Jules proposal

The working title for my paper is “Malory’s Guinevere: The Role of Queen.”
In my final paper, I will be investigating how Sir Thomas Malory characterizes Queen Guinevere in his Le Morte Arthur, specifically focusing on The Tale of Sir Launcelot and Queen
Guinevere but also weaving in significant elements from later parts of the text (such as from The Death of Arthur, which will be relevant because of Arthur’s treatment of Guinevere after he must publicly address her infidelity to him, and her fate overall). Specifically, my investigation should uncover what the function of Guinevere’s role is in Malory’s writing and how much power she is depicted as having, as well as how this relates to (differs from? is informed by?) the 15th-century world that Malory was living in and the actual position of queen during this era. My purpose is to come to an understanding of why Malory chose to create Guinevere’s identity as he did; how he shows her operating as not just a woman/medieval lady, but as a queen; and what the implications of this are for how we interpret Malory’s contribution to the Arthurian canon. Some issues I am considering include how, in the “Poisoned Apple” episode of the text, we readers are given a Guinevere who has a significant (unexpected, maybe) amount of independence and political authority. Instead of whispering advice into Arthur’s ear and trying to exert her influence as queen through such indirect methods, she is making decisions more or less autonomously (critic J. L. Laynesmith points out how the role of king during the late Middle Ages was determined largely by how queenship was performed). Arthur’s presence in the court, meanwhile, is downplayed. For example, Guinevere “discharge[s]” Lancelot from the court and oversees a politically-strategic banquet to draw attention away from her affair with him (Malory 163). Later on, in the episode where Meliagaunt abducts her, Guinevere exhibits leaderly qualities. It is her knights that are loyal to her and whom she gives herself up to Meliagaunt for (“slay not my noble knights and I will go with thee” [219]). Critic Kenneth Hodges points out how key Guinevere’s “political role” is in Malory’s text and how her role as lover of Lancelot is overemphasized by readers (Hodges 55).

On the other hand, I also aim to examine how despite the independence and agency
Malory assigns to Guinevere’s character, she is also employed by him as a device that allows
Lancelot to shine. Malory invests much in Lancelot’s character, in showing him to be the most
noble and worthy knight in the world; his devotion to Guinevere is a main method of
highlighting this. So, Malory adds to Guinevere’s character traits fickleness and pettiness, which (despite her steadfast love to him) cause her to alternately dismiss and summon him. I hope to examine the difference between these opposing aspects of Guinevere’s character (powerful on one hand, while subsidiary on the other) and determine how they relate to the position of queen as it was performed in the 15th-century.

March 7- Alliterative Morte Arthure

The Death of King Arthur focuses heavily on politics/militarism/warfare, with physical combat expressed in graphic terms (“his visor and face guard and all his fine garb / were spotted and spattered with his brave blood” [2572-2573]; “steel plate and spleen were skewered on the spear. / Blood spurted and splurged as the horse about” [2061-2062], etc.). However, there are also scenes of peacefulness, which stand out in stark contrast. For example: “grazing their steeds on the grassy slopes, / lords leaning and lying on their shining shields, / and their love of birdsong brought their laughter aloft, / of the lark and the linnet and their lovely tunes… in the sun-kissed woods, / lulled by the music which murmured through the land” (2671-2677). Discuss this difference/the inclusion of both types of scenes, and what it adds to the narrative.

March 5: Alliterative Morte Arthure

In Armitrage’s translation of the Alliterative Morte Arthure, we are offered a glimpse of Arthur not just as “the knightliest creature that Christendom has known” (which is how many other texts we’ve read so far have presented him), but also as an individual human (534). In this first section, Arthur’s human side is emphasized in scenes such as him consoling Queen Guinevere (lines 693-720) as well as the two “disturbing dream[s]” (829)  he has, the first of which (lines 756-805) greatly “torment” and frighten Arthur. The poem’s title, of course, also signifies how Arthur is not just a legend/symbol, but an actual man. What, to you as a reader, do these personal elements of Arthur’s interior character add to the narrative that is perhaps absent from previous ones we’ve read? Or, interpret/discuss Arthur’s first dream as a starting point.

Feb 21: King Artus

There are several key differences between this narration of Arthur’s birth/Lancelot’s affair with Guinevere/participation in the tourney and other narrations we have read, such as those of French origin. Does anything in particular strike you about the way Lancelot is characterized in King Artus? Do you think this can be explained by cultural differences (i.e. the influence of Judaism)? Explain.

Feb 19: Saga of the Mantle

Saga of the Mantle ends on a note that almost seems to contradict the story it told, with the order: “Now let no one say anything but good about women, because it is more fitting to conceal than to reveal something, even though one may know the true state of affairs” (235). This model for behavior is followed by Karadin, the lover of the maiden whom the mantle fits perfectly. Given this encouragement of deception and the overall humorous, irreverent tone adopted by the narrator towards “purity of…maidenhood” (which make Saga of the Mantle diverge remarkably from previous texts we’ve read this semester) what do you think is the purpose of this text? Or, rather, what was the narrator trying to impart about Arthurian culture and society, and how seriously can we take this given its elements of comedy?