The Hidden God of Nature

Transfigured by virtue, Alyosha Karamazov falls to the Earth’s surface and embraces the ground with a gentle river of tears and promises forgiveness for all in a critical scene of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov. Bits and pieces of the mysterious world of God are placed together into a magnificent moment of clarity and from the weather-beaten soil rises a fighter with a heart filled to the brim with love. Purpose in an apparent dim world unveils itself through the expression of active love, therefore suggesting that one truly finds him or herself by the agency of self-emptying as opposed to self-assertion which is tied to suffering. God is love itself, and possessing active love is, “such a priceless treasure that you can buy the whole world with it” (Dostoevsky, 52). Thus human beings who forcefully maintain everyone is a slave of blind fate and victim of meaningless accidents, alienate themselves from the “Hidden God” tradition of relational identity in the form of self-emptying through active love (Frank, 40-43). The idea of possessing meaning has traversed into the twenty-first century where the younger generation, facing an overall dissatisfaction with life, leans toward a more individualistic lifestyle that shies away from love and results in an epidemic of loneliness.

Elder Zosima preaches his notion of an interconnected world united by love, and he compares this world to an ocean where a singular drop can be echoed to the other end of the world (Dostoevsky 319). This belief has the ability to lead an individual to a meaningful life because it is rooted in active love by virtue of giving oneself to God and the world he created. Through Zosima, the world is portrayed as, “deeply and mysteriously alive, a world in which matter and spirit, time and eternity, coalesce” (De Jong 7). Thus, Zosima believes the Earth to be sacred and, “harboring paradise within itself” (De Jong 7). The description of the cosmos represents a spiritual otherworld-reality coined “overlay landscape” in the Christian “Hidden God” ecopoetic tradition, for nature is painted as a mirror image of God. This ethereal depiction is symbolic of the delicate nature of the world where an unkind word or lack of action is a drop in the ocean that affects everyone in the body of water to some extent. Therefore, if one truly loves animals, plants, and each living thing, one will become “tormented by universal love… and start praying to the birds, as if in a sort of ecstasy, and entreat them [for forgiveness]” (Dostoevsky, 321). It is then through God that one learns to love all things and come to walk through life believing human beings are “fused together in one integral life” comparable to leaves on a tree which grows and, “turn[s] green only by virtue of the juices that flow through them from one common trunk and root, and are nourished by the moisture of a common soil” (Frank, 129). 

            Zosima instructs his followers to fall before unkind and unfeeling individuals who fail to listen and ask for forgiveness, for their guilt falls on everyone equally (Dostoevsky 321). Loving one’s neighbors and feeling guilty for everything and everybody is expressed by Zosima’s Talks and Homilies, therefore portraying that a meaningful life is created through a collectivistic sense of self-emptying. Zosima develops this theme of all-encompassing guilt by claiming, “only with this realization of guilt can man become capable of an unending universal love that knows no satiation” (Van Den Bercken, 70). Thus, active love is intertwined with the feeling of responsibility for humanity and as a result, a sense of community and purpose in life. ^[i]From Talks and Homilies of the Elder Zosima includes Zosima encouraging others to take on the suffering of wicked people so that one’s, “heart will be eased, and [one] will understand that [one], too, [is] guilty for [one] might have shone to the wicked, even like the only sinless One” (Dostoevsky, 321). Thus, to truly engage in active love similar to Christ, one must employ self-emptying which is a part of the relational identity ecopoetic tradition. This Christian tradition is rooted in the paradoxical idea where one finds him or herself by losing him or herself. The idea of purposeful self-emptying is stressed when Zosima says, “your work is for the whole, your deed is for the future” (Dostoevsky, 322). Likewise, S.L Frank explains relational identity by claiming, “We genuinely find ourselves and our life for the first time when we sacrifice ourselves and our empirical isolation and self-enclosedness and establish our entire being in another-in God, as the original source of all life” (Frank, 89). 

            The Russian monk prefers to not speak of the flames of hell but asserts that if they in fact exist, those in hell will cherish the fire for granting momentary relief from their spiritual torment (Dostoevsky, 323). Elder Zosima asserts that hell is the inability to love, therefore suggesting active, universal love found in losing oneself is the correct path. Zosima portrays a deceased individual estranged from active love thinking, “Now I have knowledge, and though I thirst to love, there will be no great deed in my love, no sacrifice, for my earthly life is over…and now there is an abyss between that life and this existence” (Dostoevsky, 322). Thus, hell is both the “suffering of no longer being able to love” on Earth and an afterlife of spiritual torment (Dostoevsky, 322). This idea of hell is an original idea, for Zosima sets it up as, “man’s own [existential] choice against love” (Van Den Bercken, 78). This inner torment is further worsened if God chooses to forgive those which were strangers to love, for it “would only multiply the torment of being unable to answer with love” (Van Den Bercken, 78). The grave tone serves to show the importance of possessing active love while on Earth and parallels the Christian ecopoetic tradition of identity as relational to others and ultimately to God as Christ in the Christian Trinity. In order to escape spiritual torment both on earth and in the afterlife, one must empty oneself of pride and become united with God and become well acquainted with his love, “for love, true love, is nothing else but the joy of life… [and the] unity of life’s fullness and intensity, or satisfaction” (Frank, 73). 

Zosima maintains, “Christ will not be angered by love” and confesses that he prays for souls rejected by the Church despite it being considered a sin (Dostoevsky, 323). Loving those who have sinned provides life with meaning because one is still engaging in self emptying as opposed to self-enclosedness. Therefore, one can love even those who make themselves strangers to love. In a historical context, Zosima’s beliefs are similar to St. Tikhon Zadonsky who Dostoevsky, “had taken to his heart with enthusiasm” (Mochulsky, 633). St. Tikhon was a holy man who wrote about Christian love and also believed in restoring those who turned away from God. Nevertheless, “Zosima is not a representative of historical Russian monasticism; he is directed toward the future as a herald of the new spiritual consciousness of the Russian people” (Mochulsky, 635). Dostoevsky also drew on the traditions of which writers like Medieval Philosopher Maximus the Confessor were upheld as an ancient source. Centuries on Charity by Maximus asserts love is found in kindness and patience and, “the one who acts contentiously or wickedly clearly makes himself a stranger to love, and the one who is a stranger to love is a stranger to God, since ‘God is love”” (I Jn. 4:8; Foltz, 181). This estranged relationship to God and love leads to a life of questioning one’s purpose in the world.

