Lanval By Marie De France: Combatting The Stereotypical Portrayal Of Women In The Arthurian Society

Lanval was written by Marie De France in the twelfth century and according to Pepin, “the twelfth century was a prolific era of anti-feminist literature” (659). Hence, it can be argued that Marie De France’s Lanval is protofeminist as the usual male eminent plot is subverted by her choosing of a supernatural heroine. In doing so, her attempt to place women in a positive light is futile as she perpetuates the patriarchal views of women by reducing them to objects of beauty and desire. This, coupled with the flaws in the poem’s antagonistic depiction of women underscored by their unique beauty and overpowering desire for a male counterpart, renders the function of the heroine moot. As such, Lanval can be characterised as Marie De France’s failure to challenge the status quo to prove that society’s perception of women must be transformed.

Marie’s weapon, the Lady, is a tool poorly utilised to combat the stereotypical portrayal of women in the Arthurian society as through describing the Lady as extremely beautiful, the perception of the readers is narrowed to focus only on the physical beauty of the character. Additionally, the namelessness of this character hints that it represents women as a collective, and other than using the adjective “wise” (72), there is no oher trait that encapsulates the mental or physical prowess of the heroine. The lack of such mirrors society’s view of women and underlines Marie’s lack of conviction to dispute the canon.

This opposes the representation of Lanval for he is “envied [for] his handsomeness, courage, prowess and largesse” (21-22) The Lady is described to possess “slender flanks on either side. Her figure shapely; hips tapered low; Her neck, whiter than branch in snow; Her eyes were gray; her face was bright; Her mouth, lovely; nose, set just right; Eyebrows black, forehead fair: Blonde and curly was her hair” (564-570). At a glance, it seems that Marie attributes such traits to her supernatural heroine to challenge men’s perennial unrealistic search for high standards of beauty that does not exist. However, Rice suggests that this description is done deliberately to “[conform] to the strict medieval conventions of ideal beauty” (On the 'Lais' of Marie De France, 349). She also posits that “this description is fascinating partly because it suggests that Marie compensated for the character's lack of human qualities by concentrating on her physical appearance. ” Following rice, the intriguing depiction of the lady in accordance to society’s defined parameters of feminine beauty can also be understood as Marie’s oppressive fear to deviate from norm when given the perfect chance to mock society by depicting otherwise. Furthermore, Marie’s focus on feminine beauty as the trait that defines the presence and authority of women undermines her efforts to elevate women in the poem. The introduction of the first set of female characters, the chambermaids of the lady, is focused on their complexion and looks: “The fairest he had ever seen” (56), their clothing that outlines their figure: “Close-fitting tunics, tightly laced” (58), and their “faces [that are] most beautiful” (60). Right after, the image of the Lady is crafted in a manner whereby “not rose nor lily could surpass her beauty when they bloom in May” (94-95), and how “the single gown she wore was sheer and made her shapely form appear” (99-100). Although, this creates the impression that women are distinguished from men by their physical appearance in the context of the poem, the recurrent use of it as the sole defining trait of a woman, ignores the reality that women are beyond just their beauty. This is further elucidated in the characterisation of the Lady and her chambermaids upon their arrival at King Arthur’s court. They have “won great praise for figure, visage, and complexion” (532-533), possess “beauty, [that is] clear, in all the world could have no peer” (551-552) but are diminished to a mere “spectacle” (585).

Only and only when the court “[has] satisfied their gaze and greatly sung her beauty's praise” (615-616) does the Lady begin to speak for justice on behalf of her lover. This affirms that despite beauty being a useful tool in disarming the guard of people, no other trait or quality is utilised to empower the authority of the woman. In fact, the idea that women are rejoiced only for their attractiveness and viewed as objects of desire is sustained in this poem. Alternatively, Marie does well in showing how women are perceived as commodity, and that the plot will eventually unfold to show a woman designed to challenge this idea. Early in the poem, it is ascertained that king Arthur “[gives in fee wives and land] to knights who served in his meiny” (17-18). Here, women are likened to tokens of reward for high performing knights in a transaction of possessions. Moreover, the juxtaposing of land with wives exposes the horrific role of the patriarchy in their dehumanisation. This idea is arguably debunked when the Lady “[rides] upon a milkwhite horse” (553-554) to rescue her lover from injustice. Here, not only does she act as a witness, she assumes the role of Lanval’s defence lawyer to prove his innocence. Her speech to King Arthur and the court: “I would not have the man ill-used— In your court he has been accused of lies he spoke” (621-623) proves that not only are women capable of discernment, they are able to intelligently fight against the miscarriage of justice and protect the innocent. However, this crucial illustration is contradicted by the Lady’s prior discourse with Lanval which reveals her self-objectification and denigration. Her conditional love hinges on the secrecy of the entire affair. When she learns that Lanval will “give up all the rest [for her]” (126), she rewards his loyalty with endless wealth, “her heart and her body, every part” (129-130). This appears to be similar to King Arthur’s means of rewarding loyalty: to reward with land and wives.

