Joan Kelly argues that women were not able to participate in the Renaissance. Their sex barred them from practices that enabled men to become modern individuals, an essential element of the Renaissance experience. Guido Ruggiero analyzes some of Boccaccio’s stories from the Decameron to argue that women were in fact lauded for the kind of boldness and heroism that met the standard of Renaissance individuals. Analyze the stories I have assigned from Boccaccio to decide which historian makes the better claim. Do the stories better support Kelly’s assertion that women did not experience the advances of the Renaissance or Ruggiero’s assertion that women could achieve virt just as men could and could therefore claim the status of Renaissance individuals?
Analyzing the Stories:
Identify key themes and values: Pay attention to how female characters are portrayed, their actions, motivations, and the consequences they face. Consider values like:
Compare portrayals of men and women: Analyze if women are presented with opportunities to demonstrate these values compared to men. Do they face different limitations or expectations?
Consider historical context: Remember the limitations women faced in Renaissance society. How realistic is it for the stories to depict full agency and individualism?
Evaluating the Arguments:
Identify supporting evidence: Find specific examples from the stories that support each historian’s claim. Are these examples representative of the overall portrayal of women?
Consider limitations: Are there counter-examples that weaken either argument? Do the stories present a diverse range of female experiences?
Nuance and complexity: Remember that neither claim is likely to be entirely true. The stories might offer both examples of female empowerment and limitations.
By carefully analyzing the stories and considering the arguments within their historical context, you can arrive at a well-supported conclusion about which historian’s claim the stories better support.
Additional Tips: