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?
Tag Archives: nightingale
Love is grand…
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.
Cohen’s View of Laustic
Jeffery Cohen’s lecture, in class yesterday, was such an incredible experience. I was very surprised at hearing how in-depth, important, and emotional the field of “thing theory” can be. However, of all the topics discussed during yesterday’s lecture, the one discussion that captivated me was the analysis of Laüstic, which seemed to fully embody what we have been covering, in this course.
I was intrigued about what Dr. Cohen said about things being forced into new forms against their will. In this case, I thought it was interesting how we saw the nightingale’s own vibrance being suppressed by it dying, and also, I was moved by what Dr. Cohen said about the idea of ethical concerns with forcing this dead creature into becoming a piece a vibrant matter, according to the wishes of its human murderers. Such a view of the nightingale seemed to truly shed light on what Bennett has been saying all along in Vibrant Matter, and that is, we need to garner a more ecological and ethical view on our treatment of things.
Although the nightingale’s death does seem to evoke a kind of sadness and contempt for those who reshaped its vibrance, I would argue that its beauty is still preserved and carries on. When we think about how the nightingale was, in essence, at the wrong place at the wrong time, the very act of turning it into something of a saintly idol seems to evoke a sense of respect and reverence for a being that would have otherwise been discarded and forgotten about. However, by becoming a symbol of the two adulterous lovers, it seems that its vitality is increased and even saved from a short appearance in the story of forbidden love.
Therefore, I would agree with Cohen’s assertion that we should have an ethical concern for something that has had life its life, or vitality, taken from it, but I would say that in the case of Laüstic, something far more beautiful emerges through the act of reshaping a material’s vibrance.