The Wife Of Bath's Tale Analysis

The Wife of Bath’s tale has some elements of chivalric romance, but it’s not considered as one. The reasoning for this is that, in the tale, there’s the lady, there’s the knight; but the knight doesn’t even love her. The wife of bath’s tale is mostly focused on the fact that the knight has raped a lady…which is the exact OPPOSITE of the values exemplified in Canterbury Tales.

The values that were held in high regard at the time; were chivalry, chastity/purity, and of course; patience and perseverance. Only two out of four, I believe is what the Wife of Bath’s tale has presented. But the ones that it omits, only one that sparks the entire plot. A lack of chastity. The lack of suppression of one’s urges. If I were to compare it to Campbell’s

Monomyth, this is an example of Woman as Temptress, and he just fell into that temptation.

A woman could be damned to eternity because of this failing.

And the act of rape is a violation. A violation of the right to engage into the act that second to self-sacrifice, is what we humans consider to be the highest form of love. And now this man, he doesn’t think rationally. Not a single bit. Lucky bastard got himself nearly killed off.

In this story, the goal isn’t to get the girl. It’s to avoid death through knowing what women really want. And I believe that when he said the answer to Guinevere, she and the other ladies of the court went into that state of “he understands us.” Just with more formality and internal glee.

The stories of The Knight’s Tale and the Wife of Bath’s tale is a comparison relied heavily upon the elements that make the story unique or the common ground that the two share. According to the ten elements of chivalric romance, which all are not necessary to appear in order for a story to qualify as one, here is where the stories

intersect.

On the first element we see the first intersection. A wise and just leader. In the Knight’s tale, it’s Emily’s brother Theseus, due to the fact that he settled the dispute between Palamon and Arcite through a tournament; which was at the time, a fair way to settle such matters. Then in the Wife of Bath’s tale, the counterpart is King Arthur, who was considered wise due to the fact that he listened to his wife.

Their next intersection is on the third element; for the honor-rooted knights are always present.

And the people in both tales do keep their word. An example of this is in both tales. In the Wife of Bath’s tale; the old lady named her price, and yet the knight still kept his word that he’ll do his side of the deal. And in the Knight’s tale, it’s the tournament in which I believe is the symbol of the honor-rooted culture.

On the fourth element, the struggle is very apparent in the Knight’s tale, but is subverted in the Wife of Bath’s tale. The rivalry of Palamon and Arcite is what drives the plot. Their struggle to win the heart of lady Emily, who doesn’t really like them, but agrees to marry whoever truly loves her. Classic interpretation right there.

Meanwhile, in the Wife of Bath’s tale, the struggle is reversed in a sense. The knight in the story is nearly executed, but is saved by Queen Guinevere. Though with it, she gets the knight on a quest to find what do women really want. And this, is an uphill struggle. So much that he requested for the old lady’s help in

desperation.

Number five is already self-explanatory, since the two tales share vivid descriptions and imagery. As well in the second, seventh, eighth, and ninth element. Now, where the two stories diverge is where the stories become different from each other, as every story should be.

The sixth element, the unattainable woman who is loved from afar is present in the Knight’s tale. The meeting of Lady Emily and Palamon and Arcite’s love at first sight.