Since the social climate in Western culture in the fifteenth
century was such that women did not necessarily have freedom of publicly voicing opinion on political
topics, Christine De Pizan was in a particularly useful position to communicate
that quiet, unspoken voice that did exist. “The Treasure of the City of Ladies”
targeted women as her audience; however, her instruction might also be a
commentary on political undertakings of the time. On the surface, she “[spoke]
directly to women,” it is fitting that the entire piece can, “just as well
apply to men” (549). The men in question are those in positions of power.
The rhertoric she employs insists that women of all social
classes can benefit from her instruction, while hiding (and not discretely) commentary
on political topics, such as war and internal political dealings between men of
power. For example, she speaks directly to “[a]ny prince” when she makes an
ethical charge that he “ought to avoid… the spilling of blood, especially that
of his own subjects” (547). The “ethical charge” is set off with use of the verb
phrase “ought to avoid” where the word ought
is a keyword associated with morality. By using ought, instead of should,
or might consider or any other
suggestive verbiage, her demand becomes accusatory to any prince desiring war,
whatever the situation.
Another rhetorical effect, perhaps as a gift to the quite
feminine voice of the time, is that within the text of “The Treasure of the
City of Ladies”, Pizan generally associates negative political action with men
and positive political action with women. For example, she jumps into Augustine’s
grand voice in praise of “how many great blessings in the world have often been
caused by queens and princesses making peace between enemies, between prince
and barons, and between the rebellious people and their lords” (547). Divided
in half, this sentence opens with worldwide blessings associated directly with
women. The second half lists men and conflict together. Though subtle, this
seems to be a theme.
While I agree that de Pizan's social commentaries are in there, I don't know if I would exactly call them as subtle as you would. I think that it is pretty blatant that she sees women as a very powerful force, especially towards men, and she deliberately sets up active-agression with men and passive-peace with women in order to show that. It's interesting also to consider who is actually reading this text, however; in Medieval France - would a man even pick it up?
ReplyDeleteI ask that because I feel like either France is very liberal at this time and doesn't mind de Pizan speaking in a feminist manner or rather no man thought it was important to read about how a woman thought that the ladies of the court should conduct themselves. So de Pizan can slip in her social commentary because there isn't any harm of any man reading it. Or it is more subtle, like you are saying.
It's her subtlety that I really admire - probably because I'm not always a subtle person. She appears to have had a real gift for commenting on issues or virtues of the time, while allowing underlying ideas to creep into her writing in a way that would be socially accepted in her era. I think it's brilliant.
ReplyDelete