Our final class discussion on Silence, during which we noted that Silence seems to be a character devoid of desire, made me question our reading of King Evan's desire. We assume, that because he chooses at the end to marry his young and beautiful great-niece, that he desires her sexually and we see him as a creepy old man because of it.
If we look more closely at the end of the poem, however, we can see that the poet never mentions Evan's physical attraction to Silence. Instead, when she is revealed to be a woman, he praises her only for her loyalty to her father's wishes: "Indeed the price of your loyalty / is far above that of my royalty. / There is no more precious gem, / nor greater treasure, than a virtuous woman" (Lns 6630-6634). Though he is comparing her to a "gem," his language is hardly romantic - the virtue of loyalty is one shared by men and women. Silence's loyalty to the king was, in fact, probably best demonstrated when she was a knight and fighting the rebellious counts on his behalf. He could also be emphasizing her loyalty in comparison to the disloyalty of his wife; perhaps after being betrayed by Eupheme, he desires a new wife who will be as loyal as a knight.
Still, his final decision to marry Silence is seen as a result of much consultation, rather than personal feelings: "Then the king took her to wife - / that's what it said in the book where I found this story - / on the advice of his / most loyal and trusted advisers" (Lns 6676-6680). The advisers seem to have an interest in Silence being married off, in being silenced and brought back into proper gender roles. Perhaps marrying her to the king would mediate the scandal produced by her successful knighthood? She could no longer be perceived as such a threat once she is allied so closely with the king.
Whether the final marriage was a political solution devised by the king's counselors, or the king's decision to marry a more knight-like bride, or the poet's attempt to re-inscribe Silence into a feminine role, it appears far removed from the courtly love of Silence's parents.
Showing posts with label Silence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Silence. Show all posts
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Cross Dressing
The motives of Silence seem to be almost as pure as Joan of Arc’s. The debate between nature and nurture is at least weird: it is about Merlin and his veganism and not plainly about Silence. In the case of Silence, nurture has some altruist reason, as preserving her inheritance –it does not seem that altruist now, but it is some family duty at the time. The story is far from sexual motivations and, as always in feminine transvestites, the clothes are for some other purpose different of a sex or gender matter. The Eufeme affair is just collateral damage and a tool to put a little of drama in the story.
The male transvestite in the “Silence” impersonates a nun and his disguise is a trick to get to Eufeme, the queen, who is not precisely a trustable woman. For a male dressing as woman could be only a trick or joke; women transvestism obeys to higher purposes, extreme circumstances and it ends to be a proof of virtue, just as in the case of Jeanne d’Arc.The end of the book is interesting: Silence, back in her feminine form, marries the king who was her former boss and friend and becomes the queen. Is this a sign that virtues are always proper of males?
The word ‘virtue’ comes from the Latin word ‘virtus’ that also derivates from ‘vir’, the Latin word for man.
Are virtues conceived as a primary masculine quality and only accidental and scarce among women? Silence male actions are praised and she is considered a virtuous woman…
Nurture and the Devil
I was interested that the final debate between Nurture and Nature ends so firmly on the side of Nature, and even goes so far as to say that Nurture was the ultimate reason for the fall of mankind: "Nothing was ever in Adam / except what God created / and placed there. / It is not like God / to leave an evil nature in him to claim him...Whatever evil Adam did / was due to you, Nurture, without a doubt, / for the Devil fed him / evil, rotten advice." (Line 6057 - 6070)
This stark division of Nurture and Nature along the lines of good and evil seemed surprising, but slightly less so when I considered the relation between God and Nature in the poem. In many of the previous sections, Nature is shown to be the creator of man - a creator who occasionally makes mistakes and allows a little rough flour in with the fine - but in the relation of the fall of mankind, only God is given creative powers, and he never makes mistakes. If Nature is simply the agent of God (helping with the work of creating a larger population?), and Nurture has "opposed [Nature] ever since the first man / sinned be eating that apple" (Lines 6046-6047), then Nurture is in some way consistently interfering with God's work.
Still, considering that Nurture is the reason that Silence was able to grow into the person she becomes- valiant, brave, and strong as well as beautiful - I was taken aback that it would be so explicitly associated with the Devil. The text even seems to argue that the nurturing of Silence allows greater wrongs, such as King Evan's not allowing women to inherit, be redressed. Silence's story may end with her reversion to her Nature, but the story would not have existed had Nurture not taken precedence for a large part of Silence's life.
