Undergrad Wednesdays – War and Tests of Will

[This post, part of an effort to merge our undergraduate and graduate blogs, was written in response to an essay prompt for Kathryn Kerby-Fulton's undergraduate course on "Chaucer's Biggest Rivals: The Alliterative Poets." It comes from the former "Medieval Undergraduate Research" website.]

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Lines 279-300
“Nay, frayst I no fyȝt, in fayth I þe telle;
Hit arn aboute on þis bench bot berdlez chylder.
If I were hasped in armes on a heȝe stede,
Here is no mon me to mach, for myȝtez so wayke.
Forþy I craue in þis court a Crystemas gomen,
For hit is Ȝol and Nwe Ȝer, and here ar ȝep mony.
If any so hardy in þis hous holdez hymseluen,
Be so bolde in his blod, brayn in hys hede,
Þat dar stifly strike a strok for anoþer,
I schal gif hym of my gyft þys giserne ryche,
Þis ax, þat is heué innogh, to hondele as hym lykes,
And I schal bide þe fyrst bur as bare as I sitte.
If any freke be so felle to fonde þat I telle,
Lepe lyȝtly me to, and lach þis weppen–
I quit-clayme hit for euer, kepe hit as his auen–
And I schal stonde hym a strok, stif on þis flet,
Ellez þou wyl diȝt me þe dom to dele hym an oþer
Barlay,
And ȝet gif hym respite,
A twelmonyth and a day.
Now hyȝe, and let se tite
Dar any herinne oȝt say.”

My Translation:
“Nay, I do not seek to fight, in truth I tell you;
There are about on these benches only beardless children.
Were I in full arms on a high steed,
There is nobody here to match me, for their powers are so weak.
Therefore, I ask for a Christmas game in this court,
For it is Yule and New Year, and there are many brisk youths.
If anyone in this house considers himself so bold,
Be so bold in his blood, so mad in his head,
That dares to fearlessly exchange one strike for another,
I shall give him as my gift this battle axe,
This ax, that is heavy enough, to handle as he likes,
And I shall bide the first blow as I sit without armor.
If any man be so bold as to try what I propose,
Leap swiftly to me, and grab hold of this weapon,
I renounce it forever, let him keep it as his own,
And I shall stand and take a stroke from him, unflinching on the floor,
Provided that he will give me the right to deal him another
In my turn,
And yet give him respite,
Twelve months and a day.
Now hasten, and let me quickly see
If anyone dare to take up the game.”


British Library MS Cotton Nero A.x; f.90/94v.

King Arthur’s laughter danced through his great hall, infusing all the knights and ladies with such mirth, before a giant of a green man and his steed burst through the doors. He wore neither a helmet nor hauberk, and his gaze was so lightning sharp it seemed as if no man could survive his glances. This Green Knight then began to speak: “The praise of you, prince, is puffed up so high, / And your court and your company are counted the best” (Borroff 258-9). He proceeds by presenting a challenge to King Arthur’s Round Table, asking not for a fight, but rather for a game in order to test Camelot’s powerful reputation. This passage in which the Green Knight dares any man bold enough to enter his game serves as a prime example of the author’s talented use of consonance and alliteration as well as warlike imagery to sculpt his poem.

Each alliterative line in this passage contains the repetition of a consonant. Prefacing his proposal, the Green Knight says, “frayst I no fyȝt, in fayth I þe telle” (279), which translates to “to fight, in good faith, is far from my thought” (Borroff 279). The combination of consonance and alliteration works not only to highlight the statement but also to give the knight a strong, almost harsh tone with the “f” repetition. His tone is established in other lines as well: “Here is no mon me to mach, for myȝtez so wayke” (282), the Green Knight claims, meaning, “For measured against mine, their might is puny.” Every “m” word, each repetition, gives rise to the opportunity to re-emphasize the power of the Green Knight over the court of Camelot at this moment due to his superior “myȝtez.” When he explains how the game works, how whoever comes forward will strike at him with his axe, the knight again talks of his strength of character: “And I schal stonde hym a strok, stif on þis flet” (294), which translates as, “And I shall stand him a stroke, steady on this floor.” Essentially, by focusing on the lines within this passage that feature alliteration and consonance, a better understanding of the Green Knight as a very strong and very confident character emerges.

