English 83

            If Shakespeare has a conspiracy theory, Chrétien should get one too, especially considering how much less we know about him.

            To me, “Erec and Enide” seems to be very different from the other Chrétien stories we’ve read.  Others have alluded to this in other posts, but as of yet, no one has woven the threads together into a satisfyingly far-fetched theory.  So for your reading pleasure, I present my Chrétien conspiracy theory.

            Point the first:  The character of Sir Kay the seneschal.  Since there’s already a whole thread about this, I’ll just hit the highlights.  In “E&E,” Kay doesn’t seem like a bad guy.  But in the “The Cart,” “The Lion” and “The Grail” he becomes an ass extraordinaire.  Why the abrupt change?  Did Chrétien really just need to insert some tension into his stories?  Or was it something more … sinister?

            Point the second:  Chrétien’s writing style in “E&E” seems less religious.  Not in any big, overarching-theme way, but in his tone.  For instance, when reading “E&E” for the first time, I noticed that Chrétien often uses the Lord’s name in vain.  Not like, “My God, please assist my preferred knight in this battle, if you’d be so kind,” or the ever common “God had never made a more shockingly, amazingly, miraculously beautiful woman.”  More like, “‘God, what a vassal!’” (p 53).  My parents told me off for talking like that when I was a kid, and we’re not even particularly religious.  Wasn’t it considered even worse back in Chrétien’s time?  I also noticed that he is a bit stodgier about sex in the later three stories.  On Erec & Enide’s wedding night, “…they paid homage to each member,” (p 63) and it only gets more interesting from there.  On the other hand, Lancelot and Guinevere, whose relationship is considered the archetype of pure love, get this:

Her love-play seemed so gentle and good to him, both her kisses and caresses, that in truth the two of them felt a joy and wonder the equal of which has never been heard or known.  But I shall let it remain secret forever, since it should not be written of: the most delightful and choicest pleasure is that which is hinted at, but never told. (pp 264-265). 

Never told…except in “E&E”?  Hmmm…

            Point the third:  “E&E” is more subtle than the three other stories. Yeah, I know that ‘subtle Chrétien’ is about as oxymoronic as it gets, but it’s a matter of degrees.  In “The Cart,” “The Lion” and “The Grail” there are whole paragraphs (if not pages) about the effects of Love, the consequences of Love, even about Love personified.  “E&E” is about the trials and triumphs of love too, but we don’t have to sit through the preachy sections.  In “E&E,” Chrétien wants us to figure out his message on our own.  It’s pretty obvious, true, but he doesn’t force it down our throats.  Why go from a writing style where you urge your reader to think about the moral to one where you blatantly state the inner, hidden, deeper, secret meaning?  Don’t maturing writers usually go the other direction?

            Point the last:  To further support my ridiculous theory, I want to reiterate a few points from the book’s intro.  We know nothing about Chrétien except what he wrote about himself in the prologues to his tales.  The only time he listed his works was in the prologue to “Cligés,” and he does not mention “The Cart,” “The Lion” or “The Grail.”  He only identifies himself as Chrétien de Troyes (or, apparently as Crestïens de Troies) once, in the prologue to “E&E.”  Otherwise he just calls himself Chrétien (Crestïens).

            So here goes the conspiracy part:  What if there wasn’t just one Chrétien?  I’m sure I’m not the first person to think of this, and since we still consider these tales to be by one man, there must be some good evidence for it.  However, based on my limited information, it seems possible that “E&E” was written by a different author than “The Cart,” “The Lion” and “The Grail.”  The tales themselves have enough differences that they could be by different people writing in the same era and style.  What if Chrétien didn’t call himself Chrétien de Troyes in “E&E” because he was new in the area, but to differentiate himself from some other Chrétien who was also writing at the time?

              Please feel free to disagree with a specific point I make, my entire conclusion, my punctuation, or whatever else you think I’ve done poorly.  Are the changes in style due to the influence of his patrons?  Are the differences between tales an artifact of the many copiers and translators each manuscript was subject to?  Or was Chrétien really Chrétiens? I’m eager to hear what you think about my conspiracy theory.