What’s the value in “Sir Gawain and the Carl of Carlisle”?
Maybe the Middle/Old English was a bit over my head, but I’m having some difficulty understanding what makes SGCC a worthwhile piece of Arthurian Literature. I know there has to be something about it that makes it important and worth reading. It was assigned after all, and it has survived for so long that I can’t denounce its value just because I don’t see it. But, this story doesn’t really go into depth about Gawain’s character. His thoughts, intentions, desires, etc. aren’t really mentioned. So it doesn’t really serve as a way to get to know Gawain better or see him in any new light. And, although it may be a new twist on the classic romantic adventure, the events are so similar to “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” that there isn’t anything revolutionary about them; they were already done before. Regardless if the author had heard SGGK when he wrote SGCC, why would people continue to publish a work for such a long time if there already was one similar (and arguably better) in existence?
Although we may never know, the thought of both the authors composing SGGK and SGCC totally unaware of each other would be pretty interesting. It might show some evidence that the classic Arthurian was really starting to bore people, but even more interesting would be that two authors chose to put Gawain in the same particular situations: In need of lodging, Find jolly but sketchy man to stay with, Have man tell his wife to seduce him, Put to a number of tests by hosts (resist wife seduction, strike host, obey all of hosts strange commands), etc. So if indeed both Gawain works were composed with ignorance of the other, what would that mean? Why put Gawain in these situations? What does that say about Gawain and people’s reaction/interpretation of him? Is the fact that SGCC is so similar to SGGK what makes it valuable and worth reading?
sean wrote:
This is a great set of questions that I would like us to take up in detail in class . . . Thanks!
Posted 18 Oct 2007 at 9:49 am ¶
The Governator wrote:
I think that SGCC is interesting for its differences with SGGK. The two stories are very similar in narrative, yet the manner of their composition would tend to indicate very different origins. In particular, I am thinking about the rhyme scheme employed in SGCC vs. the alliterative revival style of SGKK. Thus, I actually think the stories similarity allows us to examine a fascinating issue of reception.
Posted 18 Oct 2007 at 2:24 pm ¶
Caprica Six wrote:
I think the Carl was just an entertaining character. I highlighted just about everything he said in the poem because I was amused by its contradictions. When Gawen first enters the house and kneels to his host, the Carl immediately calls him a “gentyll knight” and begs him to leave off kneeling – fairly polite behavior by most standards – and then proceeds to explain how he really isn’t a courteous man at all. Taken by itself, that almost seems like polite modesty.
He’s a little rude to his servants when he demands a larger bowl of wine, but hey, he’s their boss, and he does want the best for his guests.
When Kay and Bishop Patricius start showing their bad manners, the Carl announces “I schall teche the or thou wend away/Sum of my cortessye,” and immediatley beats them up. It’s irony and slapstick comedy. I can’t help thinking medieval audiences would be a little entertained by it.
The humor culminates when the Carl orders Gawen to kiss his wife – a strange order that probably provoked a few snickers. I think Gawen’s unhesitating obedience was supposed to be unexpected. I was reminded of one of the classic Jack Sparrow moments in Pirates of the Caribbean II, when Davy Jones asks him, “But I wonder, Sparrow, can you live with this? Can you condemn in innocent man – a friend – to a lifetime of servitude in your name while you roam free?” Completely brushing off the melodramatic buildup, Jack immediately answers, “Yup, I’m good with it.”
If nothing else, I think it’s worthwhile for its humor – something rather lacking in SGGK. And I didn’t miss the elaborate descriptions of Gawen’s body armor.
Posted 19 Oct 2007 at 3:43 pm ¶
koricature wrote:
The comparison of the two together is what I think is most important. The lack of much of the description or buildup in Carl vs. the specifically included details in Green Knight provide some interesting details in both the nature of the audience receiving the story and in the writer producing it. The morals included, that of being honest and true in Green Knight vs. being courteous in Carl add to this. So I guess the main point of reading this was to develop these ideas of different audiences and writers on the same subject, and how this can affect how the story and the stories’ purposes are conveyed.
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 5:35 pm ¶