Upon reflection, I think I was especially bothered by some of the book’s flaws because it had so much promise. While captivating at first, it became overlong and some of the twists and turns of the plot detracted from the core story rather than enhanced it.
Consequently, when I finished the book, I was a little disappointed. However, I went straight to the Afterword and really enjoyed Karen Brook’s commentary. She knows her stuff and gives a very interesting summary of Chaucer’s Wife of Bath and how she incorporated the details, both poetic and historical, into her novel.
*Edited to add that when I just returned to the Afterword and then the glossary to re-read, I clicked to the next page (on my Kindle) and there was the Reading Group Guide with discussion questions! I’ll post – better late than never.
Had you read The Canterbury Tales before reading this book? What was your impression, if any, of the Wife of Bath after reading Chaucer’s story about her?
After being forced to accept a marriage to Fulk Bigod, Eleanor realizes to her surprise that “the man whom the villagers mocked and whispered about, who was said to be a bully at best and a murderer at worst, had shown me nothing but consideration and, for what it was worth, a welcome.” How did her first marriage set up the rest of Eleanor’s life?
When Fulk talks about his daughter, Alyson, with Eleanor he says, “You’ll be good for her. And I know she’ll be good for you.” Was that true? Did it foreshadow what ultimately happened to Alyson and how it saved Eleanor?
What did you make of Eleanor’s marriages of convenience to Turbet Gerrish and Mervyn Slynge? What did she gain from those marriages? How would you compare them to her later marriages, which were for love?
What do Eleanor’s letters to Geoffrey Chaucer about her travels reveal about her? Why do you think she chooses to write him?
When Eleanor has to flee to London, Geoffrey tells her to look on the bright side, exclaiming, “You’re a free woman once more—albeit poorer.” But is that truly a good thing? Would she have been better off staying and trying to fight for justice and to keep her wealth?
Eleanor finds out that the girls she cares for have turned to prostitution, she thinks, “If the girls were willing, if it’s what they wanted and were safe, was it so bad?” Do you agree? Does Eleanor truly feel this way, or do they simply have no other choice? What do you make of her later claim: “Reluctant though I’d been to become what I most loathed, someone who profited from a woman’s body, when the role was thrust upon me, I not only enjoyed the privilege, but was damn good at it too”?
What did you think about Eleanor’s final encounter with Jankin? Was she right not to reclaim her identity and wealth, and let Sabyn have it instead? In the end, was justice truly served?
Eleanor says of Chaucer, “Geoffrey was hardly a man, not in the way others were to me.” Is this true? Was the relationship somehow more true because it wasn’t sexual? What did you think of his deathbed letter, in which he writes to Eleanor, “You . . . have always been family to me. . . . You’re the wife of my soul”?
In The Wife of Bath’s Tale in Chaucer’s original, the moral of the story is that what women most want is control. Do you agree? How would that idea have resonated in medieval times versus modern times?
Karen Brooks subtitled this book “A (Mostly) True Story.” What do you think she meant by that? Who decides what’s true about Eleanor’s story?
Hi all, Just popping in to say I haven’t had a chance to read the book. I have it on my Kindle, so perhaps I’ll come back at a later date to read through the comments.
Once again, a case of “So many books, so little time!”
What did you make of Eleanor’s marriages of convenience to Turbet Gerrish and Mervyn Slynge? What did she gain from those marriages? How would you compare them to her later marriages, which were for love?
I think Eleanor’s second and third marriages were more successful than the last two.
One argument that could be made for the marriages 2 and 3, is that they were based on common sense and therefore they worked partially.
She married Turbet against Alyson’s advice, and paid for it in the beginning and the end. It seems strange that a woman who is so capable in business concerns should have had a blind spot about inheritance laws and having safeguards in place for money that she and her relatives brought into the marriage. She gained experience in handling business and the confidence of making her own decisions but lost her entire inheritance.
Her marriage to Slynge was a smart decision and she came out of that marriage better than she expected. Her affair with her worker’s husband was a stupid mistake but perhaps could be excused because at the time she was a young woman with very normal sexual appetites which weren’t being satisfied. Still, that marriage benefitted her financially and it lasted only for a short period. She was still a young woman when she was widowed for the third time.
As for marriages 4 and 5, though she claimed they were for love, they were dictated more by the demands of her Q than her heart and for sure not by common sense. After the experience with Turbet, it was baffling that she still chose not to stipulate how her widow’s portion (and the financial stability of those who depended on her) would be kept intact. Common sense flees before lust!
Her 1st marriage turned out pretty happy for her and her H and his kids as well.
She didn’t seem to grow emotionally as much as one would hope and never really could see the danger in her plans and work to minimize such danger. This caused so much grief and heartache, much of which could have been avoided.
I did a quick re-read of Chaucer’s Prologue (modernized version!) when reading The Good Wife of Bath. My impressions were no different than every literary analysis – she’s funny, crude, smart, resourceful, strong-willed, opinionated, and a little defensive. So yes, very much like “our” Eleanor.
However, one way that I think she differs from Brooks’ version is that there is nothing in the Prologue that suggests she has experienced great loss or tragedy; whereas Eleanor spends a lot of time crawling her way out of abject poverty, enduring the worst sort of violence, and weeping over friends who have died under horrible circumstances.
Eleanor also second guesses herself a lot – wonders if she is doing right by her household, regrets her choices, and so on. Chaucer’s Wife of Bath seems quite content and self-assured, with no qualms about her life choices.
I agree, the Chaucer version of the Wife of Bath is more two-dimensional. She boasts a lot about getting mastery of men through sex. (The story of making her fourth husband jealous is straight out of Chaucer.) The business about the book and being beaten so badly that she’s deaf in one ear by husband number five is also there. (And she also says she loves husband five anyway.) She talks a lot about how she wants mastery over men and is willing to use sex to gain it.
There are a couple of pieces on line that appear to have been done for college classes. It’s amusing how horrified some people are by her, while others see her as a proto-feminist. I think Chaucer wants to have it both ways. She’s a very appealing character, funny, smart, and sexy.
Going back to the book, I think that Brooks is a bit hemmed in by the source material, but I like the idea of Chaucer’s repenting a bit at what he’d done and Eleanor being so cross about it. Life in the middle ages for most people was as Hobbes said (hundreds of years later), “Nasty, brutish and short.” I liked that Brooks gave us a more realistic picture of medieval England.
Nobody has mentioned Eleanor’s collected family: starting with Alyson and Milda all the way to her “girls” and their child or two.
It is one of the parts of the books I like best. Eleanor’s sadness over no babe herself despite five husbands and countless (or so it seems) lovers but pulling together a ragtag group and making them her own.
We’ve talked about her failings but this is one of her successes.
I did consider mentioning the “collected family”. It was an uplifting aspect of the book.
m
The book sure make me appreciate the times we live in. Also, it sure gives me a new appreciation of my slightly flawed yet also quite wonderful husband.
Also, I had a long day at work and didn’t post after this morning, but I have read everyone else’s posts! – Unfortunately, I can’t like them (or edit my own). Still seems to be a glitch in the system.
