Sunday, 24 November 2013

Back to the Green Chapel, Part 4


The Headless and the Heedless :
The Binding and Unbinding of Gawain’s Truth
 

There is no psychological development from one stage to the next without a new set of complications, resistances, anxieties, ambivalences, defences, and compromise formations.[i]

When everything changes, everything does not change in itself, but only as the individual parts realign themselves and begin to react off one another with new tensions.  Some of the new formations and forces are denied, suppressed, treated as though they were something else.  The outsider, the Jew in this instance, plays as though he were already assimilated and confirmed into the Christian, and the poem that should confirm his right to be what he thinks he is and wants others to believe, nevertheless betrays the tell-tale inconsistencies, contradictions, gaps and pointless repetitions that mark the cuckoo in the nest.  

The Knight of the Green Chapel is at once the green giant wodwose of Christmas revels and the masked figure of Bertilak de Hautdesert.  When his head is chopped off by Sir Gawain in the game played in Camelot, the rider picks it up again, waves it about, the eyes glaring like a lantern, and rides out into the wintery landscape.  This is magic, prestidigitation, and a delusion: no real human being could perform such a trick unless he were a manipulator of appearances and only if he were not a real human being at all but a creature from another realm where the normal rules of nature do not apply or an image projected on to the screen of the Yuletide Festival through the use of suggestion, artificial lights, and the suspension of disbelief. 

Sir Gawain is Arthur’s youthful nephew imbued with a naïve faith in the traditions and motifs of romantic chivalry, bold enough to step forward when Arthur and his fellow Round Table knights hesitate to take-up the Green Man’s challenge, to put his life on the line to save the honor of the royal couple, the king and his wife Gwenor (Gwenevere).  But when the oath is taken and the conditions of the agreement repeated to him, Gawain is not quite sure of what it all means, whereas his fellow knights and the ladies at court are convinced that it a suicide mission and begin to mourn for him as he sets forth later the next year.  In other words, the rest of the court does not take into account the carnivalesque world they live in, at least during the seasonal celebrations of Christmas, and assume that the return blows Gawain is to receive will be lethal.  Gawain himself also does not realize the full and ambiguous nature of the quest he sets out upon.  Certainly, on the third night of visits by the Lady Bertilak into his bed chamber when she continuously questions his credentials and identity as a knight errant worthy of the reputation she knows will in due course be accorded to him by this adventure she does more than confuse him into beginning to doubt his qualifications and at last succeeds in compromising his vow to accept the blows of the green ax without any physical or magical apotropaic.  The offered green girdle is promised to him as a way of surviving the beheading game and the young knight accepts the gift because he does not trust either in his personal valor, the ludic exercise of the Green Giant’s powers, or even the lesson taught to him by the Lady, that he will survive in Arthurian traditions to be known as the bravest and most amorously successful of all the Round Table knights.  If he were to be heedless of the dangers ahead or perfectly assured of the efficacy of the girdle’s ability to keep him alive, there would be no value in what he does achieve.  Like Abraham who performs the Akeda (the binding) of his son Isaac in the biblical story, when God commands the father to sacrifice his son as a test of the loyalty and faith of the Hebrew patriarch, if he had no qualms and did not question his own strength of will to carry out this outrageous enterprise—one that goes against all the moral principles instilled in the new emergent faith that forbids murder and human sacrifice—what would be the meaning of his obedience?  To say that Abraham knows perfectly well that by some means or other the knife will be stayed before it slays the young man laid out on the altar misses the whole point in the testing.  The rabbis saw this as the main point, and in many midrashim on the Akeda they have the father trying to force the issue of sacrifice despite the appearance of the angel who stops the procedure and the substitution of a ram or goat for the human victim. 

