Tag Archives: love

A Negative Assemblage

Posted on by
1

Is there such a thing as a negative assemblage? In Marie de France’s Equitan, we see how the love affair between the king and his seneschal’s wife is wrong and will have terrible consequences for them in the end. Marie is clearly subverting the courtly love virtues of the time (like ones espoused in Guigemar for instance) in her cynical (rather than sincere or straightforward) presentation of the love affair.

In the courtly love tradition, love was not really love without pain and suffering. Truly loving someone could be described as fundamentally irrational, but necessary for the love to say alive. However, it is obvious that, in this story, their love is characterized by destructive tendencies. The affair literally destroys them—it is a lack of loyalty, honor, or discretion leads them toward a painful demise.

Ultimately, the message is one of reciprocity: your evil deeds will not go unpunished. At the end, she admonishes: “whoever wants to hear some sound advice/can profit from this example:/he who plans evil for another/may have that evil rebound back on him” (lines 307-310).  The “love” assemblage in this story, not only does not work, but proves to be fatal for both lovers. They committed the sin of loving too strongly, the irony being than in any other story “loving too strongly” is often viewed as a virtue.

We think of assemblages as working toward the common good, but are they all necessarily performing this function?  The affair (demonstrating the “power” of love) in Equitan does not end well for the ones involved. The resolution of the love affair suggests that something was out of balance in the first place. The king values his love over his loyalty, and in doing so, allows his passion to overwhelm his reason. Considering the primary imbalance of the assemblage, it is clear that the fate of the unfaithful couple will not end well.

The Nightingale as a Source of Love in Laustic

Posted on by
3

We talked in class yesterday about Laustic and the way in which the nightingale was simply used. First, it was used as an excuse to stand at her bedroom window, and then as a vehicle to “relate the adventure” (Line 134) to her love. More care was shown toward the samite and embroidery and casket than to the actual life of the bird. After it is killed and its dead body thrown upon her, the wife is upset, but only because her excuse is gone.
Though we talked about the way in which the nightingale misrepresented the couple because it was much more beautiful than their “convenient” love, I couldn’t help but think there must be something more to the nightingale than simply being a harbinger of symbolism. Is there significance beyond that placed upon it by the humans?
I keeping thinking there must be, firstly because of the title which literally means “the nightingale.” Is this simply in homage to the nightingale for its sacrifice as a result of their love? Even if this is the case, doesn’t that imply an inherent significance simply by its presence? Although the nightingale didn’t have a choice in the matter, it had an effect on the humans like the rocks Dorigen was so frightened of, or the deer in Guigemar. In this case, the birds (seemingly nightingales) inspire happiness (instead of fear) when they sing in the trees: “He listened to them intently / and to the lady on the other side” (Lines 66-67). He listens to the birds first, and his love second. It seems as though the nightingale is in between them, somehow connecting them. Was their love borne out of inspiration from the nightingale’s song? Once the nightingale is dead, it seems as though their love is also dead. As we pointed out in class, it doesn’t mean they can’t still see each other at least sometimes. So, why does the death of this beautiful bird mean the death of their less than beautiful love? Is it because without the bird’s song to spur them to feel love, they are not really in love?

Love is grand…

Posted on by
1

Marie de France seems to praise the grandness of love in most of her lais by depicting love as something that brings great happiness as well as great suffering. This is a characterisitic seen in most tales about courtly love. Love’s intensity exists in romantic relationships as well as platonic relationships. We see intense love between Sir Cleges and his King even after he has fallen from grace. Cleges’ love for his King demands that he still defend the right and justice in the name of his King in order for the kingdom to represent these moral rights. In class we discussed how the love seen in Laustic is somewhat bland because the lovers have no real barrier between them and their love is orientated towards the physical rather than the abstract idea of love as something beyond the physical. While we discussed the lack of love between the lovers there also seems to be a lack of love between two men of the same court as well as a lack of love for the beautiful. The absence of the love between noble neighbors and of beauty is unusual when compared to other lais.

These two noblemen live as neighbors and are favored by the same king but little is said of their relationship and it could probably assumed that their relationship hardly exists since one of the neighbors is so content to have an affair with his fellow nobleman’s wife. Although, throughout the lais we see several affairs of married individuals we see fee in which a knight or nobleman of one kingdom has a relationship with a fellow knight or nobleman’s wife. Most of the affairs occur far from their home kingdom. In other lais their have been great love between neighbors and fellow individuals with noble blood. For example in Le Fresne by Marie de France  the two neighbors have such a close bond that when one of them has twin sons he basically names his neighbor as his son’s godfather. There is no such strong bond of friendship and love seen in Laustic.

