On reading Lanval, I was struck by the ambiguous power relationships that exist in this text between the male and female characters, especially between Lanval and his nameless beloved. Throughout the story, dominance appears to shift from Lanval to his beloved and interestingly, the shifts appear to correlate with the shift between private and public spaces. During private moments, Lanval appears to be the dominant member of the relationship, as Marie de France tells us, “[Lanval] experienced great joy and pleasure, for day or night he could see his beloved often and she was entirely at his command”(75). Apparently, despite the fact that his beloved initially seeks him out, and despite the fact that the beloved demands a vow of silence, Lanval controls the time and frequency of private meetings. Moreover, Lanval’s “commands” most certainly carry a sexual connotation, suggesting that Lanval’s dominance primarily extends to sexual relations between the two.
The female beloved, however, appears to exercise dominance in the public arena. Marie de France tells us that the beloved’s own all-female court outshines Arthur’s in splendor and wealth: “They led him to the tent, which was so beautiful and well-appointed that neither Queen Semiramis at the height of her wealth, power and knowledge, nor the Emperor Octavian, could have afforded even the right-hand side of it…There is no king under the sun who could afford it, however much he might give”(74). (Side note: I think the notion of a gynocentric court is fascinating and deserves more attention). In addition to the beloved’s dominant surroundings, it is of course the beloved who has the power to save Lanval. By coming forth to display her beauty and to speak on the knight’s behalf, the beloved gains Lanval’s freedom: “They sent word to the knight and informed him that he should send for his beloved to defend and protect him”(79, emphasis mine). Interestingly, the female beloved takes up the traditional role of the masculine knight in order to save her lover, and in the final scene we read that Lanval takes a seat “behind” his beloved as she leads him out of the city on her palfrey.
While I think it would be a mistake to consider Lanval some type of proto feminist text (after all, the women are merely valued for their physical beauty, and the couple’s retreat into solitude suggests that Lanval will once again “command” in the private sphere), the relationship between Lanval and his beloved complicates our notion of Arthurian gender politics, and expands our notion of what was considered “male” and what was considered “female” in the early Arthurian tradition. I’d be interested to hear other’s options on the topic. Perhaps, the fact that Lanval’s beloved is a queen of some sort allows her to act both as subordinate lover and dominant ruler without contradiction? Thoughts?
I'm interested in the idea of gender politics within Arthuriana as well. I think you bring up some extremely valuable points concerning the "public" versus "private" relationships. To go even a little further take a look at the role of the Queen and Arthur. She's uses Arthur's emotions to play in her favor, not his. When we begin Le Morte Darthur it will become even more apparent. I think this is something we should definitely discuss further in class.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Amanda.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with the majority of your points, I don't think that the power relationship between Lanval and his Beloved is ambiguous. In fact, the power Lanval's Beloved holds over him seems pretty well defined. You mention that Lanval "controls the time and frequency of [their] private meetings." However, the “power” he holds only exists within the realm of the greater power held by his Beloved. She ultimately decides the parameters of their relationship—both publicly and privately—and creates rules for him to follow. Regardless of context, the "power" Lanval enjoys is contingent upon his respect toward the verbal contract which she has authored.
I really like your point regarding how Lanval's Beloved assumes the role of masculine knight. She seems to embody certain chivalric ideals which the other two main male characters—Lanval and Arthur—are unable or unwilling to display. Unlike Arthur, she comes across as compassionate and judicious, while he seems hot-tempered and eager to condemn. And with regard to courtly generosity, she fills a material lack in Lanval's life which Arthur, in his ignorance or indifference, has not attended to. As a result, Lanval himself comes to embody the courtly ideal:
"There was no knight in the town in sore need of shelter whom he did not summon and serve richly and well. Lanval gave costly gifts, Lanval freed prisoners, Lanval clothed the jongleurs, Lanval performed many honorable acts" (75).
Lanval, once unable to provide for himself, much less for others, now has the ability to give gifts to those in need. Because of this generosity, Lanval's standing in court improves, and he gains powerful friends in Ywain and Gawain. Instead of being looked over or disregarded out of jealousy, Lanval has finally made it. (Yay!) Yet his generous acts are only extensions of the generosity of his Beloved. It is she who empowers him with the materials needed to basically buy his honorable status. And she is arguably responsible for the good works performed within Arthur’s court, for which Lanval only acts as conduit. Through her protection, generosity, and wisdom, Lanval’s Beloved does indeed come across as a paragon of courtliness and knighthood.
PS
There is one glaring fact of the Lai which complicates this claim of the Beloved’s “all powerful-ness.” That is the fact the she is consistently identified as Lanval’s--in terms of her relationship to him/ownership by him. Even so, she seems to be the one wearing the pants, or at least Medieval Breton equivalent: the white tunic and shift of authority.
A wonderful analysis, Amanda. I agree with you, Erin and Lenny. The beloved definitely does wear the pants. It reminds me though of a reversal of courtly love values depicted in Chaucer's "The Franklin's Tale," in which the knight tells his lady that she is his lady and his love and he is hers to command or have "sovereignity" over as long as she will allow him to have the upper hand in the public sphere. She must keep his honor. However, if one looks at other Arthurian Romances (which I will talk more of later), it appears that women do have a great deal of power over the knights. What about the reference in Monmouth to the flirtatious ladies in Arthur's plenary court who egg on the knights?
ReplyDelete