  Like Abraham, Gawain has to assert his own will against his fears, his questioning of the motives behind the testing, and those reassurances from those commentators who provide a traditional matrix for the stories that all will turn out for the best.  But perhaps rather than comparing Gawain to Abraham, we should look at him in terms of Isaac, the child who accepts unquestioningly and with no demurer the statement by his father that the sacrifice has been commanded by God and that therefore with no regard to possible divine reasons Isaac acts out the required role.  In Christian exegetical tradition, the young boy who goes voluntarily to what seems to be an inevitable death figuratively represents Jesus accepting his crucifixion without complaint, perhaps with some eagerness to show his faith, since he knows—as he proclaims to his disciples and other followers—that he will soon be in heaven to sit on the right hand of his father.  Because of this, examined from outside of the mystical faith and knowledge operative in the Church history of such readings and in the iconography of the Isaac-Jesus pairing, the behaviour

r of Gawain takes on a more convincing and more noble cast.  The Passion indicates the triumph of the Jesus Christ character over death, displayed in his Resurrection, and confirmed in the hieratic emergence of his full glory in heaven.  Whereas Isaac has very few lines devoted to his behavior
r on Mount Moriah, Jesus is the sustained centre of attention.  Thoughout his ordeal Jesus suffers but does not complain, he goes through the pangs of death on the cross and has only a momentary and dramatic doubt as he chants the Aramaic words of despair.  For Gawain, however, there is always a struggle to carry through with the intention to receive the ax blows of the Green Knight, a struggle marked by his shudders and flinches. 

When the third fatal blow is offered to Gawain, it is transformed in slow motion into a nick on the neck and the shedding of a single drop of blood.  Instead, then, of a highly tragic moment, the mood and tone of the poem shifts to comedy.  In one sense, the Green Man laughs heartily and begins to show himself as Bertilak the host of Hautdesert.   In another, when Gawain feels disappointed, shamed and frustrated, rather than happily relieved not to be dead, the Green Man explains that the young knight should not feel he is a coward or a failure: he has done the best a mortal man can do under the circumstances.  If he “lacked a little,” it is because, quite simply, that is all that can be expected, in fact, much more, in that other knights have already failed by refusing to step in for Arthur when they could have salvaged the honor of the court.  Deep within his conscience, Gawain realizes that he has fudged even further, because he has been wearing the green girdle, and when he wishes to confess to that fault, there is a further relaxation of tension and lowering of the serious tone by the Host putting off the return of this gift—and a sign, too, of the suspicious nature of the bedroom conversations usually rendered in courtly romances as occasions for seduction and rape—and telling Gawain to take it home with him to show to Arthur and the court as an emblem of their restored reputations for honor and bravery. 

Nevertheless, Gawain cannot accept fully this designation, because he knows that he has not lived up to reputation the poets will celebrate in his supposed victory.  Later, too, when the Round Table knights each don for themselves a version of the girdle as a public statement of their collective achievement of the quest, Gawain calls it his “token of vntrawthe.”  Against what the Knight of the Green Chapel and his other self the Host of Hautdesert say to him, and also opposite to the interpretation institutionalized by the Arthurian court, Gawain sets himself always apart from reputation and renown, from the kind of person everyone else accepts him as being, a man of trawth—truth in the sense of tried and tested adherence to faith in his own and the traditional prowess of chivalric dignity and Christian hope. 

There are many aspects to the green girdle, the belt, the ceinture or banner that Gawain hides under his garments to remind him of his own shame and identity that are similar to discussions about the function, significance and implications of circumcision—which is in itself a type of beheading.  The decapitation means the loss of the head, rosh, first, head, principal, beginning and similar terms in Hebrew.  Removal of the foreskin forms a central ritual of adherence to the covenant of the Law, the bris or brit ha’ot, ot also meaning symbol, letter, and original spark of creation.  The Round Table Knights sport their green girdle or belts as though they were foreskins, symbols of their prowess and the fullfilment of the quest by proxy.  Gawain remains for all eternity the secret Jew wearing a token of untruth but only if one validates the extraneous, superficial and confused discourses of Christian sacramentalism and faith in the alliterative poem



[i] Eli Sagan, “How Dodd's The Greeks and the irrational Changed my Life,” Clio’s Psyche, 17:1-2 (2010) p. 6. 

No comments:

Post a Comment