Trapped in the Cage of a Woman -Elizabeth

For the stories of Bisclavret and Lanvel, I feel like the symbolism in them is crucial…for otherwise, the story would be less interesting or satisfying (although even with the symbolism it’s not super abundant either of these). In both of these, the woman who is first in love with the man of the story ultimately determines both of their fates. But the difference is that when each was confronted with an admission of sudden (unwanted) truth, one woman chose to follow her fear and disgust, betraying and condemning her man, while the other chose to forgive, saving the life of her man. While the symbolism added meaningful enjoyment, the actions are what defined what was remembered.

No matter what previous story I look at though, no matter how the woman acted (good & loyal or source of betrayal), it appears the overall lesson these stories teach is that the man should always be listened too, followed, and believed in no matter what…or else horrible consequences of trial and sacrifice will occur. Le Fresne, the living icon for kindness and honesty, never once shamed or went against her lover despite what pain this probably caused her; from losing her virginity to him (despite her oath to the church), to what his marrying another made her feel. Because of which, she was eventually rewarded with the finding of her parents and the opportunity to marry her lover.

But the wife in Bisclavret, who arguably acted from a rational fear and acted to save her lifestyle, future legacy, her reputation, and thus broke her husband’s trust, ended up horribly disfigured and shamed. The story gives the impression had she chose to do nothing, despite her fear and her husband’s potential for evil/harm, she might have had a much happier ending. Had this been in a modern setting with an abusive husband (source of fear), a woman would be expected and helped enabled to leave him. But in medieval romances, it seems no matter what the case may be, a woman cannot decide to leave her legal partner.

Even the horny queen, who felt wounded at Lanvel’s declaration of love for another, was careful to keep her attempted actions a secret from her husband (though she never committed the actual affair) and not betray his trust/will, just saw her will for Lanvel to be taken to court done, never personally received any punishment. Although some could argue the penalty for her attempt at betrayal was being shown up/shamed by another more beautiful woman, but that’s a debatably mild punishment. When compared to the wife who did have an affair (in Equitan) even though she didn’t appear to want to do it yet was still killed for it, this difference in action (whether the fact the action is known or not is a debatable factor as well) and faith to their husband is what decided the woman’s fate.

While I personally really appreciate a good, happy conclusion, I also noticed the justice in these types of stories are either way too harsh, or way too lenient. Thus, I often find myself rarely ever satisfied with these endings…Which is odd, for I never considered proper justice a factor in what a story needs to be satisfactory. This overly influenced sense of justice does help emphasize the presence of each described “moral”, but I think it takes away a lot more from the enjoyment of the actual story (which is needed, for it to be remembered and possibly passed down) as a modern reader. The fact this sway in power and control is what made these stories so popular then, since it doesn’t do much for me now other than reflect on such an imbalance of morals, trust, love, and power, is a peculiar thought. I'm glad that philosophies on such things have changed as much as they have over the years.