Hi, guys! Sorry if everyone's already over the rape discussion(s); I always have Arthurian thoughts on Tuesdays but am unable to record them until the following weekend, by which time the moment has passed. However-- since I believe the topics of women and sex will continue to be pertinent, esp. with the Morte d'Arthur, which I have never read but know by reputation-- I'll go ahead and belatedly submit my ideas about medieval conceptions of women, sex and rape. In this giant post.
On Monday, Natalia discussed the medieval litigation of rape, and many of us were startled by the mildness and leniency there, since the ethics of the age so espoused chivalry and protection of maidens. But here's my thought:
It may have been then (as it was recently and continues to be in many places) the prevalent attitude that libido is the realm of men; ie, a normal woman does not really ever want to have sex, though she will deign to (1) out of tender feeling for the man she loves (Enide) and/or (2) if proper etiquette is observed (Olwen). If such is true, then the contrast between marital sex and rape is merely one of magnitude, a question of stewardship and politeness. Not as we would (hopefully) understand it: the stark contrast between love and misogyny, between friendliness and violence.
We could argue that the female characters who do exhibit sexual desire are masculinized in the sense that they are "bad guys;" they break the contract of femininity that prevents them from suffering the fates of bad guys, such as with Queen Eufeme, who, as is drawn and quartered. (Guinevere, of course, is problematic, esp. as our Arthurian lusty lady exemplar.)
Here are some disjointed textual items:
1. Maybe it's a weird example because she's a fairy, but Sir Lanval's lady-love in Marie de France's Lais of Lanval is the most sexually-liberated "good guy" we've seen, and even she seems to bequeath her body to Sir Lanval rather than to partake of his.
"When the girl heard these words from the man who loved her so, she granted him her love and her body.... He experienced great joy and pleasure, for day or night he could see his beloved often and she was entirely at his command." (74-75)
I find the fairy lady most significant because the power dynamic between her and Lanval is so atypical (while her body is at Lanval's disposal, she has the agency to shut down the exchange; she rescues him at the end; they ride off into the sunset on her horse) and yet she is still demure, not libidinal.
2. Chretien de Troyes's Eric and Enide, after a lengthy description of the sweetness between Eric and Enide on their wedding night: "The love between the two of them made the maiden more bold: she was not afraid of anything; she endured all, whatever the cost." (63) Che romantico!
3. A general paucity of happily-married characters-- (Eufemie and Cador in Silence are, I think, a significant departure on that front.) -- and, more importantly, a general paucity of happily-married parents. (You can have happy lovers, and they can get married; but if they have children, that means they're having sex, which somehow clashes with the idea of them as happy lovers.) Our primary heroes:
Arthur -- bastard son of duplicitous date-rape interlude
Galahad -- bastard son of duplicitous date-rape interlude
Perceval -- father killed; raised by mother in the woods
Lancelot -- father killed (by his own people); raised by fairies (and mermen)
Even Gawain, I think, in some traditions is illegitimate?
4. Despite its cavalier instances or mentions of rape, Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival seems to offer exceptions to the alibidinal female:
"A question. Would they celebrate their nuptials? He and the Queen answered 'Yes'. He lay with such restraint as would not suit many women nowadays, were they so treated." (110)
"The king trimmed him in his body to such effect that he is unserviceable to any woman today for her sport." (329)
"There was a lady ruled her lands, perfect in her integrity.... Human cravings found no expression in her." (409) [A contrast with normative, ie libidinal, femininity?]
Procreative, domestic bliss of Condwiramurs and Parzival.
5. What to make of the ... enigmatic role of Lady Bertilak in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight? Lynn Arner's, uh, tangential reading of her as an ungracious hostess aside, how do we understand the sexuality of the noblewoman who Gawain senses "has more insight and skill // in the art [of love] than [he], or even a hundred // of the likes of [Gawain], however long [they] live" (123); who courts Gawain for his "kindness, courtesy and exquisite looks" (105); but who is actually performing lust at the behest of her husband, who is choreographing all this at the behest of Morgan Le Fay?