Ivan Karamazov tells his brother Alyosha that he is dumbfounded in a person’s ability to love one’s neighbors and asserts one cannot possibly love his or her neighbors (Dostoevsky, 236). Ivan believes active love is acted on in a forced manner, therefore it alludes that Ivan’s self-assertion results in psychic agony (Sheehan). Ivan lives in, “spiritual autonomy, one wherein he asserts his own will as more perfective than God’s will in creating the world” resulting in aforementioned self-imposed suffering (Sheehan). As opposed to embracing human beings with active love, Ivan believes that love is only viable by turning away from humanity, for “as soon as [one] shows [one’s] face-love vanishes” (Dostoevsky, 237). Thus, Ivan’s portrayal of love is rooted in self and not a relational identity found by self-emptying. He claims, “Christ’s love for people is in its kind impossible on earth” and adults are, “disgusting and do not deserve love” (Dostoevsky, 237). Instead, only children deserve to be loved because of their innocence and yet children suffer. Nevertheless, in the midst of his self-assertive speech, Ivan admits that this topic of conservation has given him a headache and a great sense of sadness (Dostoevsky, 238). Alyosha describes his brother appearing to be, “in some kind of madness” (Dostoevsky, 238). Therefore, it is this madness of questioning love and by proxy, God that fuels Ivan’s uneasiness. Ivan’s characterization becomes symbolic of the psychic agony a nonbeliever faces, for instead of losing himself in service of others, Ivan denies the power of active love and focuses on the suffering of children who have no faults. A conclusion can be made stating, “[one is] precious not in [their] self-assertion but only in self-emptying”(Sheehan). Thus, it is through self-assertion that one lives under the assumptions including, “the land and the sea are both full of woes for man” (Hesiod) and “sorrow follows sorrow” (Simonides) during a brief and meaningless life on earth (Frank, 41).

Ivan dives deeper into his self-assertive tendencies by speaking of the evil of human beings who themselves have created the devil (Dostoevsky, 239). Ivan rebels against the idea of active love because he questions how love can be bestowed upon cruel beings and strays away from the solace self-emptying provides to one’s life. Ancient Greek Author Homer shared this negative view of humanity, for he claimed, “In truth, of all creatures that breathe and crawl in the dust, none on the earth is more wretched than man” (Odyssey Book XVIII; Frank, 41). Ivan believes there is, “a beast hidden in every man, a beast of rage, a beast of sensual inflammability at the cries of the tormented victim, an unrestrained beast let off the chain (Dostoevsky, 242). Thus, he maintains that he cannot participate in active love as Christ does because he is only a human being and cannot love another cruel human being. He diverges from relational identity and instead, forges a path of an individual, as he believes man, “is intrinsically egoistic; the idea of selfless love, as he sees it, is naught but a reified social construct” (De Jong, 35). Ivan separates himself from parents who physically abuse their children, and thus does not feel guilt for their actions (Dostoevsky, 242). Thus, the theme of universal guilt rooted in universal love is unattainable according to Ivan. In this sense, the constant questioning of the nonsensical events that occur torment Ivan who is deeply disheartened by the suffering of children. He tells Alyosha, “the whole world of knowledge is not worth the tears of that little child to ‘dear God’” (Dostoevsky, 242). Ivan is therefore left with his self-assertion but lost on Earth due to a lacking sense of purpose, for a nonbeliever cannot know the feeling of being content because no nonbeliever feels content without forfeiting a nonbeliever’s character. ^[ii]

In addition, Ivan speaks of a general who releases a pack of wolfhounds that tear a little boy who injured his favorite dog into pieces while his mother watches (Dostoevsky, 243). Active love requires forgiveness and because Ivan rejects forgiveness, he lacks true purpose.^[iii] He questions the notion of forgiveness in this absurd world that creates harmony and determines the mother should not forgive the general even if the boy himself were to forgive the general (Dostoevsky, 245). Therefore, Ivan asserts that he does not long for harmony instead, he wishes to, “remain with [his] unrequited suffering and [his] unquenched indignation, even if [he] is wrong” (Dostoevsky, 245). Accordingly, Ivan asserts, “empirical life can have as little meaning as the fragment of a page torn out of a book” and he admits to the suffering that is attached to his conviction in a state of delirium as described by his brother Alyosha (Frank, 42; Dostoevsky, 243).  Dostoevsky characteries Ivan, “‘as a synthesis of contemporary Russian anarchism. The rejection not of God, but of the meaning of His creation’” (PSS, 30/Bk; Petrusewicz, 788). Dostoevsky also describes the words spoken against God as, “the portrayal of the uttermost blasphemy and the seed of the idea of destruction in our time in Russia among the young people uprooted from reality” refuted by Elder Zosima and his homilies centered around self-emptying by practicing active love (Petrusewicz, 788).

The critical Ivan further renounces harmony found in love and forgiveness by saying the price is too high and as a result, claims he will simply return his ticket to God (Dostoevsky, 245). Ivan is not an atheist, but he holds self-assertive tendencies, therefore he pays the price through his uneasiness and suffering. Ivan rejects a God who charges too high of a price for harmony, and thus he expedites the returning of his ticket on account of his honesty (Dostoevsky, 245). Thus, Ivan accepts the existence of God but chooses to turn away from him in an act of rebellion on account of meaningless suffering. Ivan who opposes relational identity, “goes through what can be identified as various phases and types of so-called atheism, his theologoumena being characterized by rebellion against God more than logical atheism” (Brazier, 130). Nevertheless, Dostoevsky found atheism beneficial, for a “period of atheism may lead to a clarification, a clearing out of false religious ideas leaving the individual open to God’s grace (Brazier, 131). Thus, Ivan’s heart holds faith, and suffering, and stubbornness, and anger, and these traits are commonly held by one who lacks a sense of collectivism and instead is self-assertive.^[iv] This uneasiness is accounted for by an individualistic identity which, “lack[s] in any case the self-grounded peace, the luminous clarity, the fullness of being, that [one] needs to make [one’s] life meaningful” (Frank, 67). 

Hence, it seems that the illusion of a meaningless world leads to a wandering mind, and a wandering mind leads to psychic agony as seen in Ivan Karamazov.^[v] The Brothers Karamazov. written by Fyodor Dostoevsky, views self-emptying in high regard due to its ability to provide one with purpose. The Christian ecopoetic tradition of relational identity by definition also advocates for losing oneself in active love and as a result, truly finding oneself. Therefore, purpose in a world with no clear reason or rhyme can be uncovered by engaging in active love, therefore suggesting that one truly finds him or herself through self-emptying as opposed to self-assertion that results in anguish. Currently, this mental and physical suffering is apparent in America’s youth who are increasingly turning away from religion and as a result, the benefits of believing in a greater power. Instead, the younger generation favors an individualistic lifestyle with self-assertive tendencies that is mutually exclusive from universal love, universal guilt, and universal forgiveness. This lack of active love and therefore purpose leads to an increased sense of isolation and what can be coined a loneliness epidemic.^[vi]  

Works Cited

Brazier, P.H., Rae, Murray. “Dostoevsky: Religion and Atheism.” Dostoevsky: A Theological 1st ed., The Lutterworth Press, Cambridge, 2016, pp. 109–144. JSTOR,     www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvhrd1mv.12. 