Love between romantic lovers and friends is clearly diminished of status in this text but there is also a lack of appreciation and love for beauty. Beauty is embraced and revered in many of the lais. In Milun this beauty is seen in the swan that the lovers use to exchange letters. The beauty of the nightingale is destroyed in this text when the wife uses it as a way to fulfill her need for an explanation. This in itself is crime against the beauty of the nightingale.

 

The Transcendent Power of Love in “Eliduc”

Posted on by
1

What is the significance of the weasel scene in Marie de France’s Eliduc? Eliduc’s complicated love life comes to a head when his wife finds out about his affair with another woman. Surprisingly, her reaction is one of acceptance rather than anger. In fact, she goes so far as to bring his love back to life in an imitation of how the weasel brought his companion to life with the red flower.

It is significant that the weasels exemplify love’s power in this scene—its power to heal or destroy. In resituating its mate, the weasel also embodies the importance of loyalty or fidelity in the relationships between Eliduc and the two women. It is interesting that weasels would be used as the medium to express the ways in which love can overcome potential pettiness or jealousy and even death itself. The weasels’ love is not inferior; the love between the two weasels is analogous to the love between the two humans.

The wife’s reaction (i.e. to imitate their actions rather than dismiss them) shows how love transcends the divide between human and nonhuman. The exhibition of loving traits, even in the bodies of animals, does not alter the meaning of love itself but reaffirms the power of love to transcend body, space, and time. There are certainly different forms of love (and a ‘divine’ love may indeed be more important than an earthly one), but the fact remains: the weasels show how, in at least one respect, animal behavior mirrors its human counterparts.

The weasels may be important in and of themselves but, in renewing life through an act of love, they almost rise above the animal body itself—that kind of power is no respecter of artificial bodily boundaries. In portraying the scene as charming rather than ridiculous, the story illustrates the agency of love and the implied agency of the nonhuman actants as well.

Love over lies

Posted on by
1

Eliduc, Emaré and Milun all depict the idea that those who respect love tell the truth, and that this act can only result in a positive outcome for those involved. With this in mind, the logical step would be to represent lies as something which can only bring about pain and suffering. Instead, the authors of these texts demonstrate that though dishonesty possesses destructive capabilities, it cannot overcome the superior agency of love, and only temporarily hinder its inevitable ascent.

In Emaré, the king’s mother shows a selfish disregard for the principles of love, simply because she gives in to her own internal speculations. She uses her power over the messenger to change the agency of the letters entirely, thus separating the two lovers. The fact that the king, on receiving the deceitfully-written letter, instructs his staff to treat his wife well should show his mother the strength of his love. By replacing the second letter, she shows that she has completely failed to understand love, and though her treachery only delays the happy climax, she is brutally punished for this.

The female protagonist in Milun also mistreats love, albeit in a less vicious way. Her need to actively keep anyone from knowing about her lover and their son, which stems from her initial decision to keep her relationship with Milun secret, results in heartache. Though again, lies only slow down love’s progress, the family must suffer through over twenty years apart from each other, and ultimately risk death, in order to be reunited. This text demonstrates that love, though a powerful actant, must be respected with the truth in order to benefit other actants. Guildeluec portrays this principle perfectly in Eliduc, by using the truth to selflessly calm the fears of her husband’s lover, thus carving out a happy, loving future for them all.

In the assemblages of these tales, love is an incredibly potent force, which at times even explicitly imposes itself on other actants: “Love sent her a message, / commanding her to love him”. So-called ‘blocking characters’ can briefly block love’s path with lies, but the end result is always one of happiness for those who have learned to treasure love.

Love’s Agency in Marie de France’s “Eliduc”

Posted on by
3

For this week’s blog I would like to focus on the agency of love in Eliduc.  The characters of Eliduc and Guilliadun seem kind of helpless to its powers don’t they?  At one point, “love [even] sen[ds] [Guilliadun] a message, / commanding her to love [Eliduc] / that ma[kes] her go pale and sigh” (304-6).  Love has a lot of agency in these lines.  It commands Guilliadun to love Eliduc.  Instead of recognizing herself that she has feelings for Eliduc that respond to his character, she instead attributes it all to love as if she has no part in it whatsoever.  At first, the effects of this love sound pretty terrible:  Guilliadun can’t sleep at night (331-2), her heart is “assaulted” (387), and she is “in grief” (391).  The reader really gets the idea that if love does not get its way here Guilliadun is pretty much doomed and “never in [her] life shall [she] have any joy” (400).

