I had to read Lanval for English Literature tonight.
I confess to being a little confused as to some of the inner workings of this story.
Chiefly, Lanval's girl admonishes him not to divulge her existence nor their relationship with her warning that "you would lose me for good / if this lover were known; / you would never see me again / or possess my body." (30, for lack of true line numbers, I'll use the predefined paragraphs instead). But as we find out at the end of this poem, we know this is not the case, but rather that he does reclaim her love, and by extension her body as well.
This poses the question, in my mind: since he begs and begs her to return and she doesn't, is it only the status of the accuser that prompts her to return? In other words, were it not for the queen's accusal, and the subsequent 'investigation' by King Arthur, would his girl ever have returned to him? It is, after all, the two girls he had met earlier--who he also denies knowing twice later on--that precede Lanval's girl, and foretell of her approaching.
As I begin to work with this poem, it begins to seem clearer that the chief component to this story is the nature of wrongdoing and forgiveness, especially as it pertains to honor. When Lanval broke his promise to his girl, it was the second response to the queen: the first out of propriety, and the second as a redress for her insult to him. In defending his own honor, Lanval makes the mistake of boasting about his love—breaking his promise in the process—but also making the mistake of his hasty, improper retort. I find it curious, then, to see that, no matter how insulting his response to the queen may be, ultimately the burden lies on whether or not his statement is in fact true; that his love is indeed the most beautiful of all.
But Lanval denies dishonoring or shaming his lord (75), and so, in retaining deep love and honor for his girl, maintains his position that she is fairer in beauty than the queen. That the court would still let the trial proceed is curious to me, especially as I’m not too familiar with medieval texts. I expect that the king doesn’t believe Lanval’s proclamations concerning his girl, and actually plans on a public humiliation. Of course, as we know from reading the poem, she is just as he claims, and the whole court is captivated by her beauty, and she and he live ‘happily ever after’ on the island of Avalun.
Comments, anyone?
Posted by stephend at October 1, 2005 11:45 PMThese historical babes are a lot of trouble, it sounds like.
Posted by: internet brother on October 5, 2005 10:41 PMI agree with your assessment in that the nature of this story deals wrongdoing and forgiveness, but I believe the reason for her absence until the latest hour is for another reason.
Firstly, Lanvall only refers to his love in response to the advances of the queen, and for no other reason. So, it was his loyalty not only to his lord, but also his love. From what little I know of historical romances, his response fits well with the chief structure of that genre.
Secondly, her arrival at the latest hour works as a sort of foreshadowing. It wouldn't suprise me, considering the religious nature of this work, that the girl is a sort of savior, showing herself at the last moment in all of her glory, beauty, and power.
From what I have seen of historical romances, the situations are always heightened by taking the moment to the breaking point before the solution is presented. This works to convey the necessity of a sort of supernatural or improbable resolution. I could be entirely wrong of course, but the themes I addressed seem to stand out more than anything else, in my mind.
Posted by: Ahmaud Templeton on October 7, 2005 7:54 AMWow donner, you're turning into a literature geek. ;-) You should get in touch with ian and chat.
Posted by: redfive on October 7, 2005 12:21 PM