Bucknell University
Bucknell Digital Commons
+*+-.6".". /0!"*/6".".
Courtly Love in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
and Modern Reections
Alexa Leigh Keating
Bucknell University('0 '*"(("!0
+((+2/%&.*!!!&/&+*(2+-'./ %8,.!&$&/( +))+*.0 '*"(("!0%+*+-./%".".
6&.+*+-.6".&.&.-+0$%//+4+0#+-#-""*!+,"* "..4/%"/0!"*/6"."./0 '*"((&$&/(+))+*./%.""* ",/"!#+-&* (0.&+*&*
+*+-.6".".4*0/%+-&5"!!)&*&./-/+-+#0 '*"((&$&/(+))+*.+-)+-"&*#+-)/&+*,("." +*/ / ! !)&*0 '*"(("!0
" +))"*!"!&//&+*
"/&*$("3"&$%+0-/(4+1"&*&-2&**!/%"-""**&$%/*!+!"-*"7" /&+*. Honors eses
%8,.!&$&/( +))+*.0 '*"(("!0%+*+-./%".".
!
1!
Courtly Love in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and Modern
Reflections
By: Alexa Keating
English Honors Thesis, April 16
th
, 2015
Jean Peterson
Alfred Siewers (Advisor)
Lea Wittie
!
2!
Introduction
The fourteenth-century Middle English poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
presents a satiric view of "courtly love," subverting some of its practices and
assumptions, by exposing the conflict between ideals of marriage and romance in late
medieval England
1
. Yet the theme of courtly love in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
has not often been explored in relation to larger scholarly paradigms that have sought to
interpret the trajectory from medieval courtly love to modern romantic love and marriage,
notably C.S. Lewis’ influential view that the courtly love of the High Middle Ages had in
English literature become melded into middle-class views of marriage by the time of the
Elizabethan poet Edmund Spenser.
2
The fourteenth century writer Christine de Pizan,
close to the time of the anonymous Gawain poet, decried from what is sometimes called a
proto-feminist standpoint the male-privileging adulterous tendencies of courtly love,
despite arguments by some scholars that courtly love was merely Platonic or spiritual.
This paper will analyze Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in the context of such
contemporary criticism and satire of adulterous tendencies in courtly love, while
broadening historical and cultural understanding of the satire evident in the poem, to
place it in a larger history of the sometimes problematic identification of romantic love
with marriage. It will also explore other contemporary works that exhibit similar satire of
courtly love themes, for example satire of the paradoxical coupling of idealization of
1
Sir Gawain in the Green Knight is in MS. Cotton Nero in the British Library.
Quotations from the original text are from The Poems of the Pearl Manuscript, edited by
Malcolm Andrew and Ronald Waldron (Exeter, Devon: University of Exeter, 2007).
Translations from modern English are by Paul Battles from The Broadview Anthology of
British Literature (Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press, 2009).
2
C.S. Lewis’ study, The Allegory of Love, first appeared in 1936 (Oxford: The Clarendon
Press, 1936). However, I am using the 2013 version, published by Cambridge University
Press.
!
3!
women with abusive male privilege, as seen in Chaucer’s “Knight’s Tale” in The
Canterbury Tales, and in the slightly later Middle English prose of Thomas Malory’s Le
Morte Darthur, with its themes of the destructiveness of romantic love in the context of a
violent male chivalry.
Context for such late medieval subversion in poetry and rhetoric of chivalric
hierarchy, together with earlier notions of courtly love as aristocratic romance (whether
spiritual, emotionally or physically adulterous), will be sought in the history of social
disruption in England following the Black Death, the decline of French cultural
colonialism in England, the sequence of the Peasants Rebellion, the deposition of Richard
II, and the Wars of the Roses (Bennett 71-90).The accompanying rise of a commercial
economy and middle class, together with the emergence of a proto-Protestantism focused
on the nuclear family, help to explain the satire of courtly love found in Sir Gawain and
the Green Knight and related works, as well as the merging of romantic love with
marriage in an uneasy and often contentious relationship. Such factors, in changing form,
have also contributed to the re-imagination of courtly love in Hollywood romantic
comedies of the twentieth century, in which we can see a continuation of early English
literary critiques and satires of romantic love, but focused sometimes uneasily on
marriage as their ultimate outcome. As the medievalist Jennifer Wollock notes in her
recent re-examination of chivalry and courtly love, tracing the direct links from medieval
courtly love through Romanticism to modern cinema, “In domestic life as well as in
popular culture, the descendant of courtly love, Western romantic love, continues to
challenge the role of the family in arranging marriages and of social convention in
understanding them” (13). Following Wollock’s lead, I plan to examine a few select film
!
4!
examples of this adaptive continuation in the final chapter of my thesis, specifically in
terms of comparing and contrasting ways in which they include both satire of romantic
love (often with specific nods to medieval courtly love) and an attempted melding of such
romantic love with marriage, in ways similar to Middle English texts.
This study will draw on work on the Middle English text of the poem and the
historiography of studies of courtly love in modern times. It will seek to apply both
historicist-related and postcolonial contexts in understanding the poem’s stance on
courtly love, and also theoretical models for the formation of self in relation to
symbolism developed by the French feminist psychoanalytic theorist Julia Kristeva.
Taking such an approach, combining historicist and semiotic-psychonalytic analysis, will
help position the critique of courtly love within Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and
related texts in relation to broader changes and reactions within Western culture during
the transition from medieval to modern periods, as well as continuities across
conventional categories of time periods. These trajectories include the increasing
dominance of what the philosopher Charles Taylor calls the “buffered” self, especially
privileging male individualism, seen by contrast in earlier fourteenth-century models of
courtly love in the work of Dante and Petrarch, and subversion of the same in English
texts during the social disruptions of the period following the Black Death and during the
Wars of the Roses. In the emergence of foundational English literature during this period,
there was a post-colonial aspect to the emergence of critiques of courtly love, which often
identified with chivalric hierarchies associated with Norman French colonial rule of
England. Kristeva has offered a model for understanding a strengthening sense of
individualism, often at the expense of real interaction with the Other, during this period,
!
5!
in relation to religious symbolism of the time, paralleling Taylor’s model of the
development of the “buffered” self from the “porous” self in a Western medieval
trajectory toward modernity. Writings in the same era as Sir Gawain and the Green
Knight will help provide context in this regard, on the relation between subversions of
Scholastic hierarchy by mysticism, to contemporary literary critiques of courtly love.
The thesis will involve three chapters:
1. Examining the often contentious definition of courtly love, including arguments
over the utility of the term, and controversy over its spiritual versus its sensual
components. This chapter will also set up the theoretical approach of the study, by
defining its combination of historicist, postcolonial, and semiotic-psychoanalytic
approaches
2. A detailed examination of key scenes from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,
analyzing the Middle English texts. Among the examples I would like to use from the
text, I will be including scenes where Sir Gawain and Lady Bertilak are alone in the
bedroom as a result of Lord Bertilak’s hunting game. According to literary scholar, David
Mills, this scene is particularly comedic in the way that Gawain’s “…Innocence serves to
amuse the reader by emphasizing just how little doubt there can be about the Lady’s
intentions under such circumstances….” He then furthers this point by explaining how
scene is “inappropriate” in its conflict between marriage relation and “Gawain’s position
as a guest” (613).
3. In a final chapter I plan to reflect on how twentieth-century Hollywood romantic
comedies relate to the critique and satire of courtly love seen in the Middle English texts.
In doing so, I will rely on Wollock’s demonstration of a genealogy of influence (albeit
!
6!
continually re-imagined) from medieval courtly love to Romanticism and modern courtly
love. But my specific focus will be on the phenomenon of critique of romantic love
coupled with the celebration of its melding with marriage, and ask why similar central
themes should be so significant both in Middle English texts and in modern cinema, in
relation to love and sex. In making this comparison I will draw on the theoretical
approaches developed in my study of the early texts, but adapted to twentieth-century
American popular film culture. I will specifically focus on How To Lose A Guy In 10
Days, Clueless, and A Knight’s Tale.
!
7!
Chapter 1: Examining Courtly Love
The notion of courtly love is linked to many works of medieval literature
containing stories about noble knights embarking on dangerous missions while engaging
with highly respected women along the way. Although the term is often used to describe
a theme presented in ancient medieval literary works, scholars have debated its existence
in reality as well. Based on historical evidence gathered from the twelfth century and all
centuries afterwards, courtly love did exist outside of the literary realm and has, in fact,
survived until today where we see traces of its fundamental qualities in our modern
conception of marriage. According to popular belief, courtly love was a medieval practice
that consisted of a highly respected, usually married lady and a lower-class knight who
would participate in an adulterous affair. The lady would then become the object of
affection for the knight, distracting him from the quest he originally planned to embark
on. These details, however, remain under dispute. With that said, the first section of this
thesis aims to examine the definition of courtly love, including arguments over the utility
of the term, and the controversy surrounding its spiritual verses sensual components. This
section will also include a combination of historicist, postcolonial, and psychoanalytic
approaches.
The emergence of courtly love does not have a definite date of origin. However,
traces of courtly love were seen earliest in the works written by Publius Ovidius Naso,
better known as the Roman philosopher, Ovid, who was born in BC and died in AD
(Parry 4). Ovid wrote about love, influencing the writings of many other literary scholars
that succeeded him, one of them being Andreas Capellanus. The collection of Ovid’s
works deal with a multidimensional perspective on love, ranging from deep and
!
8!
emotional declarations of devotion to erotic and promiscuous love (Parry 4). Another
less-credited source of courtly love comes from poems written by the troubadours in the
eleventh century. Eleanor of Aquitaine was said to have brought ideals of courtly love
from Aquitaine to the court of France, and then to the court of England, where she was
crowned the queen to two kings. Her daughter, the Countess of Champagne, then brought
courtly love to the Count of Champagne’s court. Eventually, the troubadours noticed the
presence of courtly love and began to express these ideals in lyrical poems (Moore 624).
Eleanor of Aquitaine plays a prominent role in the works of Andreas Capellanus,
who is most commonly associated with discussing the dynamics of courtly love in his
twelfth century treatise titled De amore, which translates to “About Love.” Today, it is
known, quite deceivingly as The Art of Courtly Love.
3
According to scholar John Moore,
The term armour courtoise does not appear in the original work, but John Jay Parry gave
his translation the title The Art of Courtly Love” (626). Capellanus sheds light on a
historical time period within his writing. According to Parry, “… “Andreas’s book was
almost certainly intended to portray the conditions at Queen Eleanor’s court at Poitiers
between 1170 and 1174, (but) the actual writing of it must have taken place some years
later…” (21). The dates and historical figures shed light on the dimensions of society,
specifically the upper-class and culture, at a time when courtly love was being exercised.
Queen Eleanor of France was married to Henry II in the period that Andreas referenced
in his work. Their relationship was uncharacteristic of the time period because Eleanor
had an immense amount of power over Henry. She even managed England for a period of
time, which was often unheard of for a woman of this historical time period (Turner 151).
3
I am drawing from John Jay Parry’s translation of The Art of Courtly Love, by Andreas
Capellanus (New York: Columbia University Press, 1960).
!
9!
Moore emphasizes the importance of the historical background when he claims that,
“formal courts of love defined and propagated the rules of courtly love.” Eleanor and her
daughter, the Countess of Champagne, who is mentioned in Capellanus’s work, were
represented as the “patrons of courtly love” (Moore 624). Although it has been highly
debated whether or not De amore was satirical or serious, we can assume, because of the
historical content in which Capellanus is referencing in his work, that it is serious.