The agency of love is pretty far-reaching because Eliduc feels it too.  He begins to feel distress from the time he sees her (459), and has “no joy or pleasure / except when he th[inks] of her” (460-1).  Though he wants to stay faithful to his wife he literally cannot “keep himself / from loving [Guilliadun]” (467-8).  I would like to take the opportunity here to point out the vibrant materiality of love in this lai.  Not all love is the same here.  The love Eliduc feels for his wife is not the same love that he feels for Guilliadun.  It is almost like it is two different forces just like no two hammers are exactly the same nor do they possess the same agency.

The chapel scene

Then, there is the scene in the chapel with the weasels when an act of love brings the female weasel back to life (1038-53).  Not only is love capable of destruction when it doesn’t get its way, it is also a lifesaver.  It takes many different forms in this lai, but I don’t think that it is one love “thing” that is morphing to suit every character’s needs.  I really imagine a few different “loves” each with their own agency and agenda just like there are different characters in the lai.

Deliberate and Unacknowledged Assemblages in “Les Deus Amanz”

Posted on by
1
Neustria

As I was reading Les Deus Amanz I noticed two assemblages in particular.  The first one I took notice of because of Jeffrey Cohen’s visit when he pointed out all the assemblages we had all put together on our desks.  So when I got to the part that describes all that the young man puts together to journey to see his mistress’s aunt the assemblage was pretty obvious.  I’d like to discuss this assemblage in two parts:  the deliberate assemblage and the unacknowledged assemblage.  By deliberate I mean the items that the young man deliberate gathers to take with him on his journey:  “rich clothes, money, / palfreys and pack mules; / only the most trustworthy of his men” (122-5), and the letter from his mistress (129).  This young man thought that these were the items that would aid him most on his journey and deemed them necessary.  However, the lai does not go into detail about how these things effect his journey so it is hard to say how agency is spread out among this assemblage.  However, we do know that the letter has great agency in aiding him in acquiring the potion (130-4).

However, the young man does not realize there would be a number of other things accompanying him on his journey—this is the unacknowledged or unanticipated assemblage.  This assemblage consists of all of the things that I have previously mentioned along with the advice of his mistress (118), the idea of retrieving the medicine (117), the king’s sadness (28) that makes a journey up a mountain requiring a strength potion necessary, and the years of his life in term of age that have not yet provided him with the title of adult leading the king to scoff at him (109-2).  All of these things (and more, I am sure) are all acting upon the young man and his situation.  Yet unlike the items that the young man deliberately collects to bring with him not all of these agents will aid him.

The same kinds of assemblages are present when the young man prepares himself to journey up the mountain—the second assemblage that stood out to me in the lai.  The deliberate: the mistress (174), the chemise the mistress wears (173), the small phial (175), and the potion (175).  The unacknowledged:  the mistress’s desire (166), the crowd who would distract the young man (193), and the young man’s lack of control (179) that results in the couple’s demise (203-27).  I would say that the young man’s lack of control is the agent with the most power here because it ends both of their lives.  If the lack of control had not been present perhaps the young man would have taken the potion and that would have had the most agency.

“Two Lovers Illustration” by Yoon.Ji Kim.  This is an interesting comic interpretation that I found online (clicking the picture should lead you to a larger version).  It didn’t occur to me that the mistress may have been overweight and needed to fast because of it.  I just thought the journey was tumultuous and long so she wanted to be as light as possible.  

Le Lai de Horse

Posted on by
Reply
Pictured here:  Lanval and the horse

After reading Dr. Seaman’s Preview of Week 6 I contemplated comparing the generous figures of Cleges and Lanval, but while actually reading Lanval I thought that I would like to discuss another actant of the story:  the horses.  You may be laughing now, but Lanval’s horse is mentioned several times and if you think about it, what is a knight without his horse?  Essentially, this horse is as much a part of Lanval’s identity as a knight as his armor is, but I want to talk about this horse as its own, separate actant.