In addition, this passage contains engaging warlike imagery that helps to create a picture in the reader’s mind of how sharply the Green Knight’s savage game contrasts with the youthful mirth of King Arthur’s court. Take, for instance, how the knight calls the people of the court “beardless children” (280). These gentlemen and ladies are meant to stand as examples of the true greatness of the realm; yet within moments the Green Knight bluntly dismisses them as frivolous children who do not possess the strength or the boldness to defend Camelot. Another example are the lines: “If any so hardy in þis hous holdez hymseluen, / Be so bolde in his blod, brayn in hys hede, / Þat dar stifly strike a strok for an oþer” (285-7), or, “If any in this house such hardihood claims, / Be so bold in his blood, his brain so wild, / As stoutly to strike one stroke for another.” Here, the knight further describes the sense of daring and courage necessary for a man to enter the game, and he does so in such a way as to inspire an image of a man like himself, an almost-giant who boldly ventures into his enemy’s territory without armor. Readers can then call upon the prolific descriptions of the Green Knight and his horse earlier in the poem to enhance the imagery of both the confrontation between the knight and the court as well as the kind of knight who will step forward to take up the axe. These two examples serve to underscore how the author of the poem skillfully selects words that together paint a visual picture of the court, its people, the Green Knight, and the perfect knight who will accept the challenge.

The above English translations of the poem come from Marie Borroff, a renowned poetic translator. In the introduction to her translation, she writes, “I have done my best during the entire process of translation to attend carefully and respectfully to the exact sense of the poem at every turn, though I have inevitably had at times to decide what was essential in a given line” (Borroff xiii). Despite even Borroff’s best efforts, disagreements over her choices exist. For instance, she translates “myȝtez” (282) as “might” where I chose “powers” in my translation. By using “might,” Borroff maintains the consonant alliteration, but I decided on “powers” because I wanted to refer to the idea of an overarching power game between good and evil throughout the poem. “Might” did not convey that same meaning in my opinion. Another example is the word “hardy” (285), which Borroff and I translate as “bold.” Even though she and I both ultimately chose “bold,” it is important to highlight the other potential translations of the word “hardy”: brave, harsh, stubborn, oppressive, and violent. Each of these describes the Green Knight more than his future opponent, Gawain; yet perhaps these words describe what Gawain might become during and after the challenge. Overall, Borroff provides a solid translation of this passage, though in some cases, the layers of meanings are lost along with the stylistic devices.

The Green Knight fearlessly throws down the gauntlet before King Arthur and his knights of the Round Table. Through the alliteration of consonants, the warlike imagery, and the word choices in the poem and its translation, the knight stands as an indomitable force that tests the seemingly superior reputation of Camelot.

Shannon Bugos
University of Notre Dame

Undergrad Wednesdays – A Lovely Lady?

[This post, part of an effort to merge our undergraduate and graduate blogs, was written in response to an essay prompt for Kathryn Kerby-Fulton's undergraduate course on "Chaucer's Biggest Rivals: The Alliterative Poets." It comes from the former "Medieval Undergraduate Research" website.]

In a way, any translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is a minor miracle. Translating anything is difficult because the translation must attempt to make good logical sense while simultaneously capturing the spirit of the words. This is often difficult because the connotations behind each word are different in the language that the text is being translated into. Translating Middle English is particularly difficult because many of the words that the original texts use have a plethora of possible meanings. Middle English was also written in a time when dictionaries and writing guides were not readily available for all writers; therefore translation is further complicated by inconsistent spelling. On the same page it is not uncommon to find two or three spellings of the exact same word. Without spelling books words were often written phonetically, which led to further variation in writing as individual authors spoke different dialects. The difference in dialects is comparable to the different regional variations of speech in the United States. Imagine if a Bostonian and a Southern Californian were both to write and spell exactly as they spoke: their writing would share common words, but some words would sound and look completely different. It is therefore, difficult to even identify the best rewriting of particular words, let alone capture the connotation of the line or piece as a whole. Poetry presents a challenge in any language. Its special use of word play is often filled with subtleties that even an astute fluent reader can miss. In translating poetry the tools of alliteration, rhyming, as well as word play through the use of homonyms and homographs is often lost. Therefore any translator attempting to relate the epic poem of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight faces many difficulties, and each translator will have their own individual spin.