In his writing, Capellanus breaks down the meaning of love to create a clearer
understanding of his discussion:
For when a man sees some woman fit for love and shaped according to his
taste, he begins at once to lust after her in his heart; then the more he
thinks about her the more he burns with love, until he comes to further
mediation. Presently he begins to think about the fashioning of the woman
and to differentiate her limbs, to think about what she does, and to pry into
the secrets of her body, and he desires to put each part of it to the fullest
use. Then after he has come to this complete mediation, love cannot hold
the reins, but he proceeds at once to action; straightway he strives to get a
helper and to find an intermediary. He begins to plan how he may find
favor with her… (29).
Capellanus is referencing the relationship between the man and woman involved in
courtly love, which was practiced in years early than his writings, where the man
becomes captured by his desire for the woman. Capellanus continues by discussing the
origins of love’s name: “Love gets its name (amor) from the word for hook (amus),
which means “to capture” or “to be captured,” for he who is in love is captured in the
!
10!
chains of desire and wishes to capture someone else with his hook” (31). This
explanation of the meaning of love grows out of the man’s reaction to the woman, which
is to capture her in an attempt to retaliate against her for his overpowering love for her.
Capellanus then describes the effect that love has on its victims, by stating: “Love causes
a rough and uncouth man to be distinguished for his handsomeness; it can endow a man
even of the humblest birth with nobility of character; it blesses the proud with humility;
and the man in love becomes accustomed to performing many services gracefully for
everyone” (31). Nobility is mentioned, which is a necessary factor in any instance of
courtly love and used as a theme in many medieval literary works. The idea of a noble
knight is linked to the ways in which love is acquired, especially in courtly love. “The
teaching of some people is said to be that there are five means by which it may be
acquired: a beautiful figure, excellence of character, extreme readiness of speech, great
wealth, and the readiness in which one grants what which is sought” (33).
Finally, Capellanus discusses the foundation in which his argument relies on:
adultery. He describes the affection between husband and wife as a nonexistent emotion,
displayed through the Countess of Champagne, a symbol of historical background, who is
the daughter of Queen Eleanor. In Book II of De amore, the Countess of Champagne is
asked whether love is possible between a husband and a wife. The book states, “We dare
not oppose the opinion of the Countess of Champagne, who ruled that love can exert no
power between husband and wife” (175). Therefore, love ceases to exist between a
husband and a wife. The evidence in support of this claim rests on the belief that jealousy
is required for love, and jealousy is not present in a marriage. Thus, in the opinion of
Capellanus, what distinguishes courtly love from other styles of love is the required
!
11!
presence of adultery. However, the medievalist Larry Benson and others have argued this
is not a real practice:
What distinguishes this style of love from the styles of other times and
places is not only the theme of suffering, and certainly not the requirement
of adultery, which is always with us and was never, except in Andreas’s
imagination, a necessary part of courtly love. The distinction lies rather in
the conviction that this sort of love is admirable- that love is not only
virtuous in itself but is the very source and cause of all the other virtues
that indeed one cannot be virtuous unless he is a lover (240).
Neither of the two scholar’s perspectives can be ruled out. However, it is more logical to
believe, and there is evidence to prove, that adultery lies at the base of courtly love.
Consistently in medieval literature, courtly love involves the adulterous acts or flirtations
committed by a married woman.
Furthermore, Capellanus’s writings helped the modern reader understand the
origins and meaning of courtly love, which contributed to its long survival. According to
Parry:
Andreas is not a great literary figure like his friend and fellow citizen
Chrétien de Troyes, but perhaps for the very reason he brings us closer to
the actual life of the time than does Chrétien. From his work we get a
vivid picture of life in a medieval court like that of Troyes or Poitiers; to
the student of medieval manners such a picture is especially valuable,
because in these courts was taught, and probably also practiced, that
!
12!
strange social system to which Gaston Paris has given the name of
“courtly love” (3).
Capellanus’s recognition and analysis of courtly love allowed later scholars to evaluate
the dynamics of courtly love. With that said, interpretation of Capellanus’s writing acts as
the foundation for the study of courtly love. “Since then, nearly all the theories of courtly
love have relied heavily on that curious work” (Moore 626).
Capellanus’s gesture towards an actual history of courtly love seems to preview a
modern historicist approach toward understanding how history has defined our social and
cultural beliefs about romantic love and marriage still witnessed today. Historian Herbert
Moller furthers this point in “The Meaning of Courtly Love,” when he argues: “While
(courtly love) had originally nothing to do with married life or its customary
preliminaries, it greatly influenced the standard behavior of the upper classes, especially
their conduct in the presence of ladies,” which explains why Capellanus’s attempt at a
history of courtly love is necessary to its survival (39). Moller continues by saying:
The entire complex of sentiments and modes of behavior as well as the
corresponding poetry was alive only in the twelfth and early thirteenth
centuries; much of it, however, finally entered the mainstream Western
Civilization, such as the high evaluation of sentimental love and
conspicuous politeness of gentlemen toward ladies, which became specific
Western culture patterns (39).
In later centuries, the argument about the historiography marriage and Western cultural
patterns is revisited and supported by C.S. Lewis in The Allegory of Love.
!
13!
Despite Andreas Capellanus’s foundational work, Gaston Paris has been credited
for coining the term “courtly love,” or what he called “amour courtois,” in 1883 when he
described the love that had existed between Guinevere and Lancelot in Chrétien de
Troyes’s Conte de la Charrette, an early French romance (Moore 621). Chrétien’s work
together with his companion piece Yvain, or The Knight of the Lion, also known for its
French translation le Chevalier au Lion, provides a literary exemplum of courtly love
4
.
The first celebrates the famous adulterous love of Lancelot and Guenivere. The second
focuses on an enduring married love involving an otherworldly lady, in which, however,
extra-marital male-female friendship proves central to the story, which to its end
celebrates both the male knightly identity and consummated male-female love, unlike the
later Gawain poem under study here.
During Paris’s time, many people were aware of the existence of courtly love, as
it had existed in earlier centuries and was written about by Capellanus. However, Paris is
the one who popularized the term and established a definition for the phenomenon of
what we now know today to be called courtly love. Moore writes: “It is not clear that
Paris intended amour courtois to become a technical term having a precise definition, but
after him that usage became common” (622). Paris theorizes about the historical origin of
courtly love. He recognizes Ovid, but he also claims that the origins of courtly love
existed prior to Capellanus’s historical account. Paris argues that courtly love was seen in
Henry I’s court, prior to Henry II’s court, providing earlier background to broaden future
scholarly interpretations of courtly love. But many scholars have questioned Paris’s
work. Howard Bloch has argued that “the psychology of Gaston Paris and his circle”
4
For modern translation of Chrétien’s original work see Joseph J. Duggan’s version of
Yvain, the Knight of the Lion (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1987).
!
14!
could have “affected their understanding of medieval love literature,” which suggests that
Paris’s “own experience with unattainable ladies of the nineteenth century may have led
him to stress the unattainability of the troubadours’ objects of affection” (Wollock 31).
Paris turned the notion of courtly love into a “social system” in his works (Moore
626). To Paris, courtly love was based around the idea of nobility and admiration.
Fundamentally, his definition rested on the idea of the “lover’s worship of an idealized
lady” (Wollock 31). Paris provided a list of four specific characteristics that he used to
describe courtly love. Although he described four specific characteristics, they do not
necessarily need to occur in unison for courtly love to exist. It is, however, possible for
all to co-exist. Among these characteristics were: “1) It is illegitimate and furtive; 2) The
lover is inferior and insecure; the beloved is elevated, haughty, even disdainful; 3) The
lover must earn the lady’s affection by undergoing many tests of prowess, valor, and
devotion; 4) The love is an art and a science, subject to many rules and regulations- like
courtesy in general” (Moore 622). The love that Paris described was an “ennobling
discipline, not necessarily consummated, but based on sexual attraction” (Wollock 31).
Paris’s belief that courtly love was an “ennobling discipline” stems from the phenomenon
in which the lover tries to make himself worthy enough for the lady by being a chivalrous
knight acting both bravely and nobly, fulfilling her desires, and subjecting himself to
danger as he tries to prove that he is worthy of her. In reference to “sexual attraction,”
Paris’s scholarly work provides evidence that sexual satisfaction between the lovers may
or may not have been the desired goal, but the love was not Platonic; it was neither pure
nor nonsexual. In fact, according to Paris, the love was founded on sexual attraction
between the lovers, in correlation with the ideals of knighthood and chivalric code.
!
15!
Chivalry involved restrictions on fighting, as courtly love did on sex, in the sense that it
involved an idealized system of communication between men and women. Neither,
however, was entirely successful, and both shared a tension between physicality and
ideal. The term romance became associated with both as a term for the literature that
promoted them, poetries and stores written in non-Latin vernacular language called
romance. The term for popular non-religious literature eventually became identified with
a certain kind of passionate yet idealistic love, and was retrofitted to the Romantic
movement by nineteenth-century writers.
Fifty-three years after Paris, C.S. Lewis published a book titled The Allegory of
Love, which was published in 1936. Lewis’s book has done the most to popularize the
term courtly love and to communicate the notion that there was certainly a system of
courtly love that existed in the medieval time period that we can still see traces of it in
modern society. At the foremost part of his book, Lewis proposes a broad definition of
courtly love in the Middle Ages when he asks: “…what have we to do with these
medieval lovers - ‘servants’ or ‘prisoners’ they called themselves – who seem to be
always weeping and always on their knees before ladies of inflexible cruelty?” (1). At
this point in the reading, he suggests a broad definition of what most people, up until this
point, have associated with courtly love. Lewis says:
Everyone has heard of courtly love, and everyone knows that it appears
quite suddenly at the end of the eleventh century in Languedoc… The
sentiment, of course, is love, but love of highly specialized sort, whose
characteristics may be enumerated as Humility, Courtesy, Adultery, and
the Religion of Love. The lover is always abject. Obedience to his lady’s
!
16!
lightest wish, however whimsical, and silent acquiescence in her rebukes,
however unjust, are the only virtues he dares to claim (1).
These four themes have become well known, but Lewis rarely applies these four themes
consistently. Moore has criticized Lewis for his failure to address that the themes do not
need to coexist for courtly love to be present. When Lewis intends to show that courtly
love is a rival religion, he refers to the character Aucassin from the early French work,
Aucassin and Nicolette. However, Lewis fails to mention that in Aucassin and Nicolette,
there is no adultery or humility from the hero, Aucassin. In addition, his beloved
Nicolette is neither idealized nor remote (Moore 623). Therefore, the characteristics set
forth by Lewis are simply common themes, not necessary themes, which must work
together in order to produce courtly love. Moore claims: “There are in fact many
examples of adulterous love, of knights humbling themselves before idealized ladies, of
courteous lovers, of love talk using religious vocabulary. But to group these four themes
together as essential traits of a new phenomenon called “courtly love” is to distort
seriously the views which courtly people held about love” (624).
For Lewis, “politeness” lies at the center of courtly love (2). He also claims that
the lover (or the man) is always obedient to the lady’s wishes. From Paris to Lewis, this
seems to be an accepted concept associate with courtly love: the lover is submissive to
the woman. Lewis then begins to talk in-depth about adultery in relation to courtly love.
