The Disenchantments of Love I

I felt that I had read the story of Isabel/Zelima before, but I couldn't remember where. While I was captivated by the story I found myself getting frustrated with Isabel for making the same mistakes over and over again. The Code of Honor that she values so highly seems to make things worse for her. It is because of her "honor" that she pursues don Manuel after he has left Zaragoza (or so she claims). Even after he has lied to her and betrayed her so many times, she follows him with the intention of reclaiming him as her lover. How can she truly believe that he will be reformed? But then she also claims that she is pursuing him to seek vengeance. She tells Luis that he should not kill don Manuel because "even though don Manuel is treacherous and false, my life depends on his. I must regain my lost honor...". I don't understand her logic.
However she does seem at times to be aware of her own foolishness, saying that when don Manuel pacifies her she is pleased but does not entirely believe him. Yet she still allows herself to be deceived.

She seems to control most situations but how she uses this power/talent is unfortunate because it only causes her further misery. At the end she finally decides to go to a convent and take God on as a husband. While I cannot say I would do the same thing, I don't understand why she didn't do this in the first place, if this were the only way to preserve her honor.

Her goal by telling the story is to warn women against trusting men and trusting flattery. Which I think she makes more than apparent with the numerous times she falls for don Manuel's lies. "Woe be to all ill-advised and credulous women who let themselves be overcome by lies so well adorned that their glitter lasts only as long as does the appetite!"

As far as this work being considered anti-feminist or 'poor feminism' I don't think that this is the case. I think that the story shows how women can be manipulated by men because of their lower social status due to sexist society. What might make the story seem anti-feminist is how Isabel fits into the stereotype of an overly emotional, unreasonable woman. At the beginning she has the reason and respect of a man but when she starts doing ridiculous things to pursue a man who has already proven himself to be "evil", she discredits herself and her sex.

All this being said, love makes people do stupid things, especially forgiving those who they love for any and all transgressions.

Christine de Pizan: The City of Ladies II

Christine de Pizan speaks through the voices of her characters to negate the argument of male writers who make claims about women that are entirely unfounded.
Reason, Rectitude and Justice (all female characters) give their opinions about the nature of women and explain why the prejudices against them created by men are incorrect.
As far as I am concerned, reason is the highest virtue and most valuable trait for a human (man or woman) to have. Reason disproves all else. Lady Reason tells Christine that what she has read written by men is in accurate, "...I can assure you that these attacks on all women-when in fact there are so many excellent women-- have never originated with me, Reason."
As a means of validating herself as a writer, Christine de Pizan uses examples of women who exhibit traits which men insist they do not have, women who act in ways that shows how ridiculous the claims made against women are. The examples she uses from history span over different time periods and countries, showing that women everywhere have proven themselves to be equal to if not superior to men.
Possibly her most useful tool is the Bible, and Chistine de Pizan uses it to her advantage. By giving examples from the Bible, she makes it very difficult for anyone to dispute her words because they would not want to sound like they were saying anything that might be remotely construed as negative or contradictory to the Bible.

Christine de Pizan: The City of Ladies I

I think that the interruption by her mother in the prologue is a means for Christine de Pizan to reveal a little bit about herself to the reader. Because she lives at home with her mother we can assume certain things. I originally wanted to say that it could indicate her youth but given the time period it wouldn't be uncommon for a grown woman to be living with her mother, however it would indicate that she is unmarried. This would be an important factor that would effect her writing because as a single woman she would naturally have very different views of marriage and marital relations than a married woman.

Christine de Pizan's apparent gullibility in the prologue does not reflect her true beliefs about the nature of women. She is writing satirically in response to the countless male writers who condemn women as being inferior and believe "that the behavior of women is inclined to and full of every vice". She mocks them by pretending that she shares these beliefs. She claims to have been persuaded that they are correct because it seems that all the writings she comes across are in agreement about the evil nature of women. This tactic is effective because even as she is agreeing with the anti-feminist writings she is disproving them. It is not expected that a woman would be as clever and subtle in her writing as de Pizan is.
Just in case the reader is missing the irony, de Pizan points out her own use of satire through the voice of the women who come to visit her. One asks her why she puts such faith in the words of men who "spoke on many subjects in a fictional way and that often they mean the contrary of what their words openly say", which is exactly what de Pizan herself is doing.