De Jong, Caleb. For the Sake of the Whole: A Theological Explanation of Dostoevsky’s    ElderZosima via Sergius Bulgakov. 2015. McMaster University, Masters    thesis. https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/bitstream/11375/18211/2/THESIS%20DEJ ONG%20-%20FINAL%20VERSION.pdf

Foltz, Bruce. Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2019.

Frank, S.L. The Meaning of Life. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010

Mochulsky, Konstantin. Dostoevsky; His Life and Work: Translated and Introduction by                          Michael A. Minihan. Princeton University Press, 1967.     

Petrusewicz, Mary, editor. “Rebellion and the Grand Inquisitor.” Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time,    by JOSEPH FRANK, Princeton University Press, Princeton; Oxford, 2010, pp. 788–        803. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t0bx.61.

Sheehan, Don. “DOSTOEVSKY AND MEMORY ETERNAL.” The Brothers Karamazov, 29     Nov. 2011, web.archive.org/web/20160102121137/www.dartmouth.edu/~karamazov/ 

Van den Bercken, W. (2011). The Spirituality of the Monk Zosima in The Brothers Karamazov.              In Christian Fiction and Religious Realism in the Novels of Dostoevsky (pp. 63-82).                Anthem Press. doi:10.7135/UPO9780857289452.007

---

^[i] Narration or Statement of the facts: imparting a spin to a story, plausibility 

^[ii] Conduplicatio

^[iii] Logos: Deduction 

^[iv] Polysyndeton 

^[v] Anadiplosis 

^[vi] Arrangement: Conclusion/Epilogue

Rediscovering his faith and love for humanity, Alyosha is compelled to the Earth’s surface and embraces the ground with a raging river of tears and the promise of forgiveness for all. Bits and pieces of the world of God are placed together in a magnificent painting and from the weather-beaten soil rises a fighter for humanity. Purpose in what appears to be a dim world unveils itself through the expression of active love, therefore suggesting a meaningless life is one self-enclosed and unprompted by responsibility for everyone and everything. As mentioned in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov God is love, and possessing active love is how most find meaning in a world where there is no apparent rhyme or reason. Human beings who assert that life is capricious and insignificant find themselves alienated and unable to attain active love. The idea of a meaningful life has traversed into the twenty-first century, where the younger generation facing overall dissatisfaction with life tends to lean toward an individualistic lifestyle that hides away from love.

An individual truly possesses active love upon successfully escaping the chains that attach themselves with every mishap one executes. The way of a monk which entails obedience, fasting, and prayer offers solace in a meaningful life because an individual loves their life when they are close to God. Therefore, accepting the call and becoming a Russian monk as Zosima does can be interpreted through the Christian ecopoetic tradition of identity as relational to others and ultimately to God as Christ in the Christian Trinity. Acting as a true monk, Elder Zosima’s identity becomes tied with God, as he acts with good faith and is characterized as a holy man. Zosima is considered a saint with great influence among the monks, for he is known for being irrevocably devoted in aiding his followers. In addition, Zosima is characterized as a moral compass who never wavers from his homilies himself. The monk consistently preaches about love, even claiming that hell is the inability to love. This idea of hell is an original idea, for he sets it up as, “man’s own choice against love” and later apologizes for the dim nature of conversation (Van Den Bercken). His homilies instruct, “Love animals, love plants, love each thing. If you love each thing, you will perceive the mystery of God in things. Once you have perceived it, you will begin tirelessly to perceive more and more of it every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an entire, universal love” (Dostoevsky, 319). Thus, a religious perspective focused on love is outlined where meaning is found in faith. In addition, contrary to popular belief the seclusion that comes with being a monk, “no one attains such loving attention, such sensitive understanding of another’s life, such breath of the world-embracing universal life as a hermit” (Frank, 91). 

 New Paragraph starts here: 

To love all is to be responsible for the sins of all. Loving your neighbors and feeling guilty for everything and everybody is expressed by Zosima’s Talks and Homilies, therefore portraying that meaning is given to a life when one possesses active love comparable to the Lord. Zosima develops this theme of all encompassing guilt by claiming, “only with this realisation of guilt can man become capable of ‘an unending universal love that knows no satiation’” (Van Den Bercken, 70). Thus, active love is intertwined with the feeling of responsibility for humanity and as a result, a sense of community and purpose in life. From Talks and Homilies of  the Elder Zosima includes Zosima encouraging others to take on the suffering of wicked people so that, “your heart will be eased, and you will understand that you, too, are guilty for you might have shone to the wicked, even like the only sinless One” (Dostoevsky, 321). Thus, to truly engage in active love similar to Christ, one must employ self emptying which is a part of the relational identity ecopoetic tradition. This Christian tradition is rooted in the paradoxical idea where one one finds him or herself by losing him or herself. Thus, the idea of purposeful self emptying is stressed when Zosima says, “your work is for the whole, your deed is for the future” (Dostoevsky, 322). Likewise, S.L Frank explains relational identity by claiming, “We genuinely find ourselves and our life for the first time when we sacrifice ourselves and our empirical isolation and self-enclosedness, and establish our entire being in another-in God, as the original source of all life” (89). 

Therefore, one must love even those who make themselves strangers to love. Loving those who have sinned also provides life with meaning because one is still engaging in self emptying as opposed to self-enclosedness. Therefore Zosima who asserts, “Christ will not be angered by love,” confesses that he prays for souls rejected by the Church despite it being considered a sin (Dostoevsky, 323). In a historical context, Zosima’s beliefs are similar to St. Tikhon Zadonsky who Dostoevsky, “had taken to his heart with enthusiasm” (Mochulsky, 633). St. Tikhon was a holy man who wrote about Christian love and also believed in restoring those who turned away from God. Nevertheless, “Zosima is not a representative of historical Russian monasticism; he is directed toward the future as a herald of the new spiritual consciousness of the Russain people” (Mochulsky, 635). Centuries on Charity by Maximus the Confessor asserts love is found in kindness and patience and, “the one who acts contentiously or wickedly clearly makes himself a stranger to love, and the one who is a stranger to love is a stranger to God, since “God is love” ” (I Jn. 4:8; Foltz, 181). 

