One of the more interesting threads that class picked up was about exactly how permeable the boundary between Christians and Pagans is. The pagans can, of course, convert and become Christian but up until this point we do not see "Ganelon that wrought the treachery" slip through the border in the other direction.
Narratively, no matter what the second half brings, Ganelon can never and will never be thought of as a pagan. If he was to do so, the entire structure of The Song of Roland would fall to pieces. The Song, at it's very core, is a narrative of difference and while the Pagans(Them) could be consumed by the Christians (Us), the reverse will never be true because then we'd have a narrative based on positive relation and not negative relation.
Jonathan Goldberg, discussing Bowers v. Hardwick in the introduction to Sodometries (sadly not available online, but if anyone wants to read it, I can easily make copies), says that "homosexuals and heterosexuals are so immutably different that their acts could never be the same - even when they are" (11). This seems most evident in laises 67-79, when the Paynim's are being introduced one by one. Margaris of Seville, described as "so beautiful is he, she that beholds him has a smile on her lips...And there's no Paynim his match for chivalry" (89), reads very much like a description one would expecting to read in reference to the French hordes. While there is slight undercutting by mentioning that no Paynim is his match - obviously the lowest of the Christians would outshine him, his beauty is still presented as favorably as, say, Oliver's wit.
On the other hand, Estorgan and Estramarin are "foul felons both and knavish traitors" who seel to assail Roland(88). The exact words used to describe Ganelon are used to describe these particular Paynims. That should make them at least structurally similar characters yet Ganelon never loses his status and becomes a Paynim. He can't. His acts will never be the same - even when they are.
The only driving distinction between Ganelon and the Pagans is simply a negative relation. This negative relation between Us/Them is in name only, however, that does mean it's also a false relation. Margaris will never be Oliver because without him would have no way to construct Oliver. Ganelon will never be pagan because such a transition would show the flimsy relation of the boundary the entire poem is based on. The road into Us is one way only and, more importantly, must be one way only.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
A noteworthy case study of the issues raised in this posting occurs in laisse 260 (p. 188), during the single combat between Baligant and Charlemagne. The combatants exchange parallel demands that the other surrender and come over to his side, but it is interesting that Baligant, in his exhortation to Charlemagne, makes no mention of religion as a criterion governing their potential relationship: "Become my man, and I will be thy liege; / Then come and serve me from here unto the East." Conversion to the religion of Mahomet, Termagant, and Apollyon is apparently unnecessary, whereas conversion to Christianity explicitly governs passage over the boundary out of pagandom, as Charlemagne makes clear: "Do thou confess the faith by God revealed,/ Take Christendom, and thy fast friend I'll be."
The Paynims thus seem to regard the boundary between themselves and the Christians as even more permeable than the Christians do; it seems to be entirely a matter of political affiliation, divorced from creed. Earlier in the battle, Baligant makes reference to "this Christian race" (laisse 244, p. 180), which seems to imply a kind of ethnic essentialism (I am assuming "race" translates "gens," with all of its attendant ambiguities which we discussed in class). But just as Baligant's army already contains a wide array of different ethnicities united under one political banner, so can the "Christian race" apparently join this diverse unity. Granted, all of these "pagan" ethnicities also share belief in the Paynim deities, which they collectively reaffirm before the battle, but allegiance to Baligant seems to be the overriding consideration, above even creed.
By Paynim standards, then, maybe Ganelon did become one of them: he swore oaths and received gifts from Paynims, including Marsilion's queen, although none of these interactions seem to have borne any overt symbolism of political allegiance. However, I think it's correct that none of this turns Ganelon into a pagan from the poet's point of view. Ganelon definitely does become an "Other" of another sort, and the dynamics surrounding what exactly he has done in the eyes of the French and the necessary repercussions for it (which revolve around the notions of "revenge," "treason," and "justice") are material for a whole other post entirely. But the poem's structures of difference do require that, whatever standards the Paynims may hold, Ganelon's dealings with them have not REALLY caused him to cross that line.
Just a brief note to confirm that in fact the reference to "Christian race" translates "la gent chrestiene" in the Old French original, so Max's intuition about "gens" (the Latin source for "gent") is correct.
Post a Comment