Marie Borroff’s translation is the one most commonly found in Norton Anthologies and is widely viewed as one of the best translations. However, after reading Sir Gawain, I would like to tease out some difference between her text and the original as I understand it. Below is a side by side comparison of my own translation (on the right) and Borroff’s translation (on the left) of Part I lines 1204-1236.

 

One of the first things I noticed was that this rather steamy scene was significantly censored and edited so that the lady was portrayed in a more playful rather than sexually aggressive light. For example, instead of translating “I schal happe yow here þat oþer half als” as “I shall imprison you on the other side too” and choosing “I shall hem and hold you on either hand,” Borroff is closer to directly translating the words themselves, but misses the truly sexually explicit imagery that the words imply. Her chosen adjectives go with the less aggressive or unsettling meanings, as well. For instance, she has chosen to take the word “vnslyȝe” in “Ȝe ar a sleper vnslyȝe, þat mon may slyde hider” to mean “slack”. However an alternative meaning of the word is “incautious”, which warns the reader that Sir Gawain must be very cautious in this next encounter. Interestingly, on further examination Sir Gawain is similarly portrayed in a gentler light as he is described as gentle and jesting, “Thus jested in answer that gentle knight,” instead of being characterized as more war-like, “And thus he wittily answered (verbally jousted) against with many a happy laugh”. I have chosen to translate the word “bourded” in this way because of the presence of the word “aȝayn” which means against. Jesting and verbal jousting are often the same thing, however I felt like the word “against” together with “jousting” created a war-like feeling appropriate to a knight being tested.

As the differences in translating the line “And þus he bourded aȝayn with mony a blyþe laȝter” reveals, even some of the best translations cannot capture some of the word play that is occurring. “Bourded” seemed to be a variation of the word “bourden”. “Bourden” could mean exactly what Borroff suggests, according to the Middle English Dictionary, it could very well mean “to joke, jest, mock”. However the MED also gives a second possibility as “to joust,” or even more specifically, “charge (a boar) with a spear”. Clearly the second possibility cleverly links Gawain’s challenge in the bedroom with the lady, to Lord Bertilak’s ongoing hunt in the forest as one of the animals he hunts is a boar.

Another example of when the translation must unfortunately shed itself of the word play occurring is in the line “Al laȝande þe lady lauced þo bourdez”. The word “lauced” according to the glossary in the back of Gillespie, Glasscoe, and Swanton’s The Poems of the Pearl Manuscript could mean to “utter, speak” but it also has the alternate meaning “loosen, break, burst, undo, and open”. The use of this homograph helps create the sexual atmosphere of the scene. Even though the lady does not actually loosen or undo anything, the clever play on words, draws the reader’s eyes to the implicit sexually aggressive nature of the scene as a whole.

Aside from the sexual nature of the scene, which Borroff tries to make family friendly, her usage of punctuation is particularly interesting. In part, I believe that this is due to the fact that Borroff is not directly translating the text, but is attempting to make it flow in modern day English. Despite her careful use of archaic words, Borroff gives a very readable text to the modern reader. However, by slightly changing the punctuation of her text, Borroff is placing emphasis on different ideas within the passage. For example, by placing an exclamation point after “I am well content!” instead of the comma used in the original, Borroff Is stressing the knight’s content. While this may seem like a minor issue, the stress on the knight’s content makes him sound more confident and at ease than in the original. In the original he is obviously uncomfortable as he claims that he needs a certain outcome to occur, “Me schal worþe at your wille, and þat me wel lykez, For I ȝelde me ȝederly, and ȝeȝe after grace, And þat is þe best, be my dome, for me byhouez need!’”.