He claims: “If courtly love necessitates adultery, adultery hardly necessitates courtly
love” (14). The struggle between romance and adultery leads Lewis to recall the story of
Malecasta and Busirane: a story that was originally told by Spenser. Lewis argues that
Spenser was unaware that he was ending a chapter of courtly love, or that he even
!
17!
understood the term ‘courtly love’ (423). Lewis argues, using the story of Malecasta and
Busirane, that the “ideal of married love grew out of courtly love” (426). Lewis believed
that marriage was separate from love in feudal society, a claim that he supports by saying
that the lady was often a little better than a piece of property to her husband (16). This
illustrates that the need for love in marriage is a creation of modern society. When
piecing Lewis’s ideas together, we see that Lewis believes that courtly love expresses the
chivalric code. The lover must show his noble actions to the lady through his bravery and
humility. The lovers emotions do not fade at any point and, in fact, the lady encourages
him to be a better knight than what he was before he met her (Lewis 17). Towards the
end of his writing, Lewis addresses how the aristocracy, or the noble sense, has
transformed over into a middle class theory that exists today in modern culture. Romantic
love becomes associated with monogamous marriage through the idea of a love leading
outside of one’s self having a mystical dimension that became associated with marriage,
especially in a middle-class Protestant context with a focus on the household (Lewis 402-
3).
Although Capellanus, Paris, and Lewis are three of the most influential scholars
associated with courtly love, they are not the only ones with compelling insight. The
French psychoanalyst, Jacques Lacan, addressed courtly love in many of his works as
well. During the twentieth century, Lacan was able to shed new light on the practice of
courtly love and show that courtly love has a connection to psychoanalytic theory. As a
medievalist by training, he was interested in how “courtly love worked against the
repressive effect of language on jouissance, thereby circumventing a structural non-
rapport between the sexes and proving that an ethics of desire can govern social practice
!
18!
if the admission of lack governs the debates and rituals in play” (Ragland 1). In other
words, Lacan argued that courtly love was “the greatest admission in the history of
Western love practices of the non-rapport at the heart of sexual relations,” which is the
unobtainable aspect of sexual love as Lacan saw it (2). His psychoanalytic approach
argued that the practice of courtly love melded desire as a sense of lack with love as an
idealizing principle.
Lacan touches on many aspects of courtly love within his argument. One of the
core factors in Lacan’s argument was that courtly love appeared when homosexual
amusement began to decline. Knights, who were often described in the medieval time
period as sharing homoerotic relationships with each other, were becoming increasingly
enticed by the idea of “The Woman, a love that keeps alive an essence of the feminine”
(Ragland 2). The relationship shared between the knight and “The Woman” in his view
gave rise to a culture for the warrior realms of “barbarian” Western Europe, and that
culture would help shape the future of the West. Another factor related to courtly love
mentioned by Lacan in his psychoanalytic approach was the presence of nobility, honor,
and chivalry. Lacan attributes the “invention of courtly love to a heroic effort-- an art, an
artifice, he says-- to circumvent a necessary impasse between the sexes” (Ragland 4). The
heroic aspect of courtly love was seen in the man’s attempt to please his lady.
Using the basic psychoanalytic principles of structure, das Ding, metaphor, and
the real, Lacan considers courtly love a practice that combines the spiritual, the sexual,
and the artistic, around the sexual non-rapport showing that “there is no ratio for a natural
harmony between the sexes,” or in other words that it was in an effect a symbolic if
disembodied integration of male and female (8). Essentially, the practice of courtly love,
!
19!
as interpreted by Lacan, shows that sexual difference is at the heart of cultural practices,
even continuing to this day. Ragland writes in explication Lacan’s views:
From the 11
th
century to the 12
th
or 13
th
, an Ideal of la belle dame held
sway as a principle of morality around which behavior, loyalty, and so on,
was encoded. The pivot was not marriage, monogamy, or motherhood, but
an Erotics. The poetry written to this belle dame concerned grief, unhappy
love, dissatisfaction… Not surprisingly, the Lady’s value often lay in her
giving grace, clemency, mercy to a suffering (i.e., desiring) lover (15).
Based on Regland’s claim, our view of love is culturally embedded, which is why it has
transformed over time. In the Middle Ages, also at the time in which a rise in courtly love
was present, “this intellectual practice organized desire around the paradoxical object, an
object constituted around its own disappearance, the object that psychoanalysis finds at
the base of all material in the real: Woman” (19). The idealizing of sexual attraction in
courtly love would, however, be transformed in part through otherworldly subversion, as
seen in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and its mystical notions of marriage beyond
knighthood, to live on in new forms, which is understandable in terms of Lacan’s adapter,
the feminist psychoanalytic theorist Julia Kristeva, whose ideas will be applied to the
poem in the next chapter.
As we enter the most recent time period, scholars still argue over the many
aspects of courtly love. Some scholars say courtly love is based on sexuality; others say it
is not. Some scholars say courtly love is simply a myth; others would argue that it is a
reality. Some scholars claim that courtly love was adulterous; other scholars have argued
that it was not. Some say its origins are found in Ovid; while others say it was not. These
!
20!
different interpretations are useful when analyzing the controversy that surrounds courtly
love. Two more modern and conflicting interpretations of courtly love are shown through
Georges Duby and Alfred Jeanroy, who were writing at the end of the twentieth century.
Both scholars have offered their ideas concerning courtly love in the centuries after
Capellanus, Paris, and Lewis, by raising serious questions for thought when analyzing the
notion of romantic love in medieval times.
Georges Duby published a book in 1988, as the twentieth century began to come
to a close, titled Love and Marriage in the Middle Ages, in which he theorizes that courtly
love was actually an “educational game.” He claims: "Courtly love was a game, an
educational game. It was the exact counterpart of the tournament. As at the tournament,
whose great popularity coincided with the flourishing of courtly eroticism, in this game
the man of noble birth was risking his life and endangering his body" (57). The
educational game he describes was a game that claimed courtly love primarily served the
purpose of men, which signals how his views are much different from earlier scholars. In
the onset of his chapter, On Courtly Love, Duby explains to his reader that he is
“…reducing the initial model of so-called courtly love to its more schematic form,
without taking into account the changes which distorted it in the course of the twelfth
century” (57). Like many others, Duby analyzes courtly love from a literary standpoint at
first in order to establish a stable definition for courtly love. Duby’s interpretation of
courtly love is described as follows:
The protagonist is a man, a 'youth' in both sense of the word, in the technical
sense that it had at that time (a man without a lawful wife) and in the literal sense, that is,
a mean young in age, whose education is not yet complete. This man besieges and tries to
!
21!
take a lady, that is to say a woman who is married and thus inaccessible, impregnable, a
woman who is surrounded and protected by the strictest of prohibitions imposed by a
liberal society- a society based on inheritances handed down through the male line, which
therefore viewed a wife's adultery as the most dreadful subversion, and threatened her
lover with terrible punishments (57).
Based on his description of courtly love, Duby believes that courtly love belonged
to an upper-class woman and an average male who was inexperienced in society. He
thought that courtly love acted as a model of behavior for young unmarried men in
medieval society. These men, he claims, may have otherwise used their leisure time to
commit crimes or other violent acts if courly love did not exist. Duby claims:
At the heart of this model lies danger, and this is where it should be. For on the
one hand, the whole spice of the affair came from the danger involved (the men of the
period believed, with good reason, that is was more exciting to chase the she-wolf than
the woodcock); on the other hand, it was a test in the course of a continuing education,
and the more perilous the test, the more educational it was (57).
The game described by Duby targets the younger male part of medieval society.
Duby argued that courtly love was a man’s game because it catered to the man in the
sense that it was helping him improve himself and his knighthood through a romantic
relationship."...The young man was risking his life in the hope of improving himself, of
enhancing his worth, his price, and also of taking, taking his pleasure, capturing his
adversary after breaking down her defenses, unseating her, knocking her down and
toppling her" (Duby 57). The man was fulfilling the woman’s desires, but at the same
time helping himself grow into a man who would later act as functioning member of
!
22!
society. Therefore, making this relationship two dimensional in purpose. Courtly loved
worked as a way to keep both men and women content in society.
The historical perspective behind Duby’s thoughts is also compelling for the
reader. Duby argued that the code of courtly love was meant to serve the prince. To
support this, Duby supplies the evidence that: “princely patronage deliberately
encouraged the institution of these secular liturgies” (60). As his writing progresses,
Duby stresses the idea of knighthood and the knightly values that men were displaying in
their quests for courtly love. “Courtly love taught men how to serve, and serving was the
duty of the good vassal” (62). Duby concludes that courtly love purports to serve the
male figure more than the female figure, deviating from any works that came before his
time. His views towards courtly love are especially compelling when looking at his works
next to those of Capellanus, Paris, and Lewis because of his disagreement with these
earlier scholars.
Alfred Jeanroy, a French scholar, took a different approach in his analysis of
courtly love. Jeanroy’s definition of courtly love only applied to the troubadours of the
“classic epoch,” which, according to Moore, is something that he acknowledges in his
writings (623). Jeanroy stressed the idea that essence of courtly love was found in the
worship of an idealized lady, which contrasts against Duby’s views. According to
Jeanroy, the lady lies at the center of courtly love. In addition, Jeanroy does not make
much of the unlawful characteristics of courtly love, leaving hardly any room for actual
adultery to occur. Jeanroy claims: “Conscious of the distance which separates him from
the beloved, he remains invariably respectful, humble, discreet, scarcely brave enough to
present his love or express his desire: it is the attitude of the devotee in ecstasy before the
!
23!
Madonna” (102). Jeanroy, like other scholars, emphasizes that the man should be humble,
respectful, and brave. However, he fails to address the issue of adultery in the same way
that earlier scholars, such as Capellanus, Paris, and Lewis, had. But he believed the
medieval era established fundamental new ideas of love for the West.
So then what is the real definition of the term “courtly love”? According to many
medieval literary works and based off of the interpretations provided by Capellanus,
Paris, Lewis, Duby, and Jeanroy, courtly love can be described as the love between a
noble knight and a married upper-class woman. The lover is submissive to the lady and
exerts his bravery, nobility, and is honorable. He is faithful to the lady and continues to
love her for the entirety of his existence and he learns to become a better knight through
her. This timeless theme of courtly love relates back to the poem of Sir Gawain and the
Green Knight, in which courtly love is the central theme critiqued in comic poetry as it
transitions from the ancient belief of romantic love into a more modern conception at the
end of the Middle Ages.
!
24!
Chapter 2: A Detailed Examination of Scenes from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
Knowing that the Gawain-poet was a contemporary of Geoffrey Chaucer, a well-
known English poet who wrote in the Middle Ages and is referred to as the “Father of
English Poetry,” we are able to draw connections and understand more about Sir Gawain
and the Green Knight from a societal perspective (Hales, 712). According to Lewis,
“Chaucer is a poet of courtly love” as well (201). At the time that Chaucer was writing,
the aftermath of the Black Death was setting in society. Chaucer was born in 1343 and
died in 1400, which means that he survived the Black Death and experienced the horrific
aftermath of the incident as well (Hales, 712). Assuming that the Gawain-poet is a
contemporary of Chaucer, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight was written as England
experienced the horrible repercussions. The Black Death, which took place in England
from 1346 to 1353 and remained widespread afterward, wiped out an estimated one-third
of the population (Noymer 616). The significance of an event that killed such a large
proportion of Europe’s population goes without saying. The Black Death changed
people’s views and made them rethink their values. The knowledge of knowing that the
poet grew up exposed to the Black Death allows additional analysis to be made when
interpreting Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in relation to courtly love. It is possible
that the Black Death influenced the poet to write Sir Gawain and the Green Knight from
a comedy standpoint in order to lighten the mood that was circulating around this time as
well as to challenge the social order, especially since it (unlike Chaucer’s work) was
written in a dialect from a marginal region outside the London metropolis and near the
Welsh cultural zone of alternative Celtic traditions (Bennett 71-90).
