One of the most notable and unforgettable characters of medieval literature is Wife of Bath, a pilgrim on the journey from Southwark to Canterbury in Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales (CT). Chaucer includes and exploits individuals from all walks of medieval society; he uses irony and satire in varying types of narratives to show the problematic components of virtually each pilgrim. Unfortunately Chaucer delegated only two of his tales to be told by women-the tales of Wife of Bath and the Prioress. Women characters are included, and quite frequently, as characters in the tales the pilgrims themselves "tell." The portrayal of these women becomes quite an intriguing issue for feminist literary critics, but in a piece of literature this old it at the same time makes our judgements somewhat more speculative.
             So how should a twenty- first century feminist accurately and fairly asses the writing of Chaucer, a fourteenth century writer who has been labeled a social satirist? This question has no easy answer, and even intra-disciplinarily, feminist literary critics would debate Chaucer's use and abuse of his female characters (the Wife of Bath in particular). To some critics, like Carolyn Dinshaw, Chaucer was protofeminist, a writer ahead of time who used the medium of literature to speak out against the injustices the opposite gender suffered. But then there are others, like myself, who believe this is a hopeful, yet unlikely representation of the "Father of English Poetry" and that Chaucer was fundamentally a writer and product of the misogynistic times in which he lived. This feminist reading of Chaucer seeks to prove (through the means of historical information and studying the stereotyping and satire with other pilgrims) that Chaucer's Wife of Bath represents not Chaucer's act of feminism, but his alignment with her as the medieval stereotype of "La Vieilla," the old greedy sexually overbearing woman. But before we del...