First of all, I'm confused as to why The Knight of the Cart (Lancelot) will not tell people his name. Is it for his own protection? Is it for Guinevere's? Is it possible that if Meleagant found out Lancelot was coming for her, he would kill her? Then again, I got the impression that Guinevere was "for Meleagant's son. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Also, the idea that Guinevere, a powerful (albeit bitchy) woman can still be held captive. It reminds me of a recent event in the news where female Olympic gymnasts were said to be sexually harassed by their doctor. You can be a queen, or an Olympic athlete, and even then you run the risk of being sexualized. Maybe reading this story in such a modern context is wrong, but there are some passages in the story that simply cannot be ignored. Like...
"But if she [a damsel in distress, presumably] was under the escort of one knight, another, anxious to fight for her and successful in winning her in armed combat, might do with her as he pleased without receiving censure or shame." (186)
...Okay. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that passage essentially condoning rape? It seems like such a weird passage. It also treats women as flat screen tvs during Best Buy's Black Friday sale.
I will say one thing though...the courtly love aspect of this story, although a little heavy handed, is quite beautiful at times. A knight fighting for his love no matter what, warding off foes and refusing any other woman. Charged by his love and desire for her. Call me a hopeless romantic, but I find that quite lovely. Even if he does get himself in a "hairy" situation. (Ha ha...hair pun. Get it?)
I think it's honestly impossible to read these stories and at least not view them through a modern context a little bit. As much as we're supposed to remove our modern worldview from it, when you read quotes like the one you have above, all my modern feelings about the sexualization of women and rape culture come to a head. I mean, on some level. I know that's the point, since women as objects is kind of the point (like, they're really shiny and pretty objects, but they are still just things), but I still totally agree that reading this stuff brings up a lot of thoughts about the way women are treated in modern times.
ReplyDeleteLancelot does not tell people his name in this story, in my opinion, because his quest was not about him. It showed that love and humble ways are the only ways to act, despite risking his life just about every where possible. I completely agree that reading these stories in a modern context is shifting the way we view certain topics. The woman's set-up rape scene made me quite uncomfortable and while I understand it within the context of the book, I cannot separate it fully from the context of present times. Alas, that is the beauty of evolving thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI have a hard time seeing that passage as an "okay" for rape..."rape" would imply overpowering a PERSON against their will, and women are obviously seen as objects and child bearers in this time period. The whole phrase is just saying that should two knights battle for the "prize", the winner can walk away honorably with the spoils. You have to remember, women barely had a choice in their partner as it was. So it probably wasn't a big deal to them who owned them, unless it was someone they truly loathed. And since a Knight's main goal was to get better in battle and more honorable in reputation, to fight and grow stronger for the incentive of a beautiful prize and increased reputation was probably beyond logical.
ReplyDelete...As sick as it all is in terms of a modern viewpoint.