!
25!
The role that women play in the action of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight helps
mock the medieval tradition of courtly love. Critics have argued about Morgan le Fay’s
intentions of humiliating King Arthur in front of his court, Gawain’s quest, and
Gunevere’s reaction to the Green Knight. However, at the center of the poem is the Lady
of Hautdesert, who tempts Gawain and questions the conventions of courtly love. Thelma
Fenster has said: “…the centrality of the lady works to underline the poem’s purpose”
(83). By closely examining scenes in which Gawain is tempted by the Lady of Hautdesert
and by analyzing the moral tension that is present in the text, we see the effect of comedy
and are able to decipher the true meaning of the poem as a whole.
Before the Lady of Hautdesert ever confronts Gawain, he is tempted by her
presence. The poem confirms that the Lady of Hautdesert is a married woman, fulfilling
one of the qualifications for courtly love. The text explains that, Þe lorde loutes þerto,
and þe lady als [“the lord makes his way there, and his lady too”], showing a sense of
ownership in that the Lady accompanies the man as if she belongs to him (933). We then
get a description of the Lady from the poet: Ho watz þe fayrest in felle, of flesche and of
lyre, / And of compas and colour and costes, of alle oþer, / And wener þen Wenore, as þe
wyȝe þoȝt, [“She was the loveliest on earth in complexion and features / In figure, in
coloring and behavior above all others, / And more beautiful than Guenevere, it seemed
to the knight”] (943-945). This describes the initial attraction that Gawain feels for the
Lady of Hautdesert, drawing yet another parallel to courtly love through her beauty. The
text also discusses Guenevere, who is both King Arthur’s wife and known for her beauty
in Camelot. At the time that this was being written, fans of Arthurian literature would
know of Guenevere’s beauty and be able to imagine a Lady so beautiful as to attract
!
26!
Gawain. Guenevere is also symbolic to the women’s central part in the poem. According
to Thelma S. Fenster, “If the poem’s revisionary agenda is evidence in the initial
description of Arthur’s court, the portrait of Guenevere in Fitt I both emphasizes this
agenda and indicates the ways in which the positionings of women are central to it” (80).
As the poem continues, courtly love is being foreshadowed to the audience. The
poet emphasizes the connection between Gawain and the Lady at the dinner table, where
they were seated next to each other: Bot ȝet I wot þat Wawen and þe wale burde / Such
comfort of her compaynye caȝten togeder / Þurȝ her dere dalyaunce of her derne wordez,
/ Wyth clene cortays carp closed fro fylþe, / Þat hor play watz passande vche prynce
gomen, / in vayres, [“Yet I know that Gawain and his beautiful partner / Found such
enjoyment in each other’s company / Through a playful exchange of private remarks, /
And well-mannered small-talk, unsullied by sin, That their pleasure surpassed every
princely amusement for sure”] (1010-1015). The chemistry described between the two is
growing tremendously over such a short period of time. Simultaneously, however, the
Lord of the castle, Lord Bertilak, is very gracious towards Gawain. The mocking of
courtly love here draws on an overall otherworld framework of the poem, with its
inclusion of the “green world” element of the Green Knight and Morgan Le Faye. The
poem draws on an otherworldly tradition going back to pre-Scholastic Celtic times that
suggests a triadic view of relations and reality, rather than a binarized one. If courtly love
involves a binary between male and female, subject to a male gaze even when the female
is being adored, the otherworld adds a third element to mix up the binary, in effect.
The feminist psychoanalytic theorist Julia Kristeva writes about the rise of
cultural binaries in the West, which she relates to the Scholastic theology of the Trinity,
!
27!
as a source of static hierarchy.
5
The latter flourished alongside the static hierarchies of
feudalism from which courtly love emerged during the era of the Crusades. In this
binarized view of reality, she argues that male identity was formed in a fusion of the Real
and the Imaginary realms of psychoanalytic theory. That meld of imaginary
individualistic identity then came into a binary relation with the Symbolic realm, related
to nature and the feminine, tending to objectify it through a sense of desire as lack, as
described by Lacan. However, Kristeva argued that an alternative kind of triadic dance
between the Real, the Imaginary, and the Symbolic, in which identity is formed in
relationship and not in opposition to the other, involves also an alternative sense of desire
as relational. The mystical sense of hierarchy also lent itself to a sense of marriage as a
mystical relationship between the male, the female, and the spiritual, drawing on earlier
traditions. This could help explain how the mystical subversion of courtly love in the
poem supports Lewis' idea of courtly love melding into marriage as the old feudal system
crumbled.
Kristeva’s model in effect supplements Lacan’s, suggesting that his definition of
desire as lack is culturally specific, and while that structure is typical of Western culture
as it developed from Scholasticism, that an alternative mystical shaping of desire could
be more relational. It was that relational approach that the melding of romantic love and
marriage would draw on in emerging from the era of the Black Death and Wars of the
5
For discussion on Kristeva’s model, relating Western binaries to a static sense of the
Trinity, see Julia Kristeva, “Dostoevsky, the Writing of Suffering and Forgiveness” in
Black Sun: Depression and Melancholia, trans. Leon S. Roudiez (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1989), 173-218. Also see Alfred K. Siewers, “Introduction – Song,
Tree, and Spring: Environmental Meaning and Environmental Humanities” in Re-
Imagining Nature: Environmental Humanities and Ecosemiotics (Lewisburg,
Pennsylvania: Bucknell University Press, 2013), 1-44.
!
28!
Roses. However, as we shall see in Chapter 3, romantic marriage also ended up becoming
further changed around by the development of modern individualistic consumer culture
of the West. The latter would encourage the equation of marriage and romance again in
more Lacanian terms of desire as lack--like courtly love a symbolic approach to what he
called the non-rapport of the sexes in real terms, but still in a more individualistic
monogamy, in the romantic-comedy film genre.
On each day after their initial encounter, the Lady goes to see Gawain in private
quarters. She makes statements that are unacceptable in their current situation as a knight
and a married woman, depicting the convention of courtly love.
And Gawayn þe god mon in gay bed lygez,
Lurkkez quyl þe daylyȝt lemed on þe wowes,
Vnder couertour ful clere, cortyned aboute;
And as in slomeryng he slode, sleȝly he herde
A littel dyn at his dor, and dernly vpon;
And he heuez vp his hed out of þe cloþes,
A corner of þe cortyn he caȝt vp a lyttel,
And waytez warly þiderwarde quat hit be myȝt.
Hit watz þe ladi, loflyest to beholde, (1179-1187).
[And the good man Gawain lies in his fine bed,
Lying snug while the daylight gleamed on the walls,
Under a splendid coverlet, shut in by curtains.
And as he lazily dozed, he heard slily made
A little noise at his door and its stealthily open;
!
29!
And he raised up his head from the bedclothes,
Lifted a corner of the curtain a little,
And takes a glimpse warily to see what it could be.
It was the lady, looking her loveliest] (1179-1187).
The first day’s actions and dialogue are very comical for the most part. They depend
upon the idea that traditional idealistic words and themes from chivalric society are given
a more embodied sexual significance when used in the context of the bedroom. They rely
upon an embodied and incarnational sense of Nature, rather than an idealistic one, which
possibly reflects the impact of the Black Death in weakening the constructed overlapping
realms of feudalism and Scholasticism. Gawain’s innocent behavior when the Lady of
Hautdesert enters the bedroom sets the tone for what is going to come next. According to
David Mills, Gawain’s “…Innocence serves to amuse the reader by emphasizing just how
little doubt there can be about the Lady’s intentions under such circumstances” (613).
The Lady continues to act in the same manner and continues by saying: Your honour,
your hendelayk is hendely praysed / With lordez, wyth ladyes, with alle þat lyf bere,
[“Your good name and courtesy are honorably praised/ By lords and by ladies and all
folks alive”] (1228-1229). She also tries to lure him by mentioning that:
And now ȝe ar here, iwysse, and we bot oure one;
My lorde and his ledez ar on lenþe faren,
Oþer burnez in her bedde, and my burdez als,
Þe dor drawen and dit with a derf haspe;
And syþen I haue in þis hous hym þat al lykez,
I schal ware my whyle wel, quyl hit lastez,
!
30!
with tale.
Ȝe ar welcum to my cors,
Yowre awen won to wale,
Me behouez of fyne force
Your seruaunt be, and schale' (1230-1240).
[… and we two quire alone,
My husband and his men have gone far away,
Other servants are in bed, and my women too,
The door shut and locked with a powerful hasp;
And since I have under my roof the man everyone loves,
I shall spend my time well, while it lasts
with talk.
You are welcome to me indeed,
Take whatever you want;
Circumstances force me
To be your servant] (1230-1240).
The Lady is inviting Gawain to participate in a sexual affair with her behind her
husband’s back, which would be acting out themes from courtly love. According to Mills,
this scene is particularly comedic in the way that it is “inappropriate of the marital image
to Gawain’s position as a guest” (613).
The next day the Lady returns. Only this time, she is attempting to lure Gawain in
by attacking his behavior as a knight and his reputation for skill in the courtly arts
including love. Again, this scene engages courtly love because the Lady is superior to the
!
31!
man. According to Shadi Neimneh and Qusai Al-Thebyan, and in reference to Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight, “The lady’s authoritative stance” is equivalent to “…a
master instructing a novice knight…” (241). In this sense, the Lady is trying to put
Gawain down and tempt him using reverse psychology and is criticizing his behavior as
both a person and a knight. The Lady says: 'Sir, ȝif ȝe be Wawen, wonder me þynkkez, /
Wyȝe þat is so wel wrast alway to god, / And connez not of compaynye þe costez
vndertake, / And if mon kennes yow hom to knowe, ȝe kest hom of your mynde, [“Sir if
you are Gawain, it astonishes me/ That a man always so strongly inclined to good, /
Cannot grasp the rules of polite behavior, / And if someone instructs him, lets them drop
out of mind”] (1481-1484). The Lady also brings up “courtesy,” a major component of
courtly love, especially when looking closely at C.S. Lewis’s definition of the meaning of
courtly love. The Lady says, in reference to Gawain, So cortayse, so knyȝtyly, as ȝe ar
knowen oute - / And of alle cheualry to chose, þe chef þyng alosed / Is þe lel layk of luf,
þe lettrure of armes, [“So courteous and chivalrous as you are known far and wide- / And
of all of the aspects of chivalry, the thing most praised / Is the true practice of love,
knighthood’s very lore; / For to speak of the endeavors of true knights”] (1511-1514).
Her insult towards his knighthood is tended to wound his ego, but Gawain still does not
engage in the act of courtly love. At this point, the scene is mocking courtly love for what
it is: an adulterous affair, and a violation of both spiritual and social community, yet here
without consummation, while subverting Gawain’s male identity as a knight in a way in
which Chrétien’s poems did not do with their heroes.
However, the Lady has finally pushed him to the point where he gives her a kiss.