The reader is first introduced to Lanval’s horse in line 41 when Lanval has decided to go “amuse himself” (42).  Consider how this story would have changed if the horse failed to move.  Would Lanval have ever met his love?  Let me put it another way, what if your car fails to start the morning of one of the most important days of your life?  What I am suggesting through the studies that we have been doing these previous weeks is that the horse’s movement forward is an exhibition of its agency.  It could have remained immobile as some stubborn horses often do, and just like your car it would no longer be just a horse, but now a lousy horse who has not performed the duties that humans have assigned to it.

Continuing, once Lanval arrives at his destination the horse “tremble[s] badly” (46) yet remains “around the meadow” (48).  Here again this horse could have very well raced away because it senses some trouble, but stays.  Once more, how would this story have been different if Lanval’s loyal steed evacuated the premises? In fact, Lanval even deserts his horse “giving no thought to” it (77-8) until it was time to leave (190-1).  [Note:  I realize that using "it" objectifies the horse even further, but without a name or gender I am limited in my representation.]  Perhaps I am reaching here, but by bringing all matter in this story to that horizontal plane, the horse plays a pivotal role in this story when viewed as having more agency than one would normally assign to it.

Conditional Love and Confessions

Posted on by
Reply

I enjoyed reading Le Fresne overall, but I had some lingering issues with the way some characters behaved. The first issue I had was the way the wife had seemingly no consequences for her actions. As Dr. Seaman pointed out, she wanted to first kill Fresne and didn’t choose a different option out of the goodness of her heart or out of recognition that it would be wrong, but only because others came up with a better solution. She does confess her wrong doings at the end of the story, but only after she has secured forgiveness from her husband. Max brought this up in class and it was something that had been bothering me also. What if she had not been granted forgiveness up front? Would she have confessed to her husband, or was her confession contingent on the assurance she would have no consequences?
Gurun was also problematic for me. In his attempt to convince Fresne to run away with him, he promised “I’ll never let you down and I’ll take good care of you” (Lines 287-288). But once his vassals convinced him it was necessary for him to marry a girl of nobility, “Fresne was hidden away, and her lover was to marry the other” (Lines 349-350). As Dr. Seaman pointed out in class, he goes so far as to “joyfully” say he had never seen a “fairer maiden” in the middle English version beginning in line 345. Now, I understand it is part of a knightly duty to take care of his men, but does that mean that his promises to his true love are to be “hidden away” with no further investigation into the possibilities that might allow them to stay with each other? The ring and cloth she had with her were part of her identity and obviously recognizable. They were certainly indicators of her noble background. Why would her true love not take these items around the surrounding areas and ask if anyone recognized them as a way to find out where she really came from? He seemed unwilling to take any action to prevent marrying another girl.
As forgiveness and knightly love were not the central themes of this story, I wonder if the reader is supposed to look past the actions of these two characters?

Obedience, and its inevitable benefits

Posted on by
1

Marie de France’s Le Fresne emphasises the importance of being obedient to your master and those who you love. The rewards for carrying out your duty are great, and those such as Fresne’s mother who fail to act in a proper manner are punished, at least until they repent. Unwavering obedience is Fresne’s most obvious characteristic and is also considered her noblest by the author, who places significance on her protagonist’s refusal to complain: “her lover was to marry the other. / When she found out that he had done this, / she didn’t sulk about it; / she continued to serve her lord well”. Though this may be perceived as a weak, passive reaction, de France depicts the act as defiant, for Fresne maintains her moral, kindly approach to life even when hurt. This behaviour benefits her greatly, not in the short-term, as with her mother’s horrendous act of abandonment, but in the long-term, as she eventually gains a family and a husband.

Love can be seen as the determining catalyst behind Fresne’s caring nature, but de France highlights that a sense of subordinance can also motivate obedience. The knight’s consent to his vassals’ wishes to marry another woman is an inescapable act, for he is governed by higher principles which he cannot conceive of breaking from. This dutiful attitude has advantageous consequences for the knight, and he emerges from this text with the woman he truly loves.

However, the vassals, though obedient to the moral code of the land, go against their master’s desire to marry Fresne, and yet the climax sees them benefit with everyone else. Even though their plan went awry, the knight still weds a noblewoman with the ability to conceive. Therefore, the scheme of the knight’s vassals to ensure that there would be an heir to protect them after his death is rewarded, despite its intrinsically selfish nature. This is contradictory to de France’s message of altruism, but perhaps displays the idea that if one person is constantly obedient, then everyone profits.