Reading Malory
Thoughts on Chivalry
Reading Elizabeth Edwards’ essay The Place of Women in the Morte Darthur, I found an idea which strikes me as particularly interesting.
The Knights in these tales often find themselves in between two categories of woman who are located in two physically separate places:on one hand there is the Queen whom they serve and those women of status safely within the castle, and on the other there are the damsels of the forest.
Edwards points out a recurring dynamic here using the example of the Tale of Sir Lancelot du Lake, she states that those women who are the object of the Knight’s desire are contained, or to use her words, ‘safely immured’.
The instability comes with the issue of a woman who’s desires place the Knight as the object. Chivalry suggests a woman is to be actively protected bar none however status says the Knight is not the pursued but the pursuer, and here we have Edwards’ idea of a polarization between adventurous duties and courtship. Commitment to one becomes abandonment of the other however each are essential components of these tales, so how is this dealt with?
As soon as elements of one infringe upon the other Edwards asserts that the result is a confused situation where the knight’s senses are abducted by madness in order to have both elements present without contradicting each other. When this occurs all elements associated with knightly behaviour are removed and the narrative deals with a man of an entirely different condition.
Why is this necessary? And also how may it be plausible? It occurs to me on reading Malory that both of these questions are answered if chivalry is considered as as much of an issue as a guideline for the knight. Leading on from Edwards’ thoughts on the matter I would go so far as to say that chivalry contradicts it’s self.
In The Accusation and Rescue of Guinevere immediately after being found in king Arthur’s sleeping quarters with Guinevere in the absence of the king, the narrator refers to him as ‘that noble knyght’ (Pearsall, Chaucer to Spencer p.438, l.5) which leads to a re-evaluation of what it is that is being referred to here as nobility.
Possibly an explanation may be found in Malory’s position when writing this piece, himself incarcerated on the grounds of various offences which may not be considered in accordance with chivalry. Perhaps this is why the reader’s sympathies are not directed towards the much wronged and yet absent king Arthur, but moreover attention is paid to the mischievous yet valiant Sir Lancelot.
In the essay Malory’s Vertuouse Love by R. T. Davies the conjecture is made that various discrepancies in Malory’s overriding portrayal of love as an element of narrative are present because of the possible changes in his own perception which may have taken place during the long period over which Malory was to write this piece in isolation.
Despite this I would prefer not to draw too much inference from his personal circumstances, but to merely keep them in mind.
Atop this something else which did occur to me having considered Elizabeth Edwards’ views was the difference between the penance of a knight and a lady, when considering the relationship there is meant to be between the two, it seems another paradox within chivalry arises:
The knight is to serve and protect the lady, which infers the lady is incapable of doing so herself. This in isolation is not an issue, however looking at how both are disposed of, knights are more so than not attacked only when armed giving an opportunity for defence, yet seldom is a lady put in a suit of armour and given opportunity for defence. Instead she may be disposed of.
Lancelot and Guinevere’s escape involves Lancelot defeating thirteen knights and abducting Guinevere before she is burnt.
She may lack the ability to fight however this means she is not given opportunity to act as a force of her own, and so chivalry results rather in the control of the lady rather than her protection.I believe this to be the reasoning behind Elizabeth Edwards’ notion of the problematic woman who adopts a position of power in pursuing the knight.
Charles Moorman in his essay Courtly Love in Malory argues that it is more specifically courtship within chivalry which creates the issue of a paradoxical conflict of interests for the knight. He also points out that Malory and many contemporary writers of this period including Chaucer did explicitly disagree fundamentally with such a convention as did the church.
“My fayre lordis, wyte you well I wolde be lothe to do that thyng that shulde dishonour you or my bloode; and wyte you well I wolde be full lothe that my lady the quene shulde dye such a shamefull deth.”
Despite any of this it is difficult to be overly carried away with any issues within the text because of the delicacy with which it is written. The above extract alone looks so well on the page. It carries with it all the poise that chivalry makes its self known for.
Also the characters appear themselves to be attempting to tackle these issues with courtship and so on, meaning any aggravation that the reader may have is not directed towards any present characters, but towards chivalry as a separate force acting upon them.
Perhaps it can be said that in the present day the death of chivalry is not such a bad thing.