As the poem continues, the relationship between Gawain and the Lady intensifies.
!
32!
Gawain is finding it harder and harder to resist the temptations of courtly love presented
by the Lady. He is constantly reminded of Lord Bertilak and does not want to commit the
sin of betrayal against him, representing the traditional ideals of knighthood. Knighthood
has also been seen as a homosocial behavior that men engaged in, symbolized here by
Gawain’s dilemma of having pledged to give Bertilak whatever he gets from his wife.
Medievalist Dorsey Armstrong notes that,
Homosocial bonding balanced with heterosexual desire created and
legitimized the knightly subcommunity… The heterosexualized knightly
urge to serve one’s lady, interscts with the homosocial desire to emulate
and bond with one’s fellows… The model of homosocial bonding made
licit by heterosexual desire, the organizational scheme by which Arthur’s
realm was both maintained and destroyed (203).
The woman figure in an adulterous affair transforms the homosocial aspect of
knighthood, helping to define further the bravery, nobility, and honor of knighthood as
more masculine and desirable. By presenting the bedroom scenes in a social context in
which Gawain can demonstrate his masculinity, the Lady criticizes the ideals of
knighthood with hidden meanings in her words. She evokes a very strong sense of
physical and sexual attraction through her dialogue. Although Gawain tries to resist, he
does however, accept the girdle as a gift from the Lady before he goes to fight the Green
Knight:
'If ȝe renay my rynk, to ryche for hit semez,
Ȝe wolde not so hyȝly halden be to me,
I schal gif yow my girdel, þat gaynes yow lasse.'
!
33!
Ho laȝt a lace lyȝtly þat leke vmbe hir sydez,
Knit vpon hir kyrtel vnder þe clere mantyle,
Gered hit watz with grene sylke and with golde schaped,
Noȝt bot arounde brayden, beten with fyngrez;
And þat ho bede to þe burne, and blyþely bisoȝt,
Þaȝ hit vnworþi were, þat he hit take wolde.
[“If you reject my ring because you think it too precious,
And wish not to be so deeply indebted to me,
I shall give you my girdle that profits you less.”
Quickly she unbuckled a belt clipped round her waist,
Fastened over her kirtle beneath the fine mantle;
It was woven of green silk and trimmed with gold,
Embroidered at the edges and decorated by hand;
And this she offered to the knight, and sweetly implored him
That despite its slight value he would accept it] (1827-1835).
In this scene, the girdle is displayed as the physical representation of courtly love,
referred to as a “love-token,” or “luf-lace” in Middle English (1874). Gawain does not
tell the lord about his girdle, as he promised the Lady he would not, showing the reader a
different side of Gawain then has been seen prior to this moment. Before the third day,
Gawain was conflicted between the physical attraction to a married woman and engaging
in an affair with her verses the purpose of his quest; to meet the Green Knight as he
promised he would to receive his “blow.” The Lady, in this case, is distracting him from
focusing on the purpose of his journey. This scene shows comedy through the double
!
34!
meaning that it has.
When Gawain goes to meet the Green Knight and the truth is revealed, Gawain
rants about how awful he is, as if his masculine identity as a knight has been
deconstructed in the context of the courtly love comedy. But given that that masculine
knightly identity is a key component of courtly love, the satiric effect is to bring into
question whether courtly love, along with chivalry, really is natural or not, especially
given the associations of the Green Knight with nature. When Gawain chose to keep the
girdle from the lord, he broke his promise and honored the Lady instead. Although
Gawain survived his journey, he was tempted by the Lady and failed to uphold his honor.
When he realizes the Green Knight was his host, Gawain behaves similarly to a young
child throwing a temper-tantrum. Gawain says the following:
Bot hit is no ferly þaȝ a fole madde,
And þurȝ wyles of wymmen be wonen to sorȝe,
For so watz Adam in erde with one bygyled,
And Salamon with fele sere, and Samson eftsonez-
Dalyda dalt hym hys wyrde--and Dauyth þerafter
Watz blended with Barsabe, þat much bale þoled (2414-2419).
[But it is no wonder if a fool acts insanely
And is brought to grief through womanly wiles;
For so was Adam beguiled by one, here on earth,
Solomon by several women, and Samson was another –
Delilah was cause of his fate – and afterwards David
Was deluded by Bathsheba, and suffered much grief] (2414-2419).
!
35!
Gawain is comparing himself to many other men, famous figures from the Bible, who
have failed because of women. This is a comic approach to courtly love because the
figures that he mentions had done far worse than what Gawain had done. Each time he
mentions one of these men, his argument becomes less meaningful. In addition, in terms
of the poem's medieval audience, the failure of Adam to take responsibility for his own
flaws, and to blame Eve as the Woman, would have been a familiar trope adding to the
comedy.
Despite his dishonesty, Gawain gets to keep his head and suffers a minor battle
wound. The fact that Gawain only suffered minor injuries because he fought off courtly
love highlights how society looked at courtly love: as a violation of the religious ideals of
knighthood but a necessary evil. Paradoxically, also supported knighthood as an identity.
The ideas of courtly love seemed to distract a knight from following the chivalric code,
even while being central to it. The uneasy tension between courtly love and chivalry
parallels that between the warrior business of knights and their supposed ideals. The
poem in many ways exposes those contradictions. It is also comic how Gawain is so hard
on himself. Readers who are familiar with Arthurian literature know that Guenevere and
Lancelot were engaging in a courtly love affair behind King Arthur’s back. According to
Thelma Fenster, “Guenevere and her betrayals of her king are, of course, notorious in the
dissolution of the Round Table; she is most famous, in other words, for her association
with the end," with Le Morte Darthur as Thomas Malory's book title famously focused
the Arthurian legends (80). Fenster provides evidence that women were the downfall of
men, chivalry, and knighthood in the medieval time period through her use of Guenevere.
This is paralleled to the incident between Gawain and the Lady of Hautdesert that we see
!
36!
in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. “At this early stage of the Round Table’s career,
Gawain is a stronger knight than Lancelot will turn out to be” (86). If Fenster is correct,
women are at fault, and Gawain appears to be a true knight for following the chivalric
code much closer than others, and for feeling remorse for his actions. Yet he is revealed
as ridiculous in doing so.
When Gawain finally returns to Arthur’s court, he is extremely ashamed of
himself for accepting the girdle. Still, he is still more honorable than most other men in
Arthur’s court. He displayed his strength when he volunteered to partake in this
challenge, when no other knight would. He also respected Lord Bertilak enough to resist
the temptation of courtly love. Upon entering Arthur’s court, Gawain says:
“See, my lord,” said the man, and held up the girdle,
“This belt caused the scar that I bear on my neck;
This is the injury and damage that I have suffered
For the cowardice and covetousness that seized me there;
This token of the dishonesty I was caught committing,
And now I must wear it as long as I live.
While Gawain sees the girdle as his failure, brought upon him by a woman, the rest of the
court continues to wear the girdle as a sign of honor:
Þat lordes and ladis þat longed to þe Table,
Vche burne of þe broþerhede, a bauderyk schulde haue,
A bende abelef hym aboute of a bryȝt grene,
And þat, for sake of þat segge, in swete to were.
For þat watz acorded þe renoun of þe Rounde Table,
!
37!
And he honoured þat hit hade euermore after,
As hit is breued in þe best boke of romaunce.
[That lords and ladies who belong to the Table,
Each member of the brotherhood, should wear such a belt,
A baldric of bright green crosswise on the body,
Similar to Gawain’s and worn for his sake:
And that became part of the renown of the Round Table,
And whoever afterwards wore it was always honored,
As it set down in the most reputable books of Romance] (2515-2521).
While the text notes that the girdle is worn as a symbol of honor, it is also being
worn as a sign of mockery towards Gawain. It is ironic that the Knights of the Round
Table wore the girdle after Gawain had explained the dishonesty of courtly love and the
temptation of women that the girdle symbolized. While the text first assumes that
knighthood is centralized around strength, it later reveals that knighthood requires
courage and honesty as significant factors as well. While courage and honesty were
characteristic of Gawain at the beginning of the poem, they began to dissipate as love
made its way into the picture. Gawain’s failure was largely due to courtly love, which
discredited him as a knight, by exposing contradictions within the identity of male
knighthood of the time. Thelma Fenster argues: “The lady of the girdle is reduced to the
corruption of the flesh…”(90). Fenster purports to show that Gawain’s only weakness
was women, commenting on how ancient society perceived courtly love and women at
the time. However, the ambiguous role of Morgan LeFaye in the poem, as "goddess" and
ruler of Lord Bertilak, and the feminine associations of the natural world in the domain of
!
38!
the Green Knight as a servant of Morgan, raises the question of whether Gawain's
knighthood is also inadequate because it fails to take into account the natural life of
human beings as embodied souls, relative to sexual and other issues.
The otherworldly element of the story reinforces symbolically Kristeva’s model
of the triadic overcoming the binary. The “cutting” of Gawain occurs on the Feast of the
Circumcision, a time of medieval Christian commemoration of the proof of God’s
embodied presence within Creation. The proof of embodiedness in the cut that Gawain
receives both releases Gawain from penalty and suggests a mystical alternative to
knighthood and courtly love—in marriage, which mystically also was taken by medievals
to symbolize the relation of God to the human community.
This effect of the poem can also be understood in terms of Timo Maran’s model
for reading the text as a nature-text (270-294). In Maran’s model, both meaning and the
identity of the reader immersed in a text emerge from a coming together of what he called
the Environment, the Text, the Author, and the Reader. The contexts of the medieval
poem include, as discussed earlier, the Environment of the social disruption of
knighthood in the wake of the Black Death as well as the way in which the poem shapes
a fantasy overlay of British geography. The Text draws on traditions of Celtic mythology
and of Christian and biblical imagery, crafted into Middle English and a combination of
native and French words and poetic technique. The Author is unknown but the satirical
and mystical elements of the ethos of the poem are given to the reader in cues from the
text. And the Reader as a context involves different temporalities mixing in the original
post-Black Death audience, engaged with an emerging commercial economy and a search
for alternatives to the Norman French colonial regime and static Scholastic Church
!
39!
hierarchies. The combination of all these contexts shapes the reader’s experience of
identity within it, as a comedy about a knightly breakdown.
Thus, the poem can be seen as subverting idealistic rhetoric associated with
courtly love, as a means of bringing into question masculine knightly identity It offers a
deep entwining of the perceived natural aspects of life (including embodied sex), in a
way that challenges aristocratic knighthood with a more down-to-earth sense of life. The
result is what Lewis noted in his early study: A trajectory of courtly love being merged
into more of a partnership ideal of marriage as a middle class began to replace the only
knightly and aristocratic elite in the wake of the Black Death and subsequently the Wars
of the Roses. In this we can see a transition from the binary of knight and beloved to what
Kristeva described as a more mystical triad – eventually of husband, wife, and a sense of
the divine related to Nature. In the poem, we see that the scenes of courtly love are highly
comical. Gawain, as the hero, is tested, tempted, and tricked by a woman who is
desperate to trap him in courtly love, but who is also related to a realm of otherworldly
and subversive Nature. He overcomes his journey, however, by living by the traditional
and romantic ideals of knighthood, which nonetheless are shaken by his comic trials. The
reader is made ready, in the laughter of the community at the end, for what Lewis
described as a cultural transition into romantic love within marriage for a middle-class
culture emerging from the ruins of feudalism.
!
40!
