“Defiantly comic.” Consider this view of Chaucer’s presentation of his Wife of Bath.

An empirical form of Chaucer’s Wife of Bath, even today, would function as the antithesis of a typical woman. Therefore, to consider the patriarchal context which Chaucer would have seen around him as he created such a character, is arguably to shed light on the motive behind the author’s development of the overbearing, bold and indeed defiant Wife of Bath. However, the notion of this defiance as being “comic” is perhaps subject to debate – although at face value, she encapsulates the beliefs of Chaucer’s typically misogynist contemporaries, it has been suggested he was instead challenging the anti-feminist views which others, unquestioning, simply accepted. Therefore, although the view of the Wife of Bath as being “defiant” is almost certainly accurate, the comedy behind this portrayal is perhaps an interpretation into which we should read further, rather than simply ‘enjoying’ Chaucer’s literary creation. The General Prologue introduces us immediately to “A good wif”. Chaucer, in giving her this complimentary epithet, influences his audience/reader to assume the Wife of Bath will be another typical female character, succumbing to the patriarchal expectation that a woman is defined by her husband and her marital status. Then, as stated by James Winny, he suddenly surprises us with a character who “bursts upon the pilgrimage with the unexpectedness of a bomb”. Juxtaposed with the only two other women on the pilgrimage, the Prioress and the Second Nun, she is almost incomparable – where they reflect the ideals women should fulfil in the fourteenth century, she entirely, and consciously, contradicts them, thus implying the “defiance” of her nature. As physiognomy was a generally accepted way of telling a person’s character in Chaucer’s time, he describes her as “gat-tothed” with a face “reed of hewe”. This reflects her lusty and over-indulgent nature, preparing us for the outrageous Prologue and Tale she will deliver, a tale which epitomises her defiance perfectly. This Portrait of the Wife of Bath could be seen in a comic light – of course, the bathetic “good wif” gives an initial impression of this character which is almost immediately destroyed in a comic revelation of the Wife’s true character. Chaucer tells us that “In al the parisshe wif ne was ther goon / That to the offringe bifore hire sholde goon” which again aligns with the godly, obedient ideal of a woman as Chaucer implies she was respected for her loyalty to God. However our image is then comically distorted as the author explains himself: “And if ther dide, certeyn so wrooth was she / That she was out of alle charitee”. Surely this ironically twisted description was used by Chaucer in a comic fashion, therefore implying his character is indeed “defiantly comic”. However perhaps the comedy which underlies this description is supposed to be analysed further: was he simply writing for entertainment, or is he forcing his readers to question whether or not we are supposed to find amusement in this character? Chaucer’s use of comedy is so clever that, subconsciously, he manipulates his readers – especially his male contemporaries, who would have viewed the Wife of Bath as inappropriate and “defiant”, until they realised it was – arguably – in fact a reflection of their own characters in the body of a female. Why, then, should we look so disapprovingly on the idea of a bold and feminist woman, when in fact she functions as a mirror for the very men who condemn her behavior? Most fourteenth-century men had multiple wives, were lusty, were bold and outspoken and loud – just like the Wife of Bath. In fact, all her traits which would so comically terrify a misogynist reader were in fact socially accepted and normal when observed in men. Thus, through taking his place as one of the pilgrims in this narrative General Prologue and comically reporting on the character of this mad woman, Chaucer encapsulates the symbolic resonance of the Wife of Bath as a social mirror for the men who would have instinctively dismissed her defiant, and frighteningly masculine, disposition. When the Wife of Bath herself, through Chaucer’s writing, begins to speak, she begins with the explosive nature we should expect given her description in the General Prologue. The first word she speaks is “Experience” – in other words, she claims that although in reality experience does not claim authority over words such as law or scripture, she is wise enough to acknowledge that her own experiences have granted her with enough knowledge to deliver her tale of “wo that is in mariage”. This is defiant in itself, as she is evidently shaping her own morals by experience in contrast with the people she sees around her, who live their lives according to the written word. There is also subtle comedy within this – Chaucer chooses this powerful word as an unforgettable start to a tale narrated by such an unforgettable character. Winny’s comparison of the Wife of Bath with a “bomb” aligns so perfectly with this sudden, explosive start to a shocking tale. Yet, once again, the comedy is perhaps being used for a different purpose, rather to make us question whether or not we should actually find humour in this tale. Chaucer’s ‘The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale’ cannot be taken at face value; what we see on the surface is almost definitely all that this author wished us to take away from his writing, especially this of all the Canterbury Tales. Surely such a controversial character must have been created for a purpose other than to make Chaucer’s audience laugh. By lending comedy to the piece, he manipulates us once again into laughing at injustice, which in turn forces us to step back and realise the social injustice behind the humour. This abstract noun, with all its connotations of worldly knowledge and confidence, perfectly defies the image of a fourteenth century woman: no female was expected to have any ‘experience’ in such a context. The men experienced life while the women fended for their husbands. The Wife of Bath, in all her comical defiance, dismisses social expectations and, through Chaucer, gains a female voice in a world dominated by males, and this “defiantly comic” portrayal of her is imperative in encapsulating the symbolic resonance behind her feminist allure. To conclude, Chaucer’s Wife of Bath is indeed a “defiantly comic” figure: yet, as was typical in the fourteenth century, this comedy is not used simply as a means of entertainment. Chaucer seemingly wished to make us laugh, and then to make us question our laughter, and then to make us recognise the darkness behind his humour and the injustice of sexism in his age and (although, of course, he did not know it at the time of his writing) indeed in the modern day where female inequality is still rife. This warping of the tales as a way of ‘entertainment’, which for the pilgrims was the only reason they were being told, is so clever especially in the Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale because Chaucer explores the defiantly comic Wife of Bath in an extended social critique wherein it is almost impossible not to recognise the deeper meaning of the text