Frank, S.L. The Meaning of Life. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010

Foltz, Bruce. Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2019.

Mochulsky, Konstantin. Dostoevsky ; His Life and Work: Translated and Introduction by Michael A. Minihan. Princeton University Press, 1967.

Van den Bercken, W. (2011). The Spirituality of the Monk Zosima in The Brothers Karamazov. In Christian Fiction and Religious Realism in the Novels of Dostoevsky (pp. 63-82). Anthem Press. doi:10.7135/UPO9780857289452.007

To be illuminated by the Holy Spirit is to feel the sunlight permeating through one’s skin and into one’s core. Nevertheless, experiencing God’s touch through a sun’s ray is exclusive to a few individuals on Earth, for in order to be basked in the Holy light, a person must be one with God. Humanity shares a natural inclination to believe in a preordained world where purpose unveils itself through love therefore, a meaningful life is often lived believing in a greater power and to see life as meaningless is an act of rebellion. As mentioned in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov, God is love, and the feeling of love is where most find meaning in a world where there is no apparent rhyme or reason. Human beings are in a battle between religion which offers the existence of a meaningful life and nihilism which asserts that life is capricious and insignificant. This juxtaposition of belief systems has traversed into the twenty-first century, where the younger generation facing overall dissatisfaction with life tends to lean toward a more secular lifestyle. 

An individual truly possesses freedom upon successfully escaping the chains that attach themselves with every mishap one executes. The way of a monk which entails obedience, fasting, and prayer offers solace in a meaningful life because an individual loves their life when they are close to God. Therefore, accepting the call and becoming a Russian monk as Zosima does can be interpreted through the Christian ecopoetic tradition of identity as relational to others and ultimately to God as Christ in the Christian Trinity. Acting as a true monk, Elder Zosima’s identity becomes tied with God, as he acts with good faith and is characterized as a holy man. Zosima is considered a saint with great influence among the monks, for he is known for being irrevocably devoted in aiding his followers. In addition, Zosima is characterized as a moral compass who never wavers from his homilies himself. The monk consistently preaches about love, even claiming that hell is the inability to love. This idea of hell is an original idea, for he sets it up as, “man’s own choice against love” and later apologizes for the dim nature of conversation (Van Den Bercken). His homilies instruct, “Love animals, love plants, love each thing. If you love each thing, you will perceive the mystery of God in things. Once you have perceived it, you will begin tirelessly to perceive more and more of it every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an entire, universal love” (Dostoevsky, 319). Thus, a religious perspective focused on love is outlined where meaning is found in faith. In addition, contrary to popular belief the seclusion that comes with being a monk, “no one attains such loving attention, such sensitive understanding of another’s life, such breath of the world-embracing universal life as a hermit” (Frank, 91). 

Alyosha asserts that the reason for Ivan’s great mental suffering is his rebellious nature that leads to his refusal to submit to God, therefore this belief is paralleled in Frank’s chapter titled The Illumination of Life with Meaning that claims faith in God is the only way to live a fulfilled life. Alyosha speaks with Ivan immediately after his encounter with the devil, and he attempts to comfort his brother. While soothing Ivan’s hysterics, Alyosha starts to think and believes that he understands the cause of Ivan’s illness exclaiming, “the torments of a proud decision, a deep conscience!” and further thinks, “God, in who he did not want to believe, and his truth were overcoming his heart, which still did not want to submit” (Dostoevsky, 655). Thus, a nonbeliever cannot know the feeling of being content; because no nonbeliever feels content without forfeiting a nonbeliever’s character. * Alyosha is a strong believer of God who often argues with Ivan on the existence of God and consistently wishes that Ivan submit to God. Alyosha also ponders to himself that God will prevail, and that Ivan will either, “rise into the light of truth, or… perish in hatred, taking revenge on himself and everyone for having served something he does not believe in” (Dostoevsky, 655). It seems Alyosha’s trust in God is unwavering and he hopes that his brother rises into the same light as opposed to the latter.

Therefore, the way toward God is the way toward happiness and overall contentment. Frank eloquently writes, “we genuinely find ourselves and our life for the first time when we sacrifice ourselves and our empirical isolation and self-enclosedness and establish our entire being in another- in God, as the original source of all life” (Frank, 89). Thus, establishing himself in God has the ability to stop Ivan’s suffering. This pattern is observed in both The Brothers of Karamazov and The Meaning of Life relating the absence of contentment to the absence of faith in God. It can be hypothesized that suffering is always seen in nonbelievers across literary works during this time period in which paralleled religious works that stressed believing in God. This is because it was strongly asserted that believing in a greater power is the only way to find meaning in what appears to be a meaningless world. All in all, it can be interpreted that religion is an exclusive way to solve mental suffering by essentially giving one’s lives to a greater power. **

*Conduplicatio (of the word nonbeliever)

** Logos: Induction

Description: I will argue that human beings are in a battle between religion and nihilism. I will juxtapose Ivan against Alyosha and his elder Zosima, and thus depict that Ivan is a rebel in his own right as a nonbeliever. In addition, my outside resources will shed light on what the characters symbolize, and I will tie in the Hidden God poetic traditions of relational identity and virtue as transfigurative. The idea of a meaningless life guided by knowledge and a meaningful life serving God is explored by SL Frank in The Meaning of Life. In addition, Philokalia offers insight on purpose found in religion by monks as well. I plan to also compare what is being said to Dostoevsky’s own beliefs as a Christian in my essay.

Draft Enthymeme Thesis: Humanity shares a natural inclination to believe in a preordained world where purpose unveils itself through love therefore, a meaningful life is often tied closely to religion and to see life as meaningless is an act of rebellion. 

Focus Chapters:

Book 6, Chapter 3: From Talks and Homilies of Elder Zosima

• I will use this chapter to show the meaningful lives of Russian monks as told by Zosima to Alyosha
• One loves their life when they are close to God 
• Hell is not being able to love
• “Love animals, love plants, love each thing. If you love each thing, you will perceive the mystery of God in things. Once you have perceived it, you will begin tirelessly to perceive more and more of it every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an entire, universal love” (Dostoevsky, 319). 

Book 5, Chapter 4: Rebellion 

• Two brothers talk about the existence of God. Ivan claims that while he has not rejected God, he feels incapable of accepting the world God created
• This brings up the idea of life without a rhyme or reason= meaningless
• Suffering of children 
• “I want to remain with my unrequited suffering and my unquenched indignation, even if I am wrong. Besides, they have put too high a price on harmony; we can’t afford to pay so much for admission. And therefore I hasten to return my ticket. And it is my duty, as an honest man, to return it as far ahead of time as possible. Which is what I am doing. It’s not that I don’t accept God, Alyosha, I just most respectfully return him the ticket” (Dostoevsky, 245). 