She says:
"I come to learn of love and more,
a lady all alone.
Perform for me before
my husband heads for home." (123)
and furthermore, some world-building:
"But what lady in this land wouldn't latch the door,
wouldn't rather hold you as I do here...
forgetting all grief and engaging in joy..." (105)
All this is performance, we learn, and yet the poem's narration exposits:
"Love would not let her ladyship sleep
and the fervor she felt in her heart would not fade." (136-37)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Erin... first off, I never tire of this rape talk. Just kidding... except not 'cause it's lit crit gold!
ReplyDeleteAs to number 3... I think what it means is everyone is a bastard.
But really. We talked about this a little bit with Silence because of her whole legitimacy argument with Merlin, but what does it mean when all of your hero's come from creepy relations? Is it tying Arthur in as a Christ figure (most are at best subconsciously uncomfortable with the Zeus like fathering), does it make them more human, or does it show that you simply cannot have the chivalric ideal of a holy romance. Will it always get dirty with consequences down the road being disastrous, usually for a whole kingdom? Maybe it's all of the above and more, but if it's the latter then I'd say the text is working against itself in magnificent ways. Just like with the confusion about Lady Bertilak (great name btw): she loves him genuinely, she is ingenuously attempting to seduce him to please her husband (awkward) who is doing this to please another woman.
The text continually loops back in on itself in all questions of sexual legitimacy because it cannot possibly uphold the cultural ideal and the reality. Without magical intervention, we're all screwed.... literally.
I like how you put it, Hannah, that the text continually loops back in on itself in all questions of sexual legitimacy. Interestingly, in Le Mort D'Arthur, Malory tries to half-legitimize Arthur by having Duke Gorlois die hours before Uther and Igraine conceive Arthur. Even if Arthur isn't completely legitimate — he's technically a bastard — at least he wasn't conceived through an act of adultery. I wonder what significance this has and why Malory was attempting to make this distinction, hobbled as he was by the requirement that Uther inseminate Igraine before they got hitched.
ReplyDeleteAnother element of legitimization to think about is how some of the texts we've read try to exempt sons from bearing the guilt or weight of their fathers' actions. Sons tend to be purer than their fathers, and various authors try to point out that their bastard or questionable statuses bear no relation to their deeds ... or do they? While Galahad is pure of heart and can do no wrong, Arthur sure screws up once in a while (sleeping with his sister, natch). Are medieval authors trying to suggest that legitimate birth should have no bearing on any consideration of whether the offspring deserves an equal shot at respect?
Lastly, I do like how Hannah points out the loop involving Lady Bertilak, her husband and Morgan le Fay. I read SGGK as a text in which Morgan le Fay is a puppetmaster, and Lady Bertilak is a physical manifestation of her trials. Lady Bertilak is not so much a sexual being, as Morgan le Fay USES her sexuality to attempt to manipulate Gawain into immorality, and by extension test King Arthur. It may be cynical to point this out, but it's interesting how one woman uses another's sexuality in this way rather than just doing it herself, or the sexualized Lady Bertilak acting on her own agency.
I think, but I'm not positive, we may have just turned Morgan le Fay into a pimp... Just kidding! Sort of...
ReplyDeleteWe do occasionally see knightly parents who seem more-or-less well-adjusted, with healthy children; they're just not the main characters of our texts. Instead they're secondary characters like the knight of Ascolat with his two knightly sons (including Lavayne, who joins the Round Table) and his doomed daughter Elaine. And Elaine of Ascolat is an interesting last case to add to your list of the problematics of female sexuality. By no means is she evil, but she is another woman who dies on account of her erotic desires. It makes me wonder how many women's deaths Lancelot is responsible for by his very unattainability (let's not forget the dismal case of Lady Hallewes, who would have embalmed him if he could and seems to have gone suicidally crazy without him!).
ReplyDelete