Well, I'm back for another brief update.
I had a blast with Geoffrey of Monmouth, Wace, and Layamon. They're all telling the exact same story (frequently copying each other, in fact), but it's a lot of fun to pick out each successive author's additions to the Arthurian legend and their shifting points of interest. I was somewhat surprised to find that I enjoyed the phased introduction of the more courtly elements to the rawer tales of lust and battle. Longing and conflict seem to affect me more viscerally when they are abstracted and symbolized: weird. I am too civilized and have read too much Proust. In any case, I really need to settle down with all three books in their entirety when I'm out of this enforced focus.
Marie de France, on the other hand, left me surprisingly cold. My only real experience with the Lais before now was reading "Lanval" in a survey course years ago. I was rather enamored of it at the time and remained so after re-reading it, but the other lais were a mixed bag. The opener, "Guigemar," didn't do much for me, and "Equitan" was even more of a letdown. "Le Fresne" reignited my interest, and "Lanval" kept me going in the middle, but there were several other disappointments.
It's probably all as a result of the difference between what I look for in romances and what Marie is trying to convey. I can see what she's doing (and even if I couldn't, the glosses in the Hanning/Ferrante translation spell it out very plainly), but she's doing it (to my mind) at the expense of better goals. The stories often seem abrupt or unreasonable; these seeming failures often carry a symbolic or allegorical point, but that doesn't make them easier to read (for me at least). To be fair, I should say that, in addition to "Le Fresne" and "Lanval," I also enjoyed "Yonec," "Laustic," "Milun," and "Eliduc." That's half the book, so not really too bad after all. Perhaps a further reading at a later date will alter my perceptions.
For now, though, I'm off to review the big four of the fourteenth century: Langland, Gower, Chaucer, and the Pearl Poet. After that, I'll dabble in some Middle English lyrics and verse romances, some mystery and morality plays, and a bit of Malory (maybe all of Morte d'Arthure if I have the time).
I'll unlock my word hoard once more in a day or two. Till then, best wishes to all.
I had a blast with Geoffrey of Monmouth, Wace, and Layamon. They're all telling the exact same story (frequently copying each other, in fact), but it's a lot of fun to pick out each successive author's additions to the Arthurian legend and their shifting points of interest. I was somewhat surprised to find that I enjoyed the phased introduction of the more courtly elements to the rawer tales of lust and battle. Longing and conflict seem to affect me more viscerally when they are abstracted and symbolized: weird. I am too civilized and have read too much Proust. In any case, I really need to settle down with all three books in their entirety when I'm out of this enforced focus.
Marie de France, on the other hand, left me surprisingly cold. My only real experience with the Lais before now was reading "Lanval" in a survey course years ago. I was rather enamored of it at the time and remained so after re-reading it, but the other lais were a mixed bag. The opener, "Guigemar," didn't do much for me, and "Equitan" was even more of a letdown. "Le Fresne" reignited my interest, and "Lanval" kept me going in the middle, but there were several other disappointments.
It's probably all as a result of the difference between what I look for in romances and what Marie is trying to convey. I can see what she's doing (and even if I couldn't, the glosses in the Hanning/Ferrante translation spell it out very plainly), but she's doing it (to my mind) at the expense of better goals. The stories often seem abrupt or unreasonable; these seeming failures often carry a symbolic or allegorical point, but that doesn't make them easier to read (for me at least). To be fair, I should say that, in addition to "Le Fresne" and "Lanval," I also enjoyed "Yonec," "Laustic," "Milun," and "Eliduc." That's half the book, so not really too bad after all. Perhaps a further reading at a later date will alter my perceptions.
For now, though, I'm off to review the big four of the fourteenth century: Langland, Gower, Chaucer, and the Pearl Poet. After that, I'll dabble in some Middle English lyrics and verse romances, some mystery and morality plays, and a bit of Malory (maybe all of Morte d'Arthure if I have the time).
I'll unlock my word hoard once more in a day or two. Till then, best wishes to all.