This stark division of Nurture and Nature along the lines of good and evil seemed surprising, but slightly less so when I considered the relation between God and Nature in the poem. In many of the previous sections, Nature is shown to be the creator of man - a creator who occasionally makes mistakes and allows a little rough flour in with the fine - but in the relation of the fall of mankind, only God is given creative powers, and he never makes mistakes. If Nature is simply the agent of God (helping with the work of creating a larger population?), and Nurture has "opposed [Nature] ever since the first man / sinned be eating that apple" (Lines 6046-6047), then Nurture is in some way consistently interfering with God's work.
Still, considering that Nurture is the reason that Silence was able to grow into the person she becomes- valiant, brave, and strong as well as beautiful - I was taken aback that it would be so explicitly associated with the Devil. The text even seems to argue that the nurturing of Silence allows greater wrongs, such as King Evan's not allowing women to inherit, be redressed. Silence's story may end with her reversion to her Nature, but the story would not have existed had Nurture not taken precedence for a large part of Silence's life.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Silence of Men
In the end Silence appears to be rewarded for her loyalty. The king is actually fairly explicit in saying “Silence, know that you have saved yourself / by your loyal actions (6636-6637).” Loyalty thus is held in high virtue by the poem.
It is interesting that by remaining quiet Silence’s loyalty is displayed in contrast to the queen’s disloyalty. (Perhaps this suggests that silence itself can be revealing, as if silence is a nonverbal statement of sorts). When the poet discusses Queen Eufeme and her lover’s executions, her lover is referred to as the nun—even though in reality he is neither a nun nor even female. While this execution implies that both men and women are subject to loyalty and the consequences of disloyalty, the use of language (the reference to the man as “nun”) only seems to implicate and pass judgment women.
On the one hand, the praise of Silence and her loyalty seems to be positive for women. However, the poet outright says that doing the right thing comes unnaturally to women, making Silence a sort of anomaly. It is as if to say she is as brave valiant and loyal as a man, how bizarre.
The conclusion makes no straightforward judgment of men, rather men seem to be used as a comparison to the women. It is curious that while loyalty affects both women and men (the nun in this case) the men are left in the silence of the poet. The silence seems to suggest that men are inherently more loyal than women. This seems to be achieved through the indirect description of men (“a woman has less motivation” (6588)), by cues of being opposite of the women that the poet directly addresses. Therefore, silence again seems to make a statement.
It is interesting that by remaining quiet Silence’s loyalty is displayed in contrast to the queen’s disloyalty. (Perhaps this suggests that silence itself can be revealing, as if silence is a nonverbal statement of sorts). When the poet discusses Queen Eufeme and her lover’s executions, her lover is referred to as the nun—even though in reality he is neither a nun nor even female. While this execution implies that both men and women are subject to loyalty and the consequences of disloyalty, the use of language (the reference to the man as “nun”) only seems to implicate and pass judgment women.
On the one hand, the praise of Silence and her loyalty seems to be positive for women. However, the poet outright says that doing the right thing comes unnaturally to women, making Silence a sort of anomaly. It is as if to say she is as brave valiant and loyal as a man, how bizarre.
The conclusion makes no straightforward judgment of men, rather men seem to be used as a comparison to the women. It is curious that while loyalty affects both women and men (the nun in this case) the men are left in the silence of the poet. The silence seems to suggest that men are inherently more loyal than women. This seems to be achieved through the indirect description of men (“a woman has less motivation” (6588)), by cues of being opposite of the women that the poet directly addresses. Therefore, silence again seems to make a statement.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
The Ending of "Silence"
We'll soon be coming to the ending of Silence which, I'm going to assume, will frustrate a lot of people. I'm not sure what I was expecting regarding Silence's end as I read through the text but I know that I was not expecting the ending we got. Prof. Wenthe noted that I argued in my presentation that the ending of Silence need not be a statement that the restoration of gender categories wins at the end of the day and I hold by that statement which puts me at odds with Sharon Kinoshita. But I don't know if I would say that I am optimistic - as Prof. Wenthe puts it - about the ending. The ending to me just represents one of the many ways that gender can manifest itself in the text and need not represent THE way - hence, possibility as opposed to limitation. Otherwise, Silence's end would be a major letdown.
I think the text practices a form of contained subversion which would address why the text seemingly seems to reinforce traditional conceptions of gender while, at the same time, reinforcing a less conventional, more unstable one. In order for the text to "pass" it must conform to normative values and ideologies but underneath this layering is one that threatens to plunge these same normative values and ideologies into disarray. And, so, Silence's end is just a ruse (I hope) in order to deflect attention away from those aspects of the text that might be deemed too controversial or revolutionary.