Chapter 3: Courtly Love as Modern Comedy; The Evolution of a Romantic Ideal
Courtly love has been transformed from its original medieval form and changed
into marriage and the idea of monogamous committed relationship over many centuries.
The medieval literary poem, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, foreshadows this
transition through its comedic critique, because it sheds light on the connection of
attraction and trust, which became embedded in marriage as a modern middle-class
institution in the West. The comedy seen throughout the poem provides evidence that
courtly love was looked upon negatively in its time following the Black Death, when the
old aristocratic society entwined with it in Norman England was falling apart. In The
Allegory of Love, C.S. Lewis explained the subsuming of courtly love into marriage,
symbolized by Edmund Spenser’s figure of Britomart in The Faerie Queene, as “the final
struggle between the romance of adultery and the romance of marriage” (424), in which a
chaste marriage won out in English culture. Lewis concluded his study by writing of
courtly love in vestigial terms as it appears retrospectively to us moderns: “What once
was platitude should now have for some the brave appeal of a cause nearly lost, and for
others the interest of a highly specialized historical phenomenon – the peculiar flower of
a peculiar civilization, important whether for good or ill and well worth our
understanding” (449-50).
Modern society in new forms praises the idealization of a sustainable relationship,
one characterized by honesty, loyalty, and fidelity, showing its transfiguration of
concerns associated with love that existed in early centuries. This is evident in one of the
most globally popular adaptations of medieval romance, the romantic comedy film genre
of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Film expert, Tamar Jeffers McDonald, has
!
41!
defined romantic comedy as “… a film which has as its central narrative motor a quest
for love, which portrays this quest in a light-hearted way and almost always to a
successful conclusion” (9). The melding of romantic love with marriage that Lewis
described as exemplified in the 1590’s poem The Faerie Queene was spurred in part by
economic and social changes that eventually would support a more individualistic view
of love and a more nuclear sense of the family, even as it retained a certain community
ethos.
Today, modern attitudes seem different than the attitudes present in the Middle
Ages. However, the same concerns still remain the same. Both men and women in
modern society still desire a very physically attractive partner, as they did in medieval
society. The male partner involved in a courtly love affair was often characterized as
being an ideal knight, which has carried over today. Modern women often long for men
who show that they are physically strong and physically fit for the needs of a woman.
Often, the “ideal” image of a man for a woman in modern romantic comedy is one who is
successful in his career while attentive to his partner. These characteristics are paralleled
with the re-translation of knighthood and the chivalric code. In addition, the need for a
sustainable relationship exists in today’s society. The notion of infidelity is widely
criticized by modern society in the same way that it was critiqued in the comical
approach taken by Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, and still is especially in the notion
of cheating. In this romantic model, a man must be faithful to the lady that he loves for
the entirety of his existence, regardless of their ups and downs. This is emphasized in
modern society through marriage vows that are seen as a type of contractual obligation,
even with more open divorce laws today. One must take a vow and uphold the vow that
!
42!
he has taken, through the bad times and the good times. The emergence of a
commercially based economy and society in the wake of the Black Death and Wars of the
Roses may help explain these parallels, in the sense that this development helped shape
the modern world (Bennett 71-90).
The following examples show how re-imagined themes of courtly love linger on
in modern centuries, through films How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, A Knight’s Tale, and
Clueless.
How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days
Seeing that the media is such a prominent part of modern society, it is no surprise
that it has become a resource as to how society treats social conventions, especially the
conventions related to love. The 2003 romantic comedy, How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days,
directed by Donald Petrie, depicts the concerns of today’s society when dealing with
romantic love. These ideas are rooted in the ancient medieval conception of courtly love
as seen in the comedic treatment of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Many of the same
themes present in courtly love are seen in the modern-day film depicting love, along with
many of the critiques of courtly love that are used in the poem. How to Lose A Guy In 10
Days is a film that provides an outlet for analyzing the current social perception of
romantic love as a long-term commitment, either within or outside of marriage.
Benjamin Barry, the male protagonist, is a successful and handsome advertising
executive who is competing with two of his female co-workers for a campaign regarding
diamonds. He bets them that he can make a woman of their choice fall in love with him
in just 10 days. If he wins the bet, the women must forfeit their control over the campaign
to him. Andie Anderson, the female protagonist, is a publicist for a magazine, who is
!
43!
writing a “how to” story on “how to lose a guy in 10 days,” a bet with her boss that will
allow her to write stories on more interesting and worldly topics, such as politics. When
both Benjamin Berry and Andie Anderson attend the same convention, Ben’s competitors
elect Andie for the bet. Andie, who is looking for a man for her “how to” video, decides
that Ben could be the perfect guinea pig. Each protagonist’s hidden agenda ends in the
ultimate fight for modern day romantic love seen in the climax of the film(Petrie, 2003).
The setting of the film takes place in New York City with the two main characters
working for two separate high-profile fashion magazines. Both of their worlds rely on
society’s dominant ideology of love, in relation to the culture of fashion. When Andie
Anderson, played by Kate Hudson, the female protagonist, is introduced in the film, she
is portrayed as the ideal woman in modern society. She is a typical beautiful blonde,
drives a red convertible, and has a desirable job. As the opening credits are playing, we
see many blonde and beautiful women on magazine covers and we understand Andie’s
lifestyle through these women. From the start, it is obvious from her job and car that
Andie is economically well off. She also resembles the many women on the magazine
covers. Furthermore, when Ben’s female co-workers are deciding on what female to pick
for the bet, they pick Andie, and refer to her as the woman with “the blonde hair” and
“pretty smile” (0:17).
6
This suggests that Andie is society’s idea of the “perfect” woman.
Andie is the equivalent to the noble woman in medieval society. We are then introduced
to Ben, played by Matthew McConaughey, the male protagonist, who appears strong,
attractive, and successful. He depicts the medieval idea of knighthood through the way he
is presented. He is first shown wearing his “armor” when he rides his motorcycle to
6
I am citing the film, How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, using an hour and minute format.
!
44!
work, wearing his helmet and jacket, appearing tough. When he arrives at work, he takes
off his shirt to change into other clothes (0:05-0:07). At this point, the audience is
exposed to a true knight. His body depicts his strength and attraction. In both Andie and
Ben, we see the ancient ideas of courtly love embedded in modern society.
Ben acts similarly to Gawain in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in the way in
which he volunteers his strength in the bet against his female co-workers, although he
was not originally picked for the job (0:16-0:17). As with Morgan Le Faye in the poem,
women seem to be catalysts of the plot. When his co-workers challenge him, they explain
that he needs to find a woman who is inferior to him. One that is “giddy, desirous,
adventurous, and desperate for love” (0:15). Ben’s co-workers also argue with him about
the differences between a woman in love and a woman in lust. While it can be argued that
courtly love in ancient times would be better titled as courtly lust, it was in fact courtly
love because the woman was fulfilling the void that her husband could not fill for her.
Her desire to be loved and to love was the sole purpose of her infidelity. As the film
progresses, the tables quickly turn on Ben, and Andie is superior, depicting a medieval
lady with her courtly lover. Although Andie has to be devoted to Ben and Ben has to be
devoted to Andie, the idea of the lady having a superior position is still there, but in a
roundabout way for modern times. Andie challenges Ben when she adds a feminine touch
to Ben’s apartment by placing several stuffed animals around his bedroom and by
decorating his bathroom with pink accessories (0:55-0:56). Similar to Sir Gawain and the
Green Knight, How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days incorporates comedy to critique the ideas
that surround courtly love. Ben is frightened by the use of feminine products and
decorations in his apartment, which is overshadowed by humor when he notices the
!
45!
transformation of his apartment and begins to scream. Similarly, in Sir Gawain and the
Green Knight, Gawain throws a temper tantrum when he realizes that Lady Hautdesert
has stripped away his knighthood by tricking him into keeping the green girdle from the
Lord.
The biggest critique on courtly love is mentioned in the beginning of the film.
Upon making the bet, Ben mentions that his female co-workers can pick any “single,
available woman,” showing that modern society does not condone the idea of adultery
(0:17-0:18). If Ben had not given these strict guidelines, his co-workers would have free
range to pick any women they wanted to. However, they are forced to comply with
modern society’s rules and regulations. In addition, when Andie is looking for a man for
her “how to” article, she comes across a married man. Andie approaches him, unaware
that he is married. When he mentions to her that he has a wife, her facial expression
immediately changes as she becomes embarrassed at her approach (0:18-0:19). Her
reaction shows that she acknowledges that dating a married man is wrong, which again
critiques the idea of adultery present in courtly love. Combined, both Ben and Andie’s
feelings towards adultery comment on modern society’s opinions towards being faithful
and loyal to another.
Both of the main characters show that they have other allegiances besides a
relationship. They have friends and professional careers pulling them away from each
other, which displays a message about commitment in a comedic way. Andie, in
particular, tries to explain to her boss that she is beginning to fall in love with Ben and
does not want to go through with writing the “how to” article (1:22). However, her boss
will not allow this to happen. This comments on the idea that one must uphold what
!
46!
society wants. If Andie does not listen to her boss, she will lose her job. Yet, if she does
listen to her boss, she will lose the man she loves. This dilemma references a knight
involved in courtly love because the knight is torn between his courtly partner and
upholding the chivalric code, but still in the modern monogamous context mentioned
above, which adds to the satire.
The fact that both main characters are involved in a bet, criticizes courtly love as
unsustainable because of the lack of commitment that is present in a courtly relationship.
The intimate scene of the couple in the shower at Ben’s parents house (1:17-1:19)
parallels the revelation at the fundraiser of how both have been involved in a bet (1:29-
1:31). The vehicle of the bet itself sets up a conflict between a commercialized and
career-centered view of love and a more monogamously focused one, toward which the
film moves. At the revelations, both characters are extremely disturbed by the other’s
actions because of the feelings they began to develop for each other. Comedy is present
during a very serious matter when the two sing a duet in front of the people at the
fundraiser because of the frustrations that arise due to the betrayal (1:32-1:36). The idea
of the lack of commitment that comes from putting other things first, whether it is work
or social status, is present at this very moment. Finally, when Andie leaves the fundraiser
and the two are bickering outside of the venue, ideal love conquers all. The two realize
that they are in love with each other and that their relationship was more than just a bet.
We have reached a point in the twenty-first century where love has changed in popular
culture, and the two characters show that, although not married, they are committed to
each other and that romantic love is defined by fidelity, honesty, and sustainability.
Courtly love is scrutinized here for being unsustainable due to the absence of
!
47!
commitment that exposes it in current society to a potentially cheap commercialism
symbolized by the bet. The use of comedy to support the idea of romantic love shows that
there should be commitment in all relationships, which is encouraged by the film in the
finale. Ben chases Andie on his motorcycle in an attempt to catch her cab before she
leaves New York City to move away and start a new life. At this moment, he resembles a
knight who is rescuing his lady so that he will never be without her, signifying that
modern-day marriage or a long lasting relationship for love is the norm in today’s
society. Today, cheating is not accepted as a norm because it is seen as demoralizing for a
modern contractual sense of relationship. The rejection of infidelity or cheating, as
affirmed in modern romantic comedy films such as How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, has
roots in changes to courtly love evident as early as Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,
during the period of feudalism’s demise.