Scholarly resources:

Cicovacki, Predrag. Dostoevsky and the Affirmation of Life, Taylor & Francis Group, 2014. ProQuest Ebook Central,          https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bucknell/detail.action?docID=3411098.      

“Dostoevsky: Religion and Atheism.” Dostoevsky: A Theological Engagement, by P.H. Brazier and Murray Rae, 1st ed., The Lutterworth Press, Cambridge, 2016, pp. 109–144. JSTOR,              www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvhrd1mv.12.

Mochulsky, Konstantin. Dostoevsky ; His Life and Work: Translated and Introduction by Michael A. Minihan. Princeton University Press, 1967.

Petrusewicz, Mary, editor. “The Brothers Karamazov: Books 1–4.” Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time,   by JOSEPH FRANK, Princeton University Press, Princeton; Oxford, 2010, pp. 848–    866. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t0bx.65.

In the novel The Brothers of Karamazov, a murder falls ill days after confessing his crime to Zosima and dies in a pleasant state, therefore portraying the meaningless of life as written in The Meaning of Life. Essentially, the idea of life having no real meaning is perpetuated, for this mysterious visitor claims that he killed a woman he loved, and the man arrested for the crime dies before sentencing. However, the murder, despite his successful life, is never truly happy because he walks around with a nagging need to confess. Zosima tells the sinner to go and tell the world of his sin. While he does confess, his family, friends, and acquaintances simply believe he has gone mad. Nevertheless, the man falls ill five days after his proclamation supported by strong evidence that he did indeed commit murder. On his death bed, he tells Zosima, “‘God has pitied me and is calling me to himself. I know I am dying, but I feel joy and peace for the first time after so many years…I shall die and for my [wife and children] my name will remain untainted’” (Dostoevsky, 311).

This tone of the meaningless of life is also seen in Russian philosopher S.L Frank who writes, “our empirical life can have as little meaning as the fragment of a page torn out of a book” and “inevitable death, terminating both the happiest life and the unhappiest life, makes them equally meaningless” (Frank, 42). Frank also claims for one individual’s life to have meaning, human life as a whole would have meaning. However, as seen in history, human life is a series of accidents with no end goal being achieved. It seems that the nonsensical death of the mysterious visitor who took a life, saw a man die taking the blame, who himself dies before killing Zosima is unphased by the entity of the concept of life. While Frank would not condone the actions of the mysterious visitor, this tone is paralleled in The Meaning of Life which states that there is no meaning. It seems as if everyone is a slave of blind fate, “and as a slave, as we already know and as it is self-evident, cannot have a meaningful life” (Frank, 40). Therefore, the mysterious visitor was a murder: rash and cruel in his habits; innocent and noble in his disposition. * All in all, The Brothers of Karamazov presents the senseless death of the woman and her murder without question. This idea relates directly to Frank’s stance on the meaningless of life where death is simply the endpoint of a life filled with random accidents. This philosophy presented in The Meaning of Life is thus paralleled in Zosima’s story of the murder who died pleased without despair or punishment for the crimes he committed. **  

*Isocolon 

**Arrangement: Conclusion/Epilogue

When given sovereignty over her husband, a wrinkled, grotesque, elder sheds her skin and becomes exquisite. Her beauty and grace become unmatched. The Wife of Bath and her Tale afford a multidimensional sense of women possessing mystical spiritual power while simultaneously being at odds with their objectification in medieval courtly love satirized elsewhere by Chaucer, therefore suggesting a complex view of women who have the ability to be enlightened through suffering. A voice is given to Alyson or as she is strictly referred to as “The Wife of Bath,” is the creation of male narrator Geoffrey Chaucer who does not place women in a neatly labeled box. Instead, Chaucer embodies a feminine narrator in The Wife of Bath depicting a range of traits that can be interpreted through the Christian ecopoetic tradition in addition to symbolic Biblical representations. This shift in developing female characters outside of being passive objects of lust seen in poet Geoffrey Chaucer during the fourteenth century is significant to the feministic movement of the twenty-first century where objectifying women is no longer accepted but instead met with resistance. 

To cut off one’s head is a gruesome act and is enforced as punishment for great wrongdoing, and when a lusty bachelor’s head is demanded it is women of the court who assure that it remains in place for the time being. This scene discussing the rape of a maiden and the Queen saving the bachelor’s life depicts a multifaceted concept of what it means to be a woman because it depicts the potential subversiveness of mystical spiritual power in relation to the objectivation and suffering women face. This paradox is set in a fairytale-like, mythical setting that can be coined as an “overlay landscape” in Christian ecopoetics. At first, women are depicted as victims because of the beauty they hold results in violation. It is said that the forests currently populated by holy friars were originally inhabited by supernatural creatures including elves and incubi many hundreds of years ago. Then, Chaucer alludes to women no longer needing to fear the incubi that previously assaulted and impregnated them in the woods. Instead, they should be wary of the friars, “in every bussh or under every tree” who will be quick to dishonor them with their religious beliefs (Chaucer, 879). Nevertheless, the friars who renounced all worldly pursuits and devoted themselves to a monastic lifestyle shuddered at the thought of lust in which both men and women alike posed to each other. These holy men were satirized by Chaucer for their misaligned beliefs where women represented sin, but their own greed was met with a blind eye.  

In every man’s heart, there is a seed of evil and if he chooses to water it, lust will sprout up and around, consuming his mind. Spiritual work Philokalia includes St. Gregory of Sinai discussing a life free of passions rooted in the human flesh, and he includes advice to those who wish to follow his lead. Holy father Gregory writes, “fire, darkness, worms, hell correspond to passions-lusts of all kinds, the all-embracing darkness of ignorance, the unquenchable thirst for sensual pleasures” (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 44). Therefore, passion was given a stark negative connotation. Passion was equated to demons themselves, and only a passionless soul had the ability to perform sound reasoning. In addition, the tendency of voluptuous passion that appears in sexual contexts is said to be, “the chief cause of lustful burnings, confusion of thoughts and darkening of the soul (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 50). As a result, it is recommended to avoid objects of sexual fantasy altogether. No saint can know passion; because no saint surrenders to passions without forfeiting a saint’s character. ^[i]Nevertheless, in the time of King Arthur where objectification is an issue, women must also fear lust-filled Knights who give into the demons that tempt them. The beginning of the Wife of Bath’s tale describes a rape scene, where a Knight “saugh a maide walkinge him biforn, of which maide anoon, maugree hir hed, by verray force he rafte hir maidenhed” (Chaucer, 242, 886-888). The bachelor is characterized as a man who could not help himself and the young maiden is portrayed as a victim. 