In giving of parts of her body in exchange for reciprocation and validation from a Lanval, she heightens his desire for her flesh and likens members of her body to tokens awarded for loyalty. She also secures this love by offering to him what he once had as “he spent all of his property” (30): wealth. This then can be viewed as a woman’s search for love by commodifying her body parts and placing her will at the feet of a man. Equally, the depiction of only her being able to be possessed in the relationship indicates that women here are shown to be beneath men and are items of desire to be won and kept by them in love. At the same time, Marie broadly presents females in the poem as selfish, steeped in their vanity and desires. Throughout the poem, men such as Lanval and King Arthur are portrayed to be thinking independently and moving about freely without desiring women. For instance, Lanval’s encounter with the Lady is only by chance. His intention of resting in the plains to “[brood] about his woeful plight” (51) is disrupted by the ‘two maidens approaching on the green” (55) “ordered [by their lady] to come for [him]. ” (73) The disruption of his peace by the Lady can be viewed as selfishness induced by the exertion of her desires as “for [him she has] come, for [him she has] traveled far from home” (109-110).

This search for love across realms can be deemed as romantic but at the same time raises the point that if the fairy realm too contains men, then the search for Lanval across worlds hints at the female desperation to obtain the “ideal” man. The revelation that only women are crafted in this poem to seek partners, initiate romance and ignite intimacy can further be seen when Lanval is engaged by the queen in her request to be his mistress: “What do you say to my proposal? Your mistress I consent to be; you should receive much joy from me” (264-266). This brazen confession by the queen highlights her infidelity to her lawful husband, King Arthur, and thwarts women in a negative light as compared to the celebratory deeds of men who appear not to sin in the poem. Additionally, when Lanval rejects the advances of his queen on grounds of physical appearances, he condemns the queen’s conceit by claiming that “[his] lady [and her chambermaids, are] worth more than [her] in beauty of both figure and face” (298-299). This confirms that his adoration of the Lady is only on grounds of her impeccable beauty; not fully her virtue, kindness and grace. Beauty then can be said to be used as a benchmark in their society to compare women despite their stature and personality. Moving on, Lanval’s blatant refusal of the queen’s advances results in his arraignment which reveals how the queen is unable to withstand that there are others who are more virtuous and ravishing than her. Hence, it underscores the immaturity of the queen’s reason to convict an innocent man of treason simply because of her damaged ego and unfulfilled emotional and physical desires. As such the queen, being also a representation of women, is seen self-serving and motivated by her individual desires. When these desires are disregarded, her sense of justice that is powered by childishness becomes warped.

Likewise, the Lady too can be seen motivated by her personal desires when she holds Lanval to his word and threatens to leave if he exposes her existence. This might be seen otherwise when she rescues Lanval despite warning him that “should people learn of this affair, [he] shall never again see [her]” (146-147). Nevertheless, the act of saving Lanval from false persecution can also be viewed as a calculated move on her part to obtain the knight for she has travelled realms to secure his love and will not return empty handed. This, while illuminatingthat the motive of the Lady might be to combat injustice, overpowers it by exhibiting that her pursuit is driven by her selfish love for him and his life. Hence, surfacing the deeper concerns and priorities of the Lady: Lanval’s companionship and love, not the justice of saving him.

Finally, Marie’s choice of using a magical character to unshackle the female potential from the chains of patriarchy is one of deep deliberation. Perhaps, by giving power to a magical being from another world, Marie De France exemplifies that the idea of the equal women in that point in time can only exist in fantasy. As a result, she conforms to the typical physical and emotional depiction of women and participates in the perpetuation of stereotypes despite making a bold move to depose the conventional male plotline. This results in the minor victory for women and can be seen in its conclusion when Lanval is rescued by the Lady from the clutches of injustice when he “[springs the horse to straddle and [sitting] behind her on the saddle” (641-642) to leave his kingdom. Nonetheless, this can be undercut and interpreted as defeat. The reality that the Lady becomes the driving force behind Lanval’s separation from his world is ironic as now he actually commits the charge that he was moments ago vindicated from: treason.

Therefore, by becoming the catalyst behind the rejection of his kingdom and king, the lady is shown to be manipulative, vicious and the reason propelling a noble man to commit crime against his state. This aligns perfectly with Pepin’s argument that one of the common dictions of medieval misogyny is the “[depiction of women] as dangerous to the physical and spiritual wellbeing of men” (359). Ultimately, it must be acknowledged that while this poem seems successful in confronting the norms by doing the unorthodox in its dramatic conclusion, it fails to recognise that women are beyond their physique and beauty. This coupled with the absent idea of the positive female personality and the presence of their ill-defining traits continues to cast women into a derogatory light. Hence, her attempt to ennoble women in this poem by using a female protagonist is inconsequential as the flaws in her plot designed to empower women ironically castigates them.