A Knight’s Tale
A film saturized in the theme of courtly love is A Knight’s Tale, directed by Brian
Helgeland and released in 2001. Helgeland mocks the traditional notion of courtly love
by taking a comedic approach to the film. The title is deceiving for the way that it entices
those familiar with the medieval era, particularly medieval literature, to believe that it is
replicating Geoffrey Chaucer’s writing called “The Knightes Tale” from his collection of
stories best known as The Canterbury Tales. Authors Martha W. Driver and Sid Ray have
said, “...there is an echo of the Canterbury Tales in the film’s title: a knight obviously
replaces the knight, and in addition, the foregrounding of Wat and Roland (William’s
squires) alludes to - or perhaps “samples”- another of the Tales” (202). Although
Chaucer does make an appearance in the film, A Knight’s Tale is not centralized around
!
48!
Chaucer or “The Knightes Tale”. Rather, the film features a peasant-born central
character, William Thatcher, who is played by Heath Ledger, and his quest to win a series
of jousting competitions. Along the way, he meets the love of his life, a noblewoman
named Jocelyn, who is played by Shannyn Sossamon, shifting the central focus of the
film towards courtly love. While the film does accurately depict aspects of courtly love, it
simultaneously critiques the notion, to show that medieval conceptions of love are
outdated and have been altered over time.
The knight’s attraction to the lady is imperative to the notion of courtly love. He
will usually worship her from afar before he pursues his interest in her, which is due in
part because he is of lower status than the lady. In A Knight’s Tale, William’s status as a
peasant is declared at the beginning of the film when his master, Sir Ector, has died.
William disguises himself as Sir Ector and jousts in his place, winning the battle and
being crowned champion. While there are subtle hints that William is poor prior to this
point, his peasant-born status is confirmed when William, and his two friends, Wat and
Roland, disperse the coins they earned after selling the prize that William won from
jousting. Realizing that he could win more competitions, William attempts to persuade
his friends to use put their money towards “training and outfitting” so that William can
continue to joust. He declares, “In one month we can be on our way to glory and riches
none of us never dreamed of!”(0:09). As the men begin to be enticed by the idea, Roland
reminds William “you are not of noble birth” and Wat continues by saying that, “we are
the sons of peasants” (0:10). Regardless, the men agree to take their chances and head to
another competition.
!
49!
At the jousting competition, William notices Jocelyn and is immediately
captivated by her beauty (0:20). He follows her on his horse and says, “Would you speak
to me?” He continues by saying “I would hear you speak if it cost me my ears” (0:22).
After he asks her name, she responds “Would you care if I was ugly?” (0:22). The
dialogue shows that a main component of the courtly love criteria have been met; the
man is attracted to a beautiful woman. It is not until William jousts, however, that her
noble status is confirmed. Up until this point, Jocelyn has been shown surrounded by the
lower class in the streets. She is dressed much different from them, as they all are covered
in rags, while Jocelyn wears lavish dresses and head garments, showing her nobility.
However, it is not until Jocelyn stands with the rest of the noble people in the stands, who
comment that William is a peasant, that the audience receives confirmation of her status.
Later in the film, the men refer to Jocelyn as Venus, goddess of love and beauty in
Roman mythology, and this suggests her amatory power as “Venus severed from Cupid,”
given that Cupid is “associated with courtly love,” as Lewis noted of the move toward
marriage in The Faerie Queene (427).
Helgeland’s choice to name the noblewoman Jocelyn cannot be overlooked.
Jocelyn was a man’s name during medieval times, and it can be interpreted as a form of
mockery towards the homosocial behavior that many knights have been said to engage in
during this time period, and to which courtly love may have created a boundary. Jocelyn
serves as physical symbol of Helgeland’s mockery of courtly love and its components.
Driver and Ray comment that A Knight’s Tale “...tilts too at ultramodern young women
in a postfeminist age through the liberated (and yet annoyingly conventional) Jocelyn,
who is William’s love interest… “ (199-200).
!
50!
Helgeland portrays William in a way that shows he embodies knighthood.
According to Driver and Ray, “the knightly code (in the movie) is clearly a masculinist
one” (200). Themes of nobility and chivalry are constantly reinforced as William wins
several jousts against his opponents. He sees the opportunity that Sir Ector left when he
died and seizes it. He shows his honor, pride, and that he can actually fight like noble
knights of medieval times were said to. In certain cases, he proves to be similar to
Gawain from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. He goes on a quest to fight others, just
as Gawain went on a quest to face the Green Knight. He also dresses in armor to show his
Knighthood. There are marks on William’s armor that are similar to the pentangle that
Gawain wore when he fought the Green Knight (0:34). The pentangle shows that Gawain
is a true knight and that he is very virtuous. The five virtues are generosity, fellowship,
chastity, courtesy, and charity. Likewise, the symbol on William’s armor shows that he is
an ideal knight. Depicted on his armor are three fighting dragons, spreading their wings
and colored in gold and red. Although it appears antique in appearance, William still has
the power to win in competitions, emphasizing his strength.
Chivalry and romance combine when the relationship between Jocelyn and
William intensifies. A more qualified suitor named Count Adhemar, who is played by
Rufus Sewell, is challenging William. Usually, but not always, the lady involved in
courtly love is married to a man of high prestige. However, Adhemar’s noble
background, that courtly love model is not entirely mimicked because Adhemar only
intends to marry Jocelyn. Regardless, William will not give up on Jocelyn, because his
love for her is too strong. He asks her, “How may I prove my love for you?” and Jocelyn
asks him to do his worst in the jousting (1:21). Essentially, she is asking him to lose.
!
51!
Although he does not want to lose, he wants to prove to his love to her. In certain ways,
this exemplifies the amount of power that women have today in relationships, that they
did not have back in the Middle Ages. As discussed in chapter 1, it was certainly ironic
that Eleanore of Aquitaine exercised as much power as she did. Martha W. Driver and
Sid Ray have said:
Jocelyn retains some characteristics of Chrétien’s Guinevere in the scene
where she demands that William lose a series of jousts at the tournament
in Paris in order to prove his love for her, just as Lancelot does at the
tournament of the Dame de Noauz in the Chevalier de la Charrette. Her
reasoning hearkens back to the code of courtly love and the total
submission of the lover to the beloved but at the same time adds a modern
spin to it that overlays the ethos of the imperious courtly lady (200).
To draw on this analysis, William is willing to lose the competition, what he has “waited
his whole life for,” just to prove his love for her, reflecting the aspect of courtly love that
includes a submissive lover. In addition, the sacrifices that William makes for his lady
can be considered heroic deeds of valor, again linking love and knighthood. After
William purposely loses the competition to prove his love for her, Jocelyn is seen
sneaking into his private quarters. However, it is not completely private, as Wat,
William’s squire, is waiting outside. The most compelling part of this scene, though,
comes seconds later when Wat says, “Guinevere comes to Lancelot” (1:27) This is
interesting in a two-dimensional way. First, the film is referring to Jocelyn and William
as courtly lovers, like Guinevere and Lancelot. However, the second aspect of the
dialogue does, in fact, critique courtly love for the concept that it is. Wat mentions that
!
52!
Guinevere is going to Lancelot after the joust, showing that Jocelyn has submissive
tendencies, which would nullify courtly love in this particular case. Helgeland indicates
through his film that ideas from the time of Chaucer, a contemporary of the Gawain poet,
are being questioned by a modern conception of what it means to be involved
romantically.
While the criteria of courtly love are met in many ways, they are also blatantly
mocked on several occasions. Courtly love is a consummation of secret love. Throughout
the film, however, Jocelyn and William’s love is publicized to everyone around them.
Specifically, many others surround Jocelyn and William when they discuss how William
can prove his love for Jocelyn. In addition, the couple is in a quiet environment, where
many people are worshipping and praying, critiquing courtly love. It appears as if the
public is an audience, watching the two argue over love. As the people stare, the couple
gets angry and shouts at them, which is shocking given the nature of their secret love
(1:20). Another instance in which Helgeland mocks courtly love is when the song “We
Will Rock You” by Queen plays right before the joust, commenting on the unserious
nature of the film. The song preference also suggests that the ideals of knighthood seen in
the film are not traditional ideals, and are, in fact, mocking medieval knights from long
ago. The song is comedic in the context in which it is used, undermining William’s
reputation as a true knight. With that said, it does, without a doubt, show a ludic aspect of
chivalry.
The final scene of the film illustrates Helgeland’s ultimate critique of courtly
love, which also parallels the idea presented by C.S. Lewis that courtly love has
transformed into our modern conception of marriage. As the last seconds of the film
!
53!
begin to unfold, Jocelyn chooses William over Count Adhemar, which would be
uncharacteristic of courtly love in the Middle Ages (2:08). Helgeland’s choice to end the
film in this way confirms that he is mocking courtly love as an outdated romantic love
that no longer exists today. The ambiguity at the end of the film implies that Jocelyn and
William will get married and live happily ever after. Driver and Ray have said, ““The
reduction of knightly proving to a series of sporting competitions crystallizes the pattern
of Bildungsroman, but it is not this feature alone that recalls the narrative structure of
classic romances and the ways in which modernity reinscribes and reperforms them to its
own ideologically reflective ends” (201). The ending of this film reaffirms that we are
currently living in the twenty-first century, where marriage is significant and cheating is
socially unaccepted. Hence, courtly love is outdated, but modern marriage is keeping up
with the times.
Clueless
Amy Heckerling satirizes the theme of courtly love in the film Clueless, released
in 1995. Clueless, another film belonging to the “romantic comedy genre,” emphasizes
comedy to highlight the importance of long-term commitment in modern-day society.
The film has often been referred to as the modern adaptation of Jane Austen’s 1816
classic novel, Emma, whose main male character significantly is titled Mr. Knightley.
The film and novel have much resemblance in themes and characters, suggesting that
Austen was aware that a transition of romantic love was taking place during the 19
th
century, which is when she was writing her novels.
Clueless is centered around the female protagonist Cher, played by Alicia
Silverstone, and her journey as she unexpectedly finds the perfect knight. The film
!
54!
depicts Cher as the ideal noble lady. Specifically, the opening scenes of the film highlight
Cher’s wealth and beauty by depicting Cher and her father as members of the elite in
society. The house in which they live is enormous and decorated with chandeliers,
statues, and large portraits, complete with a maid. In addition, Cher’s closet is
overflowing with clothes, which are all accounted for in her fancy computerized system
that helps her choose which clothes to wear for the day. As the audience is given a tour of
the house, Cher says, “Daddy is a litigator, those are the scariest kind of lawyers; even
Lucy, our maid, is terrified of him! Daddy is so good he gets paid 500 dollars an hour to
fight with people, but he fights with me for free cause I’m his daughter” (0:02). While the
dialogue in this scene suggests that Cher is very wealthy, it also shows the comedy that
Heckerling is using to critique Cher as a rich girl living in modern society. Furthermore,
Cher is striking with blond hair and blue eyes. She is also thin, which is characteristic of
the ideal woman in modern-day society.
Shortly after, we are told that Cher has a former stepbrother named Josh, played
by Paul Rudd, who will be visiting the family. When Josh appears, he looks disheveled;
wearing a t-shirt covered by a flannel sweater and a pair of old jeans. Cher comments on
his appearance by saying, “So the flannel shirt deal, is that a nod to the crispy, Seattle
weather, or are just trying to stay warm in front of the refrigerator?” (0:08). Her sarcasm
suggests that she is less than impressed with the way that Josh presents himself. Josh’s
appearance also implies that he is not of the same social status as Cher and her father.
