the patriarchy through Kate, who ‘conquers’ Marlow but is still ‘conquered’ by male- dominated society in the form of her father and father-in-law. Indeed, in the words of 18th century aristocrat Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Kate is, like other ‘people in [her] way’, ‘sold like [a slave]’. Similarly, May is still trapped in her marriage with the lecherous, old knight, Januarie, despite her use of deception, Chaucer sympathetic for the condition of women in the 1300s. Parodying the courtly love literature that was more popular in the 12th century, Chaucer’s female protagonist takes pity on the lover character of Damyan and agrees to have sex with him, deceiving her physically and metaphorically blind husband to do so. Yet, whilst this gives her power over her husband by making him a cuckold, May is still, by the end of the tale, his property. This is affirmed when Januarie ‘kisseth’ and ‘clippeth hire’ and ‘on hire wombe... stroketh hire ful softe’, Chaucer implying the power has been transferred back to Januarie fromMay as she is now the ‘warm wex’ he can ‘stroketh’ and touch. As her husband ‘lad’ May back to ‘his palays hoom’, the writer also illustrates that May is not just Januarie’s ‘sexual plaything’, to use Dixon’s description of Kate, but is his economic inferior, dependent on him for a ‘hoom’. As Peggy Knapp notes, Chaucer seems to sympathise with women, their status in medieval society low because of Original Sin, which limited them to become either a nun or to be married, in some cases to men as disgusting and perverted as Januarie. Knapp plausibly cites May’s reading of Damyan’s love letter ‘in the privee’, Chaucer’s message sympathetic as the toilet – a place of filth and egesta – is her ‘only place of privacy’, reinforcing the presentation of the patriarchy at the end of the tale as inescapable. Chaucer thus parodies courtly love literature as, whilst it placed women on a pedestal, medieval society still objectified and repressed women. Like Goldsmith, he argues that the ‘battle of life’ is futile given the overwhelming power of men compared to women. As Kate proves, though, whilst fighting in the ‘battle of life’ may be pointless, the ‘weapons’ of deception and disguise can still be used for good. Goldsmith’s purpose in this is to present deception as a means of empowerment for Marlow as well as Kate, this in deep contrast to that of the Merchant, who wishes to present deception as nothing more than a means of self-preservation for women. However, Chaucer’s
purpose is to exhibit, in his narrator, the dangers of self- deception, this a self-defeating ‘weapon’ in the ‘battle of life’. As Simon Bubbs notes, Goldsmith’s play has a ‘very big heart’, true with regards to Kate’s aim to empower Marlow. Indeed, despite his loathing of the sentimental comedies popular in the 18th Century, the playwright still sends a moral message that disguise and deception can be used for good. As Kate notes, when talking to Marlow as herself, not in disguise, he was a ‘faltering gentleman, with looks on the ground, that speaks just to be heard’. Yet, by the end of the play, and despite the crippling humiliation it causes him, he has been given confidence by Kate’s deception, such that he can express his ‘joy’ about marrying ‘[his] little tyrant’. Kate not only
Chaucer seems to sympathise with women, their status in medieval society low because of Original Sin, which limited them to become either a nun or to be married
makes the marriage tolerable for herself, but for Marlow as well since he can now speak to his wife, this being an example of a companionate marriage that became more prevalent in the 1700s as relatively more power was given by parents to their children over who they married, although Kate accepts the ‘challenge’ her father sets her to ‘conquer’ Marlow rather than veto it. The Merchant’s view opposes that of Goldsmith completely, in that he presents deception as a ‘weapon’ used by women
34
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker