Social Disorder and Discontent in Thomas Chestre's Sir Launfal

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Triamour, in fact, is the absolute antithesis of the promiscuous Guinevere. Her nakedness is the physical manifestation of her openness and honesty. This openness, in contrast to courtly and Ovidian rules, highlights what can be viewed as the superficial nature of the courtly worship of the beloved, a devotion which, in the history of Camelot, is detrimental to that utopia. As Guinevere (here, corruptive courtly love) brought about Launfal’s departure from court, so Triamour (honest love) facilitates his return. For Chestre, the one aspect of chivalric society that he cannot reconcile with his ideal vision is courtly love. He views it as a destructive force, the growth of which ultimately led to the decline of the old order which he values so highly. While its intentions may seem honourable, in practice it is entirely contrived, thriving on deception, self-pity and, in more than one instance, adultery. Sir Launfal, in fact, is closer in sentiment to Gower’s Confessio Amantis than Ovid’s Ars Amatoria. Launfal and Triamour’s banquet in the pavilion — private, intimate and relaxed — both recalls and contrasts with Arthur and Guinevere’s wedding feast, and emphasises the difference between superficial courtly love, where the beloved is placed on a pedestal, and true love, of which Marie herself would most certainly have approved. In return for his love Triamour offers Launfal riches and devotion. Guinevere, the selfish and adulterous representative of courtly love, later demands his love, offering nothing but vindictive lies in return when he refuses her advances. Supporting this interpretation of Guinevere as the representative of destructive and dishonest courtly love is one highly significant element of Triamour and Launfal’s relationship upon which Chestre and Marie agree. Unlike the relationships in many of Marie’s other lais — Milun, Yonec and Le Fresne, for example — Lanval’s relationship with his fairy lover is not adulterous, thus subverting the love theme established by such couples as Diarmuid and Gr·inne, Tristan and Iseult, and, of course, Guinevere and Lancelot. This works particularly well in the thematic context of Chestre’s version, since adultery is one of the primary things that Guinevere is renowned for, highlighting the essential purity of the relationship between the knight and his fairy lover. Triamour’s world, however, is not Launfal’s true home. He does not belong to the fairy world, and so returns to Caerleon where his fortunes are restored. Another key indication of the lack of division between the two worlds lies in the reaction of the hero to his change of fortune. Lanval, in Marie’s version, returns in a state of shock (lines. 196-200), a shock that is also tinged with a not inconsiderable sense of fear, yet Chestre’s Launfal takes to his new circumstances like the proverbial duck to water. It is fitting that the tournament in his honour should be held in Caerleon among the fickle townspeople who previously mocked him. The hypocrisy of the mayor, and Launfal’s reply, remind us that their newly found concern is not for Launfal the person but for Launfal the wealthy knight. His return to his old home of Carlisle does not occur until after his defeat of Valentyne, when Arthur sends for him. It is also significant that Arthur hears of his success across the sea in Lombardy, not in Caerleon. Although geographically nearer,
Carlisle and Caerleon are worlds apart. Nevertheless, in the light of Launfal’s recent adventures we must ask ourselves: for how much longer? Unlike the Caerleon tournament, ostensibly held in his honour, Arthur’s feast is a community affair of which Launfal is a part. While this second feast may not be in his honour, it must surely be the more important of the two for Launfal since it sees his reinstatement as king’s steward (line 622), before Guinevere yet again upsets the balance. Her sudden interest in Launfal highlights her fickleness and reinforces her reputation as an adulteress. While Marie presents only a short dance scene as a prelude to the queen’s propositioning of Lanval, Chestre’s description is lengthier, and Guinevere’s long drawnout dancing contrasts with the forward honesty of Triamour. Her sudden turnabout, together with her claim that she has loved Launfal passionately for the past seven years, exposes her self-deluding selfishness: I have the lovid with all my might More than this seven yere [...] (lines 677-8) The extent to which Guinevere is portrayed as a malignant, destructive force is emphasised by her effect on Launfal himself. While his reply may be justified in the light of Guinevere’s reputation, it is hardly the behaviour befitting a knight towards his queen, the wife of his feudal lord. The polar opposites which Guinevere and Triamour represent are also highlighted in the queen’s behaviour: whereas Triamour gave all and asked only for loyalty in return, Guinevere, to satisfy her greedy desires, demands that Launfal be disloyal to his king, her husband. Guinevere again proves his undoing as her taunts cause him to retaliate, breaking his vow to Triamour. His magical gifts are withdrawn and he is bound and brought before the king to face charges of treason. Yet even at this dire time Launfal is not alone. Like Hugh and John before, he has true friends who stand by him through the trial. Unlike the people of Caerleon, his change of fortune does not affect their opinion of him. Arthur’s court is, in Earl Anderson’s words, part of “an internal audience that responds to Launfal’s changing fortunes” (Anderson, 1977, p. 123), and they assess the situation on the basis of the man they know him to be, not on the wealth he does or does not possess. Equally, the twelve knights assigned to the task of examining the case are not afraid to take into account Guinevere’s reputation for promiscuity — something which is acknowledged even before Triamour arrives to confirm it. They decide that it is she who is at fault, and are ready to acquit Launfal on the condition that he produce his lover, or one of her maids. He is given a perfectly reasonable time-frame — a year and a fortnight — in which to fulfil this condition, and when he admits at the end of this period that he cannot satisfy the requirement the Earl of Cornwall steps in to plead that the penalty be reduced from hanging to exile. Lest we think that this show of solidarity looks promising, however, it must be recognised that it is Arthur — the king and therefore the person who represents his court
Page 1 and 2: Social Disorder and Discontent in T
Page 3 and 4: eturn. In Carlisle, Launfal is poss
Page 5: atmosphere vanishes in Chestre’s
Page 9 and 10: Sir Launfal represents a hankering

Social Disorder and Discontent in Thomas Chestre's Sir Launfal

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?