Therefore, while Borroff provides the world with an introduction to the story of Sir Gawain by translating it and thereby making it more approachable, her translation can be and should be critiqued. First, for some of the choices she herself makes, like the choice to downplay the sexual nature of the scene; and secondly, because of the nature of translation itself. No translation, however masterful, can capture all of the intricacies of the original.

Mercedes de la Rosa
University of Notre Dame

Undergrad Wednesdays – Gawain lines 1150-1177: Mirrored Pursuits

[This post, part of an effort to merge our undergraduate and graduate blogs, was written in response to an essay prompt for Kathryn Kerby-Fulton's undergraduate course on "Chaucer's Biggest Rivals: The Alliterative Poets." It comes from the former "Medieval Undergraduate Research" website.]

Original text of Fitt III, lines 1150-1177

At þe fyrst quethe of þe quest quaked þe wylde.
Der drof in þe dame doted for drede,
Hiȝed to þe hyȝe bot heterly þay were
Restayed with þe stablye, þat stoutly ascryed.
Þay let þe herttez haf þe gate, with þe hyȝe hedes,
Þe breme bucket also, with or brode paumez;
For þe free lorde hade defende in fermysoun tyme
Þat þer schulde no mon meue to þe male dere.
Þe hindez were halden in with ‘Hay!’ and ‘War!’
Þe does dryuen with gret dyn to þe depe sladez.
Þer myȝt mon se, as þay slypte,  slentyng of arwes;
At vche wende vnder wande wapped a flone,
Þat bigly vote one þe broun with ful brode hedez.
What! þay brayen and bleden, bi bonkkez þay deȝen,
And ay rachches in a res radly hem folȝes,
Hunterez wyth hyȝe horne hasted hem folȝes,
Wyth such a crakkande kry as klyffes haden brusten.
What wylde so atwaped wyȝes þat schotten
Watz al toraced and rent at þe resayt,
Bi þay were tened at þe hyȝe and taysed to þe wattrez,
Þe ledez were so learned at þe loȝe trysters;
And þe grehoundez so grete þat geten hem bylyue
And hem tofylched as fast as frekez myȝt loke
Þer ryȝt.
Þe lorde, for blys abloy,
Ful oft con launce and lyȝt,
And drof þat day with joy
Thus to þe dark nyȝt.

Translation

At the first word of the quest quaked the wild animals.
Deer drove into the dale, demented by dread,
They hastened to the high ground, but cruelly they were
Turned back by the ring of beaters, that mightily cried out.
They let the harts pass, with their high heads,
And the fierce bucks also, with their broad flat antlers;
For the noble lord had forbidden in the time of the close-season
That any man should rouse the male deer.
The hinds were hailed in with “hey!” and “ware!”
They drive the does with great din to the deep valleys.
There one may see, as they were loosed, the slanting flight of arrows;
At each wind under the boughs swished an arrow,
That powerfully bit into the brown flesh with very broad heads.
What! They bray and bleed, by banks they die,
And all the while hounds in a rush promptly follow them,
Hunters with loud horns hastened after them
With such a cracking cry as if cliffs had burst.
Whatever wild creature eluded the men that shot
Was all pulled down and torn open at the receiving stations,
By the time they were harnessed at the high ground and driven to the waters,
The men were so skilled at the low hunting stations;
And the greyhounds so great that they seized them quickly
And pulled them down as fast as men could look
Right there.
The lord, transported by bliss,
Very often did shoot and dismount,
And passed that day with joy
In this way till the dark night.


This passage from the beginning of the first hunt scene sets the stage for the following seduction attempt scenes in which the enthusiastic and energetic pursuit of the hunt is sublimated in the mirrored pursuit of the bedroom. Alliteration works to convey the urgency and vigor of the action, as in line 1151: “Der drof in þe dale, doted for drede,” where the repetition of the “d” sound mimics the thudding of hooves. The frequency of the alliteration in this line drives home the desperation of the animals’ flight. In another example, alliteration of the “s” sound in line 1160 aurally portrays the whistling of arrows as they “slypte” and go “slentyng” through the air. The scene is then fraught with imagery that is highly charged, masculine, and sensual. Vaguely erotic images describe the chaos and destructive action of the hunt, such as in lines 1161-62, where it is said that “a flone… bigly bote on þe broun” (“an arrow… powerfully pierced the brown flesh”). This is perhaps best exemplified in the bob and wheel, in which “þe lorde, for blys abloy, / ful oft con launce and lyȝt, / And drof þat day wyth joy / Thus to þe derk nyȝt.” The description of the lord’s pleasure in the hunt, apparently so great that he spends the entirety of the day from early morning until dark of night in the pursuit, is evocative of (repetitive) sexual climax.

