The Dynamics of Love, Violence, and Fate
There is an interesting contrast behind the motivations for violence in the Song of Roland and those in The Knight's Tale. Clearly, the bloodshed and wanton savagery found in The Song of Roland was motivated by a strong, patriotic national identity. It can be argued that love plays a factor in both the Song of Roland as well as the Knight's Tale. In the Song of Roland, the love for one's country is a trigger for the violence that ensues for the majority of the epic. However, in the Knight's Tale, love for a certain woman, Emelya (Emily) causes a divisive shift between Arcite and Palamon, which leads to arguably one of the most brutally elegiac displays of violence in literature.
The relationship between Arcite and Palamon is striking and worth discussing before delving into the violence. Their shared affections toward Emily destroy the bonds of friendship between them. After they realize they must fight one another for her heart, they share an eerily identical mindset:
"Heere cometh my mortal enemy!
Withoute faille, he moot be deed, or I,
For outher I moot sleen hym at the gappe,
Or he moot sleen me, if that me myshappe."
So ferden they in chaungyng of hir hewe,
As fer as everich of hem oother knewe."
(lines 1643-1648)
Despite the fact they are enemies fighting for Emily's heart, this passage is also interesting because it re-emphasizes the fact that Emily is the one thing that ties the two men together. Chaucer intentionally distorts the chivalric code by pitting these two men against each other. It is truly an enigmatic passage in determining the character development of the two warriors.
Having read this story previously, the part that always strikes me the most is when Theseus demands that Arcite and Palamon have a grand battle royale to determine who earns Emily. Why must hundreds of people risk their lives if only one man will truly earn anything? What could they possibly gain out of it? Is there an ulterior motive behind Theseus's decision, or does he just really like bloodshed? The violence becomes something of a grand, magnificent spectacle. The intervention of the gods is also interesting. Unlike Roland, where angels interfered to help save certain people, the exact opposite occurs, and it makes for one hell of a twist ending. That also infers something about fate. Was the whole battle worth it if the gods were just going to alter the outcome to their liking? Was Arcite doomed from the start?The gods play a significant role, denoting the prevalence of theology in medieval literature.
I am also a bit puzzled by Theseus’ motivation in demanding and then supervising a large-scale battle so that two private individuals might settle a relatively minor difference. It would seem as though the implication of hundreds of other knights is hardly necessary in the context of the strikingly personal conflict represented here. I think, though, that Theseus’ insistence on this point might reflect the establishment and maintenance of a state monopoly on violence. The duke is initially disturbed by Arcite and Palamon’s private duel, because it suggests a level of instability within the walls of his city; furthermore, this instability has the potential to affect his very home, due to the fact that the focus of their conflict is, of course, Emelye. In restricting acts of violence to those sanctioned and overseen by state powers, Theseus seeks to reinforce his authority and attempts to ensure that this minor conflict will not spawn a series of similar violent acts, whether these be duels, murders, etc.: “My wyl is this, for plat conclusioun,/ Withouten any repplicacioun” (ll. 1845-1846).
ReplyDeletePrivileging the sort of “battle royale” portrayed here allows power to be concentrated in the hands of those who can, by virtue of their knightly status and aristocratic connections, “brynge an hundred knyghtes/ Armed for lystes up at alle rightes, Al redy to darreyne hire by bataille” (ll. 1851-1853). The showdown, set in an elaborately decorated and exhaustively described theatre (ll. 1885 ff.), is a performance that represents, for the benefit of the larger public, the power of the knight’s class, the importance of even their private disputes, and the final authority of the duke (or local monarch) in all acts of violence.
We might also consider the structural function of the tournament as a literary trope, and its relationship to the ideals of chivalry and courtly love which are so prevalent in the Knight's Tale. Chaucer's tournie field is bound on one side by a temple to Venus; on another, by the temple to Mars; on the third, by the temple to Diana. The space of knightly competition is therefore demarcated by the forces of erotic love, fierce chastity, and wrathful violence - in essence, the core of the courtly love system, in which knights were inspired to acts of martial valor by their affections for married upper-class ladies, a necessary sublimation of the erotic energy which cannot be expressed for worry of upsetting the social structure. This power relationship exists even between the knights and Emilye - Emilye the sister of the queen, the knights noble but defeated and imprisoned or banished.
DeleteEven the deferral of erotic fulfillment exists in the Knight's Tale. Although Arcite is pronounced victor of the tournament, he is stricken dead and is therefore unable to consummate his love for Emilye. Palamon thus receives her, as per Theseus' command, but their marriage is couched in ambiguous terms which may suggest chastity. Theseus describes the love between them as servitude and suffering of "greet adversitee" (3087) on the part of Arcite, grace and "wommanly pitee" (3083) on the part of Emilye. Although they live out their days "in blisse, in richesse, and in heele" (3102), there is no mention of erotic love or children - there is no re-inscription into the social order. Indeed, recall that Palamon, according to Arcite's criticism, loved Emilye with "affeccioun of hoolynesse" (1158) rather than love of a woman; and furthermore, recall that Emilye prays to Diana, exclaiming, "I/ Desire to ben a mayden al my lyf,/ Ne nevere wol I be no love ne wyf" (2304-6). Both parties in the marriage refuse the model of social, erotic normalcy. Arcite won his lady in martial contest and would have married her and begotten children; but this puts him outside of the chivalrous bound of courtly love, which aspires to love but does not consummate it.
It is the carnival of the tournament field, the ambiguous overlapping realm of violence, sex, and virginity, where this is possible to play out; where men commit acts of violence against one another while seeing, and being seen by, groups of upper-class women.
This seems to be a popular topic, discussing the strangeness of a massive, bloody, battle royale on account of the feud between two disgraced knights. This was alluded to in an earlier post/comment, but someone referred to the theme of there being a "supreme" figure or character in both the Song of Roland as well as the Knight's Tale, whose presence and intents seem to rule over the actions of the other characters in the stories. In Song of Roland, it was obviously Roland, and in the Knight's Tale, it is Theseus. He has the powers of king and "supreme judge" (for lack of a better word) of all those in his kingdom. I don't think that his harsh judgment of Arcite and Palamoun is due to the fact that they disrupt order and cause problems in his city, but rather that by not dealing with them harshly, Theseus himself would look weak. While Chaucer cleverly mixes classical and medieval themes in this tale, the theme of chivalry is prevalent throughout, with Theseus at the top of this "chivalric hierarchy." He has to prove that he can keep order and keep his high place at the top of this hierarchy by passing these judgments onto the knights.
DeleteThere is no need for Theseus to keep order in his lands. Otherwise, he would not have organized a massive battle to decide the fates of two knights who disobeyed him. Rather, this epic expression and really, a celebration of, violence serves to follow the theme of "divine intervention" or "divine judgment," where the victor is clearly the one who had the help of God (or the Greek/Roman gods). In this, Theseus acts like the Song of Roland's Charlemagne.