In his general introduction to the Gawain legend, Thomas Hahn writes, "fantastic narratives can open a space for political critique; contradictions and absurdities, rather than being swallowed whole, constitute a basis upon which audiences - starting from a broad range of social positions - may formulate alternative or subversive understandings” (par 30). Hahn's insight suggests that the various manifestations of the Gawain myth--and Arthuriana in general--may not simply be tools which unequivocally support the established order. Instead, these tales often contain internal tensions which challenge the beliefs--be they chivalric, class-based, nationalistic, or otherwise--that the text seems to champion.
Out of our supplementary Gawain readings, I found "The Carle of Carlisle" particularly critical of the knightly class and its inability to practice the chivalrous behavior it promotes. This criticism becomes apparent in the tale's depictions of Sir Kay and Bishopp Bodwin. These men, through actions and words, insult their host, the Carle of Carlisle, and believe they are within their rights to do so. Sir Kay is the primary culprit in these scenarios, and his antagonism of the Carle begins before the two even meet. When Gawain, Kay, and Bodwin, lost in a borderland and separated from the court of Arthur, approach the Carle's castle, Sir Kay claims that he will take accommodations by force if necessary: "For if he jangle and make itt stout (complain and resist)/I shall beate the Carle all about" (107-8). Sir Kay, as a member of the Round Table, believes himself superior to the Carle, since the Carle lives in the wilderness and is not on friendly terms with Arthur.
After they have gained admittance to the Carle's castle, Sir Kay and Bishopp Bodwin continue to insult their host, treating him disrespectfully by roughly displacing the Carle's palfrey from its food and shelter in order to feed their own horses. The men perform these actions on separate occasions, and both times the Carle responds to their transgressions of chivalry by hitting them. But soon Gawain notices that the Carle's palfrey is outside and unfed in the rain:
[Gawain] "Sayth, stand up, fole, and eate thy meate.
Thy master payeth for all that wee heere gett."
The Carle himselfe stood thereby
And thanked him of his curtesye. (285-8)
The Carle's thanks take the form of a great feast for the men, and an immediate friendship with Gawain. This sets into motion a number of challenges meant to test Gawain's courtesy--all of which he successfully completes (though he almost fails a test with the Carle's wife). Gawain comes across as the exemplar of proper knightly behavior--an example which sharply contrasts those set by the seneschal and the Bishop.
Gawain's final test comes when the Carle commands the knight to behead him. At first, Gawain expresses reluctance, but soon consents. After the giant has lost his head, he returns to a normal size and Gawain discovers that his action has lifted a 40-year curse. The Carle explains that many other knights had visited him, and because of their lack of courtesy, they were unable to fulfill the obligations that would break the curse. These earlier knights, like Sir Kay and Bishopp Bodwin, are failed representatives of chivalry, and their poor treatment of politically disenfranchised border dwellers come across as failings of the knightly class.
"The Carle of Carlisle" reads as a text which, while negotiating questions of borders and national identity, also negotiates proper relations between the aristocratic knightly class and those without political clout. By exposing the failings of Sir Kay, Bishop Bodwin, and the numerous visiting knights extending over 40 years, the story questions aristocratic right, and calls for the ruling class to, like Gawain, abide by the courtesy and respect chivalry requires.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I absolutely agree with the idea that many of these Arthurian texts serve to criticize some aspect of noble life and not only serve to extend and strengthen the already established hierarchichal social order. They seem to present the perfection of the world of nobility, but there is usually some character within the circle of nobility that unsettles the environment in some way. One that we've mentioned in class is Sir Kay. He often serves to fulfill pedagogical purposes. For example, when he insults Percival and strikes the maiden, he is humilliated afterwards by Percival. Then, in Cligés the consequence of Cligés and Fenice's affair/scandal is that from then on all empresses are shut lest they might bring disgrace upon their lords as Fenice did.
ReplyDeleteAnd this reminds me of what Dr. Grimbert explained in her talk last week. Life in the Middle Ages was understood as social. For a person, the worst thing that could happen was to be expelled from society. With this in mind, the pedagogical use of these stories can be easily understood.
Lenny, I'm interested in your reading of "The Carle of Carlisle" in light of SIr Gawain and the Green Knight." If C of C negotiates questions of boundaries and courtly insularity, then SGGK seems to explore the same issues, but reach a different conclusion. In SSGK, the Green Knight takes it upon himself to teach Sir Gawain a lesson about the nature of chivalry in the court of Arthur. (I know that Morgan initially masterminds the Green Knight's plot, but I believe that the Green Knight usurps control of the plot for his own didactic purposes once Morgan's plan to scare Guinevere fails.) As an outsider--an "other"--the Green Knight has the benefit of estrangement. He lives separately from the insular court and therefore has critical distance or a new perspective on Arthur's knights and their chivalric code. The Green Knight uses his role as an outsider to redirect Gawain's perspective, to draw him out of the insular court and share in his critical distance. It's important that Gawain has to leave the court and travel to the "other's" home in order to gain a new perspective. Unlike the C of C, the purpose of the Green Knight's lessons are not to affirm the importance of chivalric behavior, but to expose the illusory nature of the chivalry Gawain practices, and reveal the "surfeit of pride that is rumored of the retinue of the Round Table." I think Natalia's comment about the importance of social bonds is helpful in relation to this text, as well. The Green Knight is ultimately critical of the social aspect of Arthur's court. It's too insular, or--to go back to the topic of boundaries--the court is too rigid in it's establishment and maintenance of boundaries. What's at stake is the ability to self-assess. Knights like Gawain aren't able to see the problems within their own court because their perspectives are so limited; only an outsider can see the problems. The author of SGGK seems to advocate a less insular, more inclusive court, one with less rigid boundaries that can benefit from an increased perspective.
ReplyDeleteGood discussions here on boundaries of various sorts: from the broadest of differences, national and cultural, to subtler distinctions between classes and kinds of courtesy. Taken together, these comments remind us that any one person may constitute a host of different identities when viewed from different perspectives or when operating in different contexts.
ReplyDelete