While he pursues this pleasure outdoors with wild game as the prey, his wife pursues it indoors as she attempts to ensnare Gawain. In the hunt, the male hunters pursue female deer (hinds and does) exclusively as the male deer (harts and bucks) are illegal to shoot. In contrast, the seduction scene reverses the gendered roles of hunter and hunted as the woman pursues the man. The hunt scene is overwhelmingly masculine and virile as it describes men energetically making use of their weapons to lay low their conquests. It is an emphatically loud scene, filled with the clamor of the hunt, the dashing of hooves, braying of hounds, and the cracking cries of the hunters. This is all reversed in the following scene, where the lady makes use of her feminine weapons. In contrast to the hunt, the bedroom seems extraordinarily quiet, as Gawain’s silent room is quietly invaded by the lady, and they humorously exchange light flirtation. Yet the rushing of the hunt scene hangs over that of the bedroom, and tinges it all the more with a sense of restrained lust.

Marie Borroff’s translation is generally successful in the description of the scene, maintenance of the alliteration, and representation of the imagery. While at times it changes for the sake of maintaining meaning in recognizable words, the alliteration for the most part matches the original consonants, successfully maintaining the sonic qualities and their aural imagery. There are, however, some questionable moments, in which the translation fails to be effectively descriptive for modern English. At line 1158, for example, Borroff translates the line as “The hinds were headed up, with “Hey!” and “Ware!” The line is easily translated into modern English, as most of the words remain the same. However, Borroff chooses to translate “halden in” (the literal meaning of which is “hailed in”) as “headed up.” The reasoning for this is unclear – the modern English translation perfectly maintains the meaning and alliteration, and the phrase “hailed in” is easier to understand than “headed up.” While fortunately the import of the line is not altered, Borroff’s translation makes the text slightly less clear and accessible than it is even in its original form.

This same issue of archaic, difficult to access diction occurs just a line above in the case of Borroff’s use of the word “demesne” which Borroff defines in the margin as “kingdom.” Perhaps she deems this important for maintaining the alliteration of the line between words beginning with “d.” Even in this case, however, we might imagine other possible choices, for example, “district,” that might maintain the alliteration of the line and perhaps even better describe the geo-political reality. But the fact remains that in the original line, the “d” is not alliterated – “dere” is the lone “d” word, and the alliterated consonant is instead the “m” of “mon,” “meue,” and “male.” Borroff maintains this alliteration in her translation of these words as “man,” “molest,” and “male,” respectively (although two of these translations are obvious). Furthermore, the original line makes no mention of a kingdom at all. Borroff’s addition of this detail seems more intended for the sake of informing modern readers of the political or legal aspects of land ownership and hunting laws than for the sake of literally representing the lines.

For the most part, though, these changes are slight and the translations are still quite faithful. The largest difference, however, is in Borroff’s translation of the bob and wheel. The general meaning of the lines still comes across, but the powerfully suggestive imagery of the original bob and wheel is significantly diminished. Borroff does try to maintain this sense, with phrases like “sheer delight” and “pleasures rare,” yet unfortunately the originally striking imagery falls apart under the demands of making a translation in modern English that maintains equal syllabic length and comparable rhyme scheme. Overall, though, the translation is impressive, considering the demands on the translator to keep the modern version as close to the original meaning while at the same time replicating original poetic devices. The Middle English is clearly preferable in its ability to convey the ferocity, virility, and sensuality of the hunt all at once, but for readers of modern English, Borroff’s translation is impressive, all things considered.

Angela Bird
University of Notre Dame