As aforementioned, evil has the ability to sprout up and out from the heart and cast a great shadow on the capacity for one to perform sound reasoning. The characterization of the young maiden as being sexually assaulted extends beyond being at odds with the objectification of woman in medieval courtly love because the casual nature in which The Wife of Bath’s Tale dealt with rape can be mirrored in the handling of sex crimes occurring in thirteenth and fourteenth-century Italy. Punishments for rape were kept at a minimum. During the fourteenth century in which The Canterbury Tales were written by Geoffrey Chaucer, a rapist had the option to pay a fine despite the laws demanding his head. In addition, it was said that if the rapist and his victim looked for solace in the Church, he would be granted immunity from his devious crime. After much research Guido Ruggiero claims, “rape was treated as an extension of the customary victimization of women, that is, as a fact of life that was accepted and not considered particularly troubling” especially for a woman of marriageable age (Graval, 123). While Holy Fathers Barsanuphius and John write in Philokalia to avoid objects of passion to celibate male monastics, their advice would extend to bachelors as lust is firmly tied to evil. They advise other holy men to, “deal with women as though they were fire” so that they, “become established in the fear of God” (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 377). This specific spiritual text also tells men to avoid looking at women and to limit the length of their conversations to subdue the temptation of desire in their hearts. While the bachelor with a heart filled to the brim with misogyny, and power, and lust, and evil was not entering a monastic lifestyle, he commits a grave crime, nonetheless. ^[ii]

Christ was nailed to the cross and a crown of thorns pierced his forehead to save mankind. With his death and resurrection, Christ is upheld as a sacrificial victim whose victimization became a source of spiritual power, therefore the distinctive nature of suffering women face such as rape has the ability to enlighten their overall existence. This allegorical theory focuses on the characterization of women as victims of objectification, and thus it predicts women obtaining Divinity through spiritual power because of the challenges they face. The logic stands strong, for Christ’s, “suffering, human nature, and obedient death launched a complex act of sacrifice that culminated in the heavenly sanctuary and in taking a seat beside God’s throne” (Nelson, 253). Thus, the obstacles women face inside the overlay landscape has the ability to bring them closer to God. This then can be applied to the Wife of Bath’s Tale to both the maiden and the Queen. The maiden symbolizes the great suffering a victim faces, and the theory would predict that she would move forward with her life closer to God. On the opposite side of the spectrum, enlightened by the challenges she endures by being a female the Queen chooses to challenge the Knight’s moral code. Therefore, the Queen uses her spiritual power in good practice by saving a life and hoping to save his soul as well. ^[iii]

A light of grace arguably created through suffering the objection of women is shown upon the Knight. The one-tonality in which depicted women as wounded by men analyzed beforehand is broken, because the Queen and her ladies of the court spare the Knight from his impending death by praying to King Arthur to show mercy. Thus, the life of the lusty bachelor is given to the Queen and she tells him, “I graunte thee lif, if thow kanst tellen me what thing is that wommen moost desiren. Be war and keep thy nekke-boon from iren! (Chaucer, 243, 904-906). The power dynamics shift as the Queen overrides the legal process, for it is a woman saving the life of a man with poise in the overlay landscape. She is the one who develops the plot by challenging a man who portrayed his lack of respect for women by violating a maiden against her will to ponder for a year what women desire most above all. Thus, Chaucer’s multifaceted female characterization begins to appear, for the Queen wields spiritual power over her husband and as a result, decides another man’s fate.

Giving yourself to another human in marriage is a thing of beauty comparable to a form of monasticism. As it so happens, the Knight meets an old woman wise beyond her years who offers her aid on the condition that he completes any favor afterward, therefore spiritual power is once again solidified in the tale. This is because the “old hag” demands a marriage after correctly informing the Knight that women desire sovereignty over their husbands above all worldly things. Thus, the Christian ecopoetic tradition of marriage as cosmic symbolism is incorporated between the Knight and the old woman. This entails a martial unit united through reciprocal service where the man is expected to lay down his life for his wife and the wife leads the husband toward wisdom and higher faith. In this tradition, Christ is the bridegroom and the Church represents the bride in an otherworldly eternal pairing. The cosmic symbolism of marriage is mirrored in the Bible when advising wives to, “submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (English Standard Version, Eph. 5:22-33). 

With increasing age comes decreasing beauty in the eye of a lusty bachelor, for a woman’s features begin to shrivel. Nevertheless, the Knight expresses his many woes to his wife, and she portrays her enlightenment because her experience with evil and suffering adds to the grace she currently holds. In Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader, St. Basil of Caesarea makes it explicitly clear that there are two types of evil: one that is created by humanity and the other by a well-meaning God. The latter is considered that which is “toilsome and painful to our sense perception: bodily illness, and blows to the body, and lack of necessities and disgrace, and financial setbacks, and loss of property” (Foltz, 129). Therefore, St. Basil asserts that God has the capacity to enact punishments in the form of sickness and poverty in order to ensure salvation at the completion of one’s lifetime. Consider a woman facing blindness, weakness, famine, shame, poverty. ^[iv] This very woman does not have the same sight, energy, or financial funds to commit sin when compared to a wealthy woman in good health. The evils that torment her everyday life on Earth have the ability to provide her with eternal life in heaven by obtaining true virtue. When this god-fearing “old hag” who saves a life is cast down as less than her husband in social status and class, she rebuttals by gently saying, “poverte ful ofte, whan man is lowe, makes him know his God and also himself” (Chaucer, 253, 1201-1202). There is nothing prideful, nothing sinful, nothing of injustice inside the woman’s heart, arguably in part because she faced financial setbacks. ^[v] The old woman who proclaims the way of God is one of great piety who embraces her age in a mild and gracious manner in part because of the suffering imparted on her. ^[vi]

Wielding power can be loud, and it can be brutal, but power also comes from quiet influence. When ridiculed for her low social class, she speaks of what it means to possess nobility in relation to her poverty, therefore portraying her “elvishness” by shifting the Knight’s view to a more Christian based stance. The “old hag” tells her husband that nobility, also known as “gentilesse,” is not a privilege of birth given to the wealthy and that living in poverty is quite compatible with true “gentilesse.” This is sound reasoning, for “every authority shows that gentilesse is a human virtue that is a gift of God to be nurtured by man” and “gentilesse” can be defined as “truth, honor, fidelity, [and] generosity of spirit.” (Foster, 101). This argument presented by the wife depicts her mystical spiritual power, for she uses sound Christian reasoning to change her husband’s incorrect statement. Therefore, this spiritual power can be connected to the tradition of an “elvish” nature, where the wife’s “elvishness” resides, “in her ability to convert, to turn people from one system of belief to another without exerting any force” (Robertson, 178). This once again relates to the cosmic symbolism of marriage, for the wife has agency and is guiding her husband to higher faith in part on account of her suffering.