It's unfortunate that we have no record of its reception in the thirteenth century because I think such information would really help us determine what may or may not be happening in the text.
I think the text practices a form of contained subversion which would address why the text seemingly seems to reinforce traditional conceptions of gender while, at the same time, reinforcing a less conventional, more unstable one. In order for the text to "pass" it must conform to normative values and ideologies but underneath this layering is one that threatens to plunge these same normative values and ideologies into disarray. And, so, Silence's end is just a ruse (I hope) in order to deflect attention away from those aspects of the text that might be deemed too controversial or revolutionary.
It's unfortunate that we have no record of its reception in the thirteenth century because I think such information would really help us determine what may or may not be happening in the text.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Silence in the Romance Thereof
It feels fairly obvious that Silence is not so named for nothing. I feel the need to use male pronouns when talking about Silence's outward life, because Heldris has thus far only used feminine pronouns when Silence is having a crisis of identity and is about to decide to live as a woman.
So he is obviously named Silentius for the secrecy he lives under. Although he is regularly unsure of whether he should remain a he, his silence and that of his parents and friends is what keeps it going. But the very name calls our attention not only to other uses of the word silence, but also points where sound in incongruous with it.
At Silence's naming, Cador says, 'Silence relieves anxiety' (2069). That is fairly straightforward, 'silence' serves as both the child and calmness, peace. But then, after hearing of Silence's disappearance, when Heldris is describing the grief of Cador and Eufemie, he mentions it being 'appropriate to keep silent' over one's grief (3032). Is the reference to the cause of their grief her intended? The jongleurs, shortly thereafter, are silenced that Silence might play (3158). How odd it is, that Silence is in fact the only one permitted to not be silent!
A final set of weighty uses of Silence's name top off the first half of the poem. While Silence is overhearing the plots against him, 'Silence was listening and heard them' (3403). And, 'Silence didn't want to utter a word' (3410). And yet, it is through sound that Silence, who, with a capital S, reads more like the embodiments of Nature and Nurture than any other character, easily sends the treacherous jongleurs on their way.
So he is obviously named Silentius for the secrecy he lives under. Although he is regularly unsure of whether he should remain a he, his silence and that of his parents and friends is what keeps it going. But the very name calls our attention not only to other uses of the word silence, but also points where sound in incongruous with it.
At Silence's naming, Cador says, 'Silence relieves anxiety' (2069). That is fairly straightforward, 'silence' serves as both the child and calmness, peace. But then, after hearing of Silence's disappearance, when Heldris is describing the grief of Cador and Eufemie, he mentions it being 'appropriate to keep silent' over one's grief (3032). Is the reference to the cause of their grief her intended? The jongleurs, shortly thereafter, are silenced that Silence might play (3158). How odd it is, that Silence is in fact the only one permitted to not be silent!
A final set of weighty uses of Silence's name top off the first half of the poem. While Silence is overhearing the plots against him, 'Silence was listening and heard them' (3403). And, 'Silence didn't want to utter a word' (3410). And yet, it is through sound that Silence, who, with a capital S, reads more like the embodiments of Nature and Nurture than any other character, easily sends the treacherous jongleurs on their way.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Silence is not a Transgendered Person
Since it's inevitable that the topic of gender with come up in "Silence", I want to say that I don't think the poem can relate to contemporary theories of transgenderism or queerness. "Silence" might seem conducive to such topics, but the text does not lend itself to such a reading. It is clear that Silence is being raised as a boy due to King Evan's law which states only sons may inherit. A lengthy passage assures us that Nature spared nothing to make Silence the most beautiful girl possible. Her biological gender is never in dispute - no ambiguous genitalia or hermaphroditic characteristics. She is without a doubt female. The fact that her parents take so many precautions to hide her from society attests to this. Silence is also well aware that she is a girl and understands why she must act and appear as a boy. It is not as though she fells like a boy trapped in a girl's body and wants her physical gender to match her emotional/psychological gender. Neither is her situation permanent. She only need perform as a boy until she comes into her inheritance or until her parents have a son. This all stands in contrast to the modern conceptions of transgenderism, where a person seeks to identify with or become another gender. Silence is a tale more similar to several Shakespeare plays where a character must perform as the opposite sex to achieve an end, but steps out of that role once the end is achieved. This is also similar to the plot of "Mrs. Doubtfire", where Robin Williams' character must act like an woman to be with his children. He does not surgically want to be transformed into a woman anymore than Silence wants to be. Both are disguising themselves for a purpose, and once that purpose is accomplished, the disguise is removed. They are not transgendered people, they are actors trying to survive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)