to explain how each day of the tale relates to women and their struggle for liberation.  Allen uses reader response and gender criticism to talk about the female audience of the Decameron and the relation of the women in the story to real life women.      

I am in agreement with Allen in her statement that the 10th tale of the 10th day of the Decameron is important in showing the dominance of men.  She states her opinions well with support from other authors and also, uses Chaucer and Petrarch as comparisons to the views expressed in the Decameron.  The article would be a very good one if someone were to be writing a paper on the Decameron or a paper about women in European Literature.  The article could also be studied from the view that men should have control of women at all times because of their so called “sexual desires” and such.  Allen tends to stray away at times from the point of domination of women in the 10th tale and sometimes takes a little time getting back to the subject, but she also includes some major points about the author of the Decameron and how he could have put some of his ideas into the work.  The article makes some very good points about the portrayal of women in the Decameron.  It almost has enough information to be a topic of its own.  It certainly could be explored further. 

 

Bullough, Vern and Cameron Campbell.  “Female Longevity and Diet in the Middle Ages.”  Speculum 55.2 (1980): 317-325.  

Bullough and Campbell, in their article, set out to prove Aristotle was wrong in saying that, “…males live longer than females because the male is a warmer creature than the female” (317).  They explain that although in the early Middle Ages women did live shorter life spans than males, the shorter life was because of malnutrition instead of not being a good person. Bullough and Campbell give several examples other than malnutrition that would lead to a shorter life such as child birth and menstruation, which led to a loss of blood, but it all comes back to the lack of certain vitamins and minerals in the woman’s diet.  They also show in their article that when certain foods, such as oats, barley, legumes, peas, beans, rabbit, and fish, were later introduced in the diet, the female life expectancy slowly grew longer because of the protein that was in these foods.  Bullough and Campbell conclude that with the introduction of iron and protein rich foods, women’s red blood cells would recover and multiply faster after menstruation and child birth.  Therefore, it would lead to a longer life expectancy in the females during the Middle Ages.  

This article is based on historical facts and not a criticism of a work.  Although I agree with the authors on their conclusions, I find it difficult to put this information into my term paper.  If someone was doing a paper on general women’s health in the Middle Ages and wanted to know some facts about the life expectancy or the diet of a Medieval Age woman, then I think this would help for a quote or two.  As I stated earlier, I am in agreement but I think that this topic could be taken from a variety of different angles.  You could study this topic through other factors such as how many children each woman hade, were women more active, were their different kinds of food, or did disease affect women more often then men. 

 

Green, Richard Firth. “Women in Chaucer’s Audience.” The Chaucer Review 18.2 (1983): 146-153.  

Green sets out, as he states, to “…examine one of the ways in which the imaginative appeal of the implied audience may have distorted our understanding of the actual historical one…” (146).  He explains that Chaucer was mainly read aloud in England in the courts of the nobles and kings.  In some of the courts in the Middle Ages, women were said to have made up a small portion of the court (147).  He explains  that men made up the large numbers of servants for the king and there were fewer women than generally thought.  Green points out that since Chaucer was a court poet, he would have read his works to an audience composed mainly of men and only a few women.   

I feel that Green does a satisfactory job at getting his point across.  He sets out to state that women were not a large part of the courtly audience but does give evidence that some participated.  I do agree with Green in that were fewer women who served than men and some were present illicitly..  I believe that this article helps in any paper that would include Chaucer and women.  It sites examples and primary texts that show how women did not make up a significant part of a courtly audience in England until the late fourteenth century.  It would be useful to further study the women in Chaucer’s work and his audience’s reaction.

 

Justman, Stewart. “Trade as Pudendum: Chaucer’s Wife of Bath.” The Chaucer Review 28.4 (1994): 344-351.  

Stewart Justman’s main focus in his article is Chaucer’s character the Wife of Bath and how she portrays middle class values at their most absurd and illegal.  In the beginning, Justman states that of the three divisions of society-the nobility, the Church, and the “tillers of the soil” (344)-not one division is directly ridiculed or has a finger pointing at them.  He then goes to explain that the Wife of Bath is much feminized.  He talks about her prologue and how she had many husbands to acquire wealth and gain.  He states that she is sexual and does not cover her actions with innocence.  He continues by saying that the Wife of Bath is like an, “…image of the commercial class…she’s a sort of trader herself, in effect having exchanged one husband for another many times over, ‘multiplying’ husbands the way a usurer would multiply money” (348).  He then concludes by stating that the Wife of Bath is like the spokesperson of the ignored middle class and women’s equality.   

I felt that this was the best article that I found.  He uses many quotes from other people and the work.  He also relates the Wife of Bath character to other characters in the work as well.  Not only does he describe the Wife of Bath as a character, but also compares her to what is happening at the historical moment.  I agree with the author in that I feel she had many husbands to make money.  I can see where it would reflect the industry of the time in that she trades husbands for money like a vender would trade goods for money.  The theme could also be studied from another view as well.  It could be said that maybe the Wife of Bath was marrying for sex and not money.  I feel this article helps to analyse the Wife of Bath’s character and show how one character alone could be a voice for the middle class of England..

 

Sanderlin, George. “Chaucer’s Legend of Dido-A Feminist Exemplum.” The Chaucer Review 20.4 (1986): 331-339.  

George Sanderlin sets out at the beginning of the article with the story of Dido in order to answer the question, “Why did Chaucer tell the story as he did?” (331). He answers this question with a simple statement, “Chaucer was to show how men betray women” (332).  He goes on to state how in the story, Chaucer shows the lack of equality that exists between the two sexes.  Sanderlin then addresses the development of Dido’s love for Aeneas.  He cites examples from the story, such as when Dido sees Aeneas for the first time, in order to show the extent of Dido’s love for Aeneas.  He then compares Chaucer’s Dido to Virgil’s Dido.  He compares how the two authors portray Dido’s love for Aeneas. Using gender criticism, Sanderlin shows the more feminist side of Chaucer.

I had a difficult time with this article. I think it will be very useful for my paper but I struggled through it for a little while. Sanderlin starts out with clear points, but I felt that the author tended to stray away from the main focus of Chaucer through the quotes and arguments about Virgil’s Dido and by comparing the two.  The comparison somewhat helpful but since I had not read either stories of Dido, I was a little confused.  I felt that the author did, however, support his statement of Dido being a very feminist side of Chaucer.  If someone were looking for a comparison of Chaucer’s works to other authors’ works, this article would provide some great help.  Also, if someone were looking for an article about the feminist movement in works of the Middle Ages, it would also help a great deal.