Thus, only the Knight’s complaint about his wife’s deep-set leather-like wrinkles remains unspoken. On account of her appearance, the “old hag” claims she understands her husband’s desire for an appealing wife and allows him to decide between her being foul and faithful versus young and free. Following the theme of sovereignty, the Knight responds, “‘My lady and my love, and wif so deere, I putte me in youre wise goverance. Cheseth yourself which may be moost plesaunce, and moost honour to yow and me also” (Chaucer, 254, 1230-1233). Therefore, in true fairytale fashion in the overlay landscape aforementioned, the wife becomes both beautiful and true because the husband acknowledges her spiritual power. It is then said that the married pair proceed to live their lives in perfect joy and reciprocity. It is important to note that Chaucer recreated prior stories in his tales and the story of, “a loathly hag who was transformed in the marriage bed into a shape of youthful beauty was told again and again in the Middle Ages” (Eisner, 7). Thus, this choice given to who was once a lusty bachelor show parallels to other texts. This motif tied with the concept of sovereignty began with an “Irish loathly lady” personified as the royal rule of Ireland and shifted into sovereignty over a husband in the English Arthurian tales. The possession of the “Irish loathly lady” was passed from king to heir if she was desired by the men when the motif originated. Nevertheless, another choice appeared in Arthurian The Canterbury Tales where the “loathly hag” has agency because a man is, “forced by circumstances to accept whatever proposal the loathly lady advanced…whether he preferred her beautiful by day and ugly by night or vice-versa” (Eisner, 140). The motif is further changed by Chaucer who creates the Knight character who must marry the “old hag” and then is given a choice between having an ugly and faithful wife or a beautiful and free wife. 

Hence, the Wife of Bath’s Tale centered around an old hag turned fair and faithful wife depicts a new form of women in Medieval writing. While there is a dispute as to whether the tale is meant as a criticism of misogyny, it is clear that Chaucer creates a multifaceted woman, not simply a passive victim of lust through the “old hag” in addition to the Queen. The Wife of Bath’s Tale includes a range of characteristics given to women including an “elvish” power capable of leading her husband and being victims in medieval courtly love, therefore suggesting a complex view of women who have the ability to be graceful because of their suffering.^[vii] This condition of suffering in order to possess spiritual power as a woman faded with time as the years progressed. Currently, women are acknowledged for their strengths, and it is acceptable for their characterization to be authoritative without needing an explanation. This concept of a strong-willed female protagonist was not widely accepted in the fourteenth century, and thus Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Talesis one of the first of its time. While he still includes women being objectified, he differs from male narrators who failed to give their female characters agency in their own lives. In the present, women act as authors and they can tell their own story.

 

Works Cited

Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Penguin, 2005.

Eisner, Sigmund. A Tale of Wonder: A Source Study of The Wife of Bath’s Tale. Burt Franklin, 1957.

Foltz, Bruce. Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2019.

Foster, Edward E. Understanding Chaucer’s Intellectual and Interpretative World. Vol 41, The   Edwin Mellen Press, 1999.

Gravdal, Kathryn. Ravishing Maidens: Writing Rape in Medieval French Literature and   Law, by University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991, pp. 122–140. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhdm5.9. Accessed 25 Sept. 2020.                

Kadloubovsky, E., and G. E. H. Palmer. Writings from the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart. Faber & Faber, 1951.       

Nelson, Richard D. “‘He Offered Himself’: Sacrifice in Hebrews.” Interpretation, vol. 57, no. 3, July 2003, pp. 251–265. EBSCOhost,             search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001364600&site=ehost-live.    

Robertson, Elizabeth The “Elvyssh” Power of Constance: Christian Feminism in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Man of Law’s Tale, Studies in the Age of Chaucer, Volume 23,2001, pp. 143-180. https://doi.org/10.1353/sac.2001.0048                                                                                                                         

The Bible. English Standard Version. Biblica, https://biblia.com/bible/esv/ephesians/5/22-33

---

^[i] Conduplicatio (of the word saint)

^[ii] Polysyndeton

^[iii] Logos: Deduction 

^[iv] Asyndeton

^[v] Anaphora

^[vi] Ethos: old hag

^[vii]Arrangement: Conclusion/Epilogue

The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, Notes from the Underground, and “Appendix: The Spiritual Emptiness of Our Time and the Meeting with the Living God” all comment on the idea of believing in idols, which is comparable to being superstitious. Notes from the Underground and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner both view believing in idols with distaste, therefore they agree with “Appendix: The Spiritual Emptiness of Our Time and the Meeting with the Living God.” In The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, shipmates cry out against the ancient Mariner for killing the bird they gave meaning to in the form of good luck. Nevertheless, when the fog cleared, they change their minds and claim that the bird instead symbolized bad luck. The shipmates who yelled at the death of the bird said, “ ‘Twas right.. such birds to slay, that bring the fog a mist” (Coleridge, 101-102). Thus, within a few lines the men completely switched the meaning of their idol, alluding to the lack of importance given to idols themselves in the poem. In addition, when trouble came again, the bird returned again as a symbol for good luck that was killed. This corresponds to a scene in Notes from the Underground when the narrator proclaims,  “But man is so partial to systems and abstract conclusions that he is ready intentionally to distort the truth, to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear, only so as to justify his logic” (Dostoevsky, 23). Therefore, it is clear that idols are abstract conclusions, and the narrator despises giving meaning to meaningless objects. A bird is a natural creature, flying creature, winged creature. * It is not representative of good luck. 

All in all, this is corroborated by “Appendix: The Spiritual Emptiness of Our Time and the Meeting with the Living God” written by S.L. Frank. In this piece of spiritual work, Frank completely invalidates the idea of believing in idols. He claims that after following his ways, “all these idols [should] have lost their enchantment and cannot attract our souls, no matter how many people around us continue to worship them” (Frank, 115). Frank also writes that the temptation to give into superstitious beliefs should be quick, as it is “easily exposed as falsehood; only the most naïve and inexperienced souls can, for a time, succumb to it” (Frank, 116). However, one who values idols might remark that giving meaning to say a bird, does not do any harm. In a sense, this is true. However, superstitious beliefs stray away from solid reasoning and all that is Divine. In addition, believing in idols is a gateway to more serious evil belief systems. Solid reasoning entails a logical way of thinking, and this by definition clashes with swaying idol-based beliefs. **

*Epistrophe; word creature

**Refutation

Summary: I want to make the argument that the Wife of Bath and her tale centered around the “old hag” and power dynamics shows a new form of woman in Medieval writing. The Wife of Bath is a complicated and experienced woman given a voice by a male author. While she embodies the negative facets such as promiscuity given to women as a whole, she also is presented to the reader a human, not a passive object falling victim to men.

