Marie's Knowing Winks: Ironic Play, Courtly Love, and the Disruption of Generic Conventions in Chaitivel, Lanva, and Yonec
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses May 2020 Marie's Knowing Winks: Ironic Play, Courtly Love, and the Disruption of Generic Conventions in Chaitivel, Lanva, and Yonec Anna Lia Johnson Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Recommended Citation Johnson, Anna Lia, "Marie's Knowing Winks: Ironic Play, Courtly Love, and the Disruption of Generic Conventions in Chaitivel, Lanva, and Yonec" (2020). All Theses. 3355. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/3355 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TITLE PAGE MARIE’S KNOWING WINKS: IRONIC PLAY, COURTLY LOVE, AND THE DISRUPTION OF GENERIC CONVENTIONS IN CHAITIVEL, LANVAL, AND YONEC ________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University ________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts English ________________________________________________________ by Anna Lia Johnson May 2020 ________________________________________________________ Accepted by: Dr. Andy Lemons, Committee Chair Dr. Brian McGrath Dr. Elizabeth Rivlin ABSTRACT While readers such as M. L. Stapleton and K. Sarah-Jane Murray have devoted time to the courtly and Ovidian play in Marie de France’s Guigemar and Laüstic, less attention has been paid to that within Chaitivel, Lanval and Yonec. In this essay, I argue that Marie slyly mocks the subgenre within which she operates: she both participates in and pushes against the constraints of fin’amors, or courtly love. In her twelfth-century version of Ovidian one-upmanship, Marie pulls tales from Celtic and classical sources, redresses them with the accoutrements of courtly love, and inserts her own wry narrative voice through the means of direct authorial commentary. She gives a final Marian twist to her “assembling” of the lais by making her female characters not merely, as courtly tradition would hold, the distant objects of male desire, but decisive, knowing, and, ultimately, realistic woman. In the process, her courtly tales, probing as they do such fraught topics as Norman colonization and forced marriage, might have created discomfort for some members of her audience. Both in her Prologue and in her lais, Marie reveals herself as simultaneously playful and as a figure of authority, never allowing us to take her tales entirely at face value. In this essay, I first highlight a few relevant moments from the Prologue and discuss Andreas Capellanus’ De Arte honeste amandi before reading Chaitivel with reference to its absurd send-up of courtly components. Next, I examine Lanval as a comical revision of Celtic themes whose only happy ending lies in the exiting of the courtly “game,” and finally read Yonec as including uncomfortable elements that disrupt its apparently courtly plot. ii DEDICATION To my husband Randolph, for his constant encouragement, for taking on the lion’s share of our children’s care in the past two years, and for urging me to pursue this degree when I doubted myself. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Dr. Andy Lemons was an invaluable mentor in the entire process of my writing this thesis. He gave thorough, challenging, and always witty feedback to my drafts, and the flashes of insight that I came to while sitting in his office were the consequence of his excellent guiding questions and incisive observations. I am also thankful to Dr. Will Stockton for prompt and patient answers to my many questions as I navigated the MAE, and for his encouragement. Finally, I thank Dr. Lindsey Panxhi at Oklahoma Baptist University for introducing me to Marie de France and for encouraging me to pursue my conviction that Marie is, in fact, quite funny. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE ....................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 MARIE AND HER PROLOGUE ....................................................................................... 3 MARIE’S OVIDIAN PLAY............................................................................................... 7 MARIE’S WARPED MIRROR IMAGE, ANDREAS CAPELLANUS ......................... 10 IRONIC PLAY IN CHAITIVEL ....................................................................................... 12 THE COURTLY WORLD IN LANVAL........................................................................... 23 DARK PLAY IN YONEC ................................................................................................. 31 WORKS CITED ............................................................................................................... 43 v INTRODUCTION Marie de France’s medieval lais were long perceived as being those of a sage poet who wrote within a courtly framework, containing as they do such trappings: fair, swooning ladies, noble knights, jealous husbands, and refined love. Many notable Marie scholars of the twentieth century regarded Marie as humorless, as Elizabeth Wilson Poe observed in her 1983 response to such readings (310n30). I argue, however, that while playing with the conventions of lyric love poetry, Marie slyly mocks the subgenre within which she operates: she both participates in and pushes against the constraints of the cult of fin’amors, or courtly love. With Chaitivel, where she takes the “clichés of lyric poetry to their extremes and makes fun of the tradition” (Hanning and Ferrante 188), Marie portrays courtly love as an unfulfilling game that results in a weary stalemate between the man and the woman. She is careful in that lai, however, not to make any explicit statements about the characters whose actions she satirizes. From their frequent appearance in late-medieval manuscripts, Lanval and Yonec appear to have been two of Marie’s most popular lais; and in these works, she ventures beyond the ironic detachment of Chaitivel.1 In both Lanval and Yonec, while retaining many of the features of courtly love, and while including several distinctly Celtic otherworldly elements, Marie perpetrates a biting commentary on the courtly system, adding substance to elements with which she teases us in her Prologue. 1 Glyn Burgess suggests that the original order of completion of the lais was as follows: Equitan, Chaitivel, Bisclavret, Le Fresne, Les Deus Amanz, Laüstic, Lanval, Yonec, Guigemar, Milun, Chevrefoil, Eliduc (Marie de France: Lais, Bristol Classical, 1995, p. xxxviii). 1 In her twelfth-century version of Ovidian one-upmanship, Marie pulls tales from Celtic and classical sources, redresses them with the accoutrements of courtly love,2 and inserts her own wry narrative voice through the means of direct authorial commentary. Marie is a significant source of information about the interior lives of medieval women: her contemporary Chrétien de Troyes, as Bernadette Williams discusses, presents women only in a supporting role (76). She gives a final Marian twist to her “assembling” of the lais by making her female characters not merely, as courtly tradition would hold, the distant objects of male desire, but decisive, knowing, and, ultimately, realistic woman. In the process, her courtly tales, probing as they do such fraught topics as Norman colonization and forced marriage, might have created discomfort for some members of her audience. Both in her Prologue and in her lais, Marie reveals herself as simultaneously playful and as a figure of authority, never allowing us to take her tales 2 I have chosen to use the much-debated term “courtly love” in this essay, while remaining aware of the controversy over its usage. Joan Ferrante provides a vigorous defense of the term in her “Cortes’Amor in Medieval Texts” (Speculum, vol. 55, no. 4, 1980, pp 686-695), where she discusses the fact that many mid-twentieth century medievalists considered “courtly love” a modern invention (by Gaston Paris, toward the end of the nineteenth century). She argues persuasively, however, that considerable medieval precedent exists in Provençal, French, Italian, and even Middle English medieval texts for the linking of courtliness and love (686). The most frequently used phrase for this “ritual pursuit of love which continues whether or not the object is achieved” is fin’amor, but that term does not, Ferrante says, include the “elegant disguising of the sexual impulse” that is part of courtly love (687). Like Ferrante, I appreciate the use of “courtly” not so much because of the “courteous” element of the game as because of its clear association with the courts: the word cortejar, cortezar in Provencal means both to hold court and to play court to a lady; the word cortesia was taken from corte (“court”) and means “usage of the court” (Ferrante 688, 694). Marie de France uses “courtly” frequently: all of her lovers, except