Besides his dress code, subtle hints suggest that Cher and Josh come from two different
worlds. Cher is high maintenance and loves to go to the mall and hang out with friends,
!
55!
while Josh prefers the simple things in life; he reads books and attends university.
Heckerling frames Cher and Josh to be the perfect courtly lovers.
Josh exemplifies knightly characteristics throughout the film. Similar to a knight
in medieval times, Josh proves himself when he performs a series of heroic deeds to win
over Cher. The initial deeds seem subtle, but as time progresses, the deeds intensify. The
first instance in which Josh proves himself to Cher is when Cher wants to take the jeep
out, but needs a licensed driver. She approaches Josh, and he hardly even hesitates to go
for a drive with her (0:16). However, this is miniscule to the second time Josh rescues
Cher. Cher becomes stranded in a parking lot outside of JR. Market after her ride ditches
her. Moments later, a stranger holds a gun up to her head and demands her purse and her
cell phone (0:42). Once he leaves, Cher immediately calls Josh, who drops what he is
doing to run to her rescue, which is significant because he is on a date with another girl.
Josh admires Cher from afar, which shows the role of courtly love in the film,
while simultaneously commenting on the modern aspects of romantic love. Cher walks
down the steps in a skintight Calvin Klein, white dress, looking absolutely breathtaking,
to go on a date with Christian, who is played by Justin Walker. She has a diamond
necklace and purse to march. As she takes her first step, the music suddenly changes to
play a classical song that stimulates a romantic vibe. The camera then shifts to show
Josh’s reaction as he sits there mesmerized by her beauty. He swallows hard and says to
her dad, “You’re not going to let her go out like that, are you?” (0:53). Josh decides to go
to the party in order to look out for Claire, or in other words, to protect her from the boy
she is with, exemplifying true knighthood. At the party, Josh continues to watch over
!
56!
Cher. As he is talking to another adult at the party, he becomes mesmerized by Cher
again (0:56). He continues to watch her the whole knight.
The modern critique of courtly love plays its most pivotal role towards the end of
the film. Cher’s good friend, Tai, played by Brittany Murphy, confesses to Cher that she
likes Josh. Cher is not happy about this and, in turn, she reflects on the emotions that she
has for Josh. While she tries to convince herself that she does not love him, by saying
“What does she want with Josh anyway? He dresses funny, he listens to complaint rock;
he’s not even cute in a conventional way!” (1:19), she cannot convince herself. This
scene is a subtle play on the modern notion of cheating because Cher is trying to
convince herself that she does not like Josh, so that it will not interfere with Josh and
Tai’s relationship. At the same time, however, she finally admits that she loves Josh.
Cher exclaims, “Oh my gosh, I love Josh!” and the fountain that has been running water
behind her suddenly produces a pink light. Subsequently, there is a flashback sequence to
all of the times that Cher and Josh shared together, followed by a love song playing in the
background. This scene is completely overdramatic in order to mock courtly love. It
shows that romantic love in modern society is something that is treated as sacred and
emotional, not hidden and covertly sexual.
Josh and Cher finally recognize that they love each other. He says to her “You’re
young and beautiful and…and…” and Cher responds by saying, “You think I’m
beautiful?” and Josh says, “You know you’re gorgeous.” (1:30). They confess their love
to each other and passionately kiss at the top of the steps. Cher’s voice is then heard in a
voice over saying “Well… you can guess what happened next!” as an image of a
wedding ceremony takes over the screen, falsely leading the audience to believe that the
!
57!
couple that was just seen kissing on the steps is about to get married. However, Cher
interrupts and says, “As if! I am only sixteen and this is California, not Kentucky!” (1:30)
Even though Cher and Josh are not married, the nature of the wedding suggests a
connection of romantic love through comedy with marriage. Furthermore, the girls fight
over the bouquet after it is thrown, but Cher ends up getting it, insinuating a long-term
relationship between her and Josh. Society even with changing ideas about marriage is in
a time where monogamy is essential to relationships. The final scenes of the film imply
that marriage is for love (even if marriage is not so essential), and that the medieval
concepts and that the medival concepts that were once practiced are now outdated in the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
While Clueless does depict certain aspects of courtly love, it like the other two
romantic comedy films here, shows the transition that romantic love has been made over
time. Beautiful ladies, as well as knights in shining armor, are ideal types of attraction,
but long-term commitment and loyalty are far more important (at least in Hollywood
romantic comedies) in modern times. In a neocolonial and neoliberal world of Hollywood
media in the late 20
th
- and early 21
st
-centuries, perhaps we see partly a return to the old
Scholastic binary of essentialized identity, and of desire as lack, despite the emphasis on
“not cheating.” But the liminal mystical and comic questioning of romantic love in Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight may yet help inform a more triadic postmodern sense of
desire as relational to larger contexts of life than individual will, amid the echoes of the
laughter of the Green Knight and the community of the Court.
!
58!
Conclusion
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight can be seen today as the beginning of a
transition from the ideas of courtly love to the modern ideas of marriage, a process
described decades ago by C.S. Lewis, who, however, like other earlier scholars, ignored
this Middle English poem’s place in the corpus of romantic love literature. Modern
people tend to think that courtly love is a depiction of the type of love that was accepted
in ancient medieval society. However, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight shows that
courtly love was subverted and rejected in key points at least by the time of the
emergency of Middle English literature in the wake of the Black Death. The poem’s
deconstruction of Gawain’s knightly identity, by putting the hero in ludicrous situations,
and its mixing up of embodied sexual meanings with courtly love’s idealism, situate it in
a satirical realm. The poem ends with neither an actual romance nor a tragic epic ending
like the Arthurian stories as a whole with Guenivere and Lancelot, but with laughed by
the court, at least partly at Gawain’s expense as everyone dons a green girdle. The
otherworldly aspect of the poem, partly drawn from Celtic sources, brings in a third
element to the binary of male and female in courtly love. In the process, the satire helps
set the stage for what became seen as a spiritual element in romantic love connected to
marriage and a long-lasting relationship. In examining modern notions of romantic love
as successors to courtly love, especially as seen in filmic storytelling, such as the
romantic comedies we examine here, we can see the continuation of that trajectory with
its roots in the late fourteenth century. Ideas of marriage and love continue to change in
popular society but certain aspects of the early critique of courtly love, affirming the
value of fidelity in long-term relationships, continue to be emphasized in modern-day
!
59!
Anglo-American popular culture today. While many scholars debate whether courtly love
was a social reality or a literary conception, it was an influential notion that likely will
continue to echo in Western culture for a long time to come.
!
60!
Works Cited
A Knight's Tale. By Brian Helgeland. Dir. Brian Helgeland. Prod. Brian Helgeland. 20th
Century Fox Film Corp. and Sony Pictures Entertainment, 2001.
Andrew, Malcolm, and Ronald Waldron. The Poems of the Pearl Manuscript: Pearl,
Cleanness, Patience, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Exeter [Devon:
University of Exeter, 2007.
Armstrong, Dorsey. Gender and Chivalric Community in Malory's Morte D'Arthur.
Gainesville: UP of Florida, 2003. Print.
Benson, Larry D. "Courtly Love and Chivalry in the Later Middle Ages (critical Study)."
(1984): 238-251 Larry D. Benson, Courtly Love and Chivalry in the Later Middle
Ages (critical Study). Archon Books. Web. July 2014.
Black, Joseph L, Leonard W. Conolly, and Kate Flint. The Broadview Anthology of
British Literature: Volume 1. Peterborough, Ont: Broadview Press, 2009. Print.
Borroff, Marie, and Laura L. Howes. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: An Authoritative
Translation, Contexts, Criticism. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010.
Brewer, Derek. A Companion to the Gawain-Poet. Cambridge: Brewer, 1997.
Brewer, Elisabeth. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: Sources and Analogues.
Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: D.S. Brewer, 1992.
Capellanus, Andreas. The Art of Courtly Love (12th Century) Translation. Trans.
John Jay Parry. New York: Columbia UP, 1960.
Clueless. Dir. Amy Heckerling. Perf. Alicia Silverstone. Paramount Pictures, 1995.
De Troyes, Chrétien. Yvain, the Knight of the Lion. Trans. Burton Raffel and Joseph J.
Duggan. New Haven: Yale UP, 1987. Print.
!
61!
Duby, Georges. Love and Marriage in the Middle Ages. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1994.
Duby, Georges. The Knight, the Lady, and the Priest: The Making of Modern Marriage
in Medieval France. New York: Pantheon Books, 1983.
Evans, R., Forsyth-Peters, C., Obst, L., Vane, R. (Producers), & Petrie, D. (Director).
(2003). How to lose a guy in ten days [Motion picture]. United States: Paramount.
Fenster, Thelma S. Arthurian Women: A Casebook. New York: Garland Pub., 1996.
Girouard, Mark. The Return to Camelot: Chivalry and the English Gentleman. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.
Guillaume, , Jean, and Harry W. Robbins. The Romance of the Rose. New York: Dutton,
1962.
Hales, John W. "Chaucer." The North American Review, 171.528 (1900): 712-723.
Kristeva, Julia. Black Sun: Depression and Melancholia. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1989. Print.
Lewis, C. S. The Allegory of Love; A Study in Medieval Tradition. New York: Cambridge
UP, 2013.
Luria, Maxwell. A Reader's Guide to the Roman De La Rose. Hamden, Conn: Archon
Books, 1982.
Maran, Timo. "Towards an Integrated Methodology of Ecosemiotics." Sign Systems
Studies. 35.1 (2007): 269-293. Print.
Mills, David. "An Analysis of the Temptation Scenes in "sir Gawain and the Green
Knight"." The Journal of English and Germanic Philology. 67.4 (1968): 612-630.
Moller, Herbert. "The Meaning of Courtly Love." The Journal of American Folklore.
!
62!
73.287 (1960): 39-52. Print.
Moore, John C. "Courtly Love": a Problem of Terminology." Journal of the History of
Ideas. 40.4 (1979): 621-632.
Morgan, G. "Medieval Misogyny and Gawain's Outburst against Women in Sir Gawain
and the Green Knight." Modern Language Review. 97 (2002): 265-278.
Neimneh, Shadi, and Qusai Al-Thebyan. "The Obstacle and the Way: Women and
Gender in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight." International Journal of
Humanities and Social Science 2.16 (2012): 235-47.
Noymer, Andrew. "Contesting the Cause and Severity of the Black Death: A Review
Essay*" Population and Development Review. 33.3 (2007): 616-627.
Putter, Ad. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and French Arthurian Romance. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1995.
Ragland, Ellie. "Psychoanalysis and Courtly Love." Arthuriana. 5.1 (1995): 1-20. Print.
Schultz, James A. Courtly Love, the Love of Courtliness, and the History of
Sexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2006.
Siewers, Alfred K. Re-imagining Nature: Environmental Humanities and Ecosemiotics. ,
2014. Print.
The Medieval Period. 2nd ed. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2009.
Turner, Ralph. Eleanor of Aquitaine. New Haven, US: Yale University Press, 2011.
Wall, G. "Love in the Western World by Denis De Rougemont, Trans. M.
Belgion."Cambridge Quarterly. 26.2 (1997): 199-203.
Warner, L. "The Lady, the Goddess, and the Text of Sir Gawain and the Green
Knight."Chaucer Review. 48.3 (2014): 334-351.
!
63!
Wollock, Jennifer G. Rethinking Chivalry and Courtly Love. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO,
2011. Internet resource.