Enthymeme Thesis: The voice given to Alyson or as she is strictly referred to as “The Wife of Bath,” is the creation of male narrator Geoffrey Chaucer, and it depicts the concept of a multidimensional woman both victimized and in possession of spiritual power, therefore this departs from the one-tonality of woman seen in Medieval texts when discussing lust and marriage. 

Outside Resources:

Chaucer, Geoffrey, and Peter G Beidler. The Wife of Bath. Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press, 1996.

Feminist Readings in Middle English Literature : The Wife of Bath and All Her Sect, edited by Ruth Evans, and Leslie Johnson, Taylor & Francis Group, 1994. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bucknell/detail.action?docID=235193.

Ravishing Maidens: Writing Rape in Medieval French Literature and Law, by Kathryn Gravdal, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991, pp. 122–140. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhdm5.9. Accessed 25 Sept. 2020.

The “Elvyssh” Power of Constance: Christian Feminism in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Man of Law’s Tale, by Elizabeth Robertson, Studies in the Age of Chaucer, Volume 23,2001, pp. 143-180. https://doi.org/10.1353/sac.2001.0048

Planned Close Reading Sections:

• SCENE 1: Lusty Knight rapes the maiden, and is offered a deal by Queen and ladies of the court- Lines 882-1012
• (CLOSE READING 1)

• SCENE 2: Knight gives power to his wife; she transforms from old to beautiful: Lines: 1207-1256
• Here I plan to stress the idea of the cosmic symbolism of marriage, and parallel the old woman’s spiritual power to “The “Elvyssh” Power of Constance: Christian Feminism in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Man of Law’s Tale”
• I will also enforce the idea of the old woman being spiritually inclined using Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader to show her understanding that certain evils (in this case poverty) are considered good because they have the ability to bring an individual closer to God and thus, eternal life.
• “poverte ful ofte, whan man is lowe, makes him know his God and also himself” (Chaucer 1201-1202).

The Wife of Bath’s tale is set in a fairytale-like, mythical setting which can be coined as an “overlay landscape” in Christian ecopoetics. In this land, women are depicted as victims because the beauty they hold results in great violation. It is said that the forests currently populated by holy friars were originally inhabited by supernatural creatures including elves and incubi many hundreds of years ago. Then, it is alluded that women no longer need to fear the incubi that previously assaulted and impregnated them in the woods. Instead, they should be wary of the friars who will be quick to dishonor them (Chaucer, 857-881). Nevertheless, in the time of King Arthur, woman should also fear lust-filled Knights, as the beginning of the Wife of Bath’s tale describes a rape scene, where a Knight “saugh a maide walkinge him biforn, of which maide anoon, maugree hir hed, by verray force he rafte hir maidenhed” (Chaucer, 242, 886-888). 

Thus, men are characterized as being filled with uncontrollable lust and women are characterized as objects and casualties of lust. In this case, the Knight who sexually assaults a maiden against her will is symbolic of losing one’s way to all that is Divine by succumbing to passion stemming from the human flesh. In Philokalia, St. Gregory of Sinai claims the body was created in the image of God and remained incorruptible because if contained a passionless soul. However, even a single thought can hinder one’s mind and the second the mind invites evil thoughts stemming from human flesh and earthily possessions, he is lost. St. Gregory compares the passion to devouring demons which entice the body to become, “unreasoning and senseless, subject to anger and lust” (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 52). In addition, the tendency of voluptuous passion that appears in sexual contexts is said to be, “the chief cause of lustful burnings, confusion of thoughts and darkening of the soul (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 50). As a result, it is recommended to avoid objects of sexual fantasy altogether. 

In the case of the Knight, Philokalia would advise him to, “deal with women as though they were fire” so that he, “become[s] established in the fear of God” (Kadloubovsky; Palmer, 377). This specific spiritual text also tells men to avoid looking at women and to limit the length of their conversations to ensure minimal desire in their hearts. It is clear the Knight does not hold this mindset, for he simply follows the evil thoughts that enter his mind without dispute and commits unreasonable acts. It is also clear that the maiden had no power in her situation, for she embodies a passive object that the Knight needed to have. Of course, justice was demanded to be served. However, it was also women who spared the Knight from his impending death by praying to King Arthur to show grace. Thus, the idea of women being more than a spark and victim of lust, is introduced with the Queen and her ladies of the court who give the Knight about a year or so to discover what women desire of all else. Here the power dynamics start to shift in the favor of a woman, mostly rooted in a spiritual sense of goodness and leading a husband to greater faith. The Queen initiates this turn of power that is developed while the Knight looks for women to help him answer this question. 

 While this event occurred in a mythical setting, the casual nature in which The Wife of Bath’s Tale dealt with rape can be mirrored in the handling of sex crimes occurring in thirteenth and fourteenth century Italy. Thus, punishments were kept at a minimum where a rapist would pay a fine despite the laws demanding his head during the fourteenth century in which The Canterbury Tales were written by Geoffrey Chaucer. In addition, it was said that if the rapist and his victim looked for solace in the Church, he would be granted immunity from his devious crime. After much research Guido Ruggiero claims, “rape was treated as an extension of the customary victimization of women, that is, as a fact of life that was accepted and not considered particularly troubling” especially for a woman of marriageable age (Graval, 123). 

DRAFT FIRST PARAGRAPH:

A woman, like a man, is a multifaceted individual, not capable of being neatly labeled and placed in a box as was often the custom. Women as a whole were associated with men overcome by lust and straying away from Divine reasoning . The voice given to Alyson or as she is strictly referred to as “The Wife of Bath,” is the creation of male narrator Geoffrey Chaucer, and it depicts the concept of a multidimensional woman both victimized and in possession of spiritual power, therefore this departs from the one-tonality of woman seen in Medieval texts when discussing lust and marriage. Throughout The Canterbury Tales, The Wife of Bath herself exemplifies the misogynistic views held by males when self-proclaiming her promiscuity and misusing Biblical references. However, the reader is given a female telling a tale intertwined with women holding and maintaining sacred power over their male counterparts inside the cosmic symbolism of marriage. This shift in attempting to develop female characters outside of being victims seen in poet Geoffrey Chaucer during the fourteenth century is significant to the feministic movement of the twenty-first century where objectifying women is no longer accepted, but instead met with resistance.