Zachary Stratton

10 December 2015

Reading Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has led me to the
conclusion that the author intended it to be, at its core, a criticism of
chivalry. The Author of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight uses a compendium
of tactics to achieve this critical effect; the author heavily relies on the use of
gender roles to draw connections between chivalrous acts and the weak or
lesser. By far the most heavily used device within the story, this implication
is phrased both in respects to characters actions and positionality. The
contrast between the inept, but classically chivalrous, court of Arthur and the
immaculately courtly, but suspiciously antagonistic, Green Knight beautifully
illustrates the intended criticism of chivalry within Sir Gawain and the Green
Knight.

Undoubtedly monstrous in appearance, The Green Knight is both

hyper-masculinized and feminized.. Ignoring the obvious Greenness of the
knight he is given a description that mashes the feminine and masculine
together:
I should genuinely judge him to be a half giant,
Or a most massive man, the mightiest of mortals
But handsome, too, like any horseman worth his horse,
For despite the bulk and brawn of his body
His stomach and waist were slender and sleek.
In fact in all features he was finely formed
it seemed (Sir Gawain and the Green Knight 140-146)

With his slim hips and slender frame , coupled with an undoubtedly
masculine bulk and brawn, the Green Knight is presented as an
androgynous monstrosity that the entire court shies away from. This
feminine effect becomes compounded when the Green Knight agrees to take
the first attack in his game of blows. In taking this initial attack he kneels
down, putting himself into a submissive and, therefore, feminine position to
receive his decapitation. In his decapitation the Green Knight is symbolically
castrated, with his head being removed, making him even more
monstrous, in the eyes of the medieval reader, as a man who can survive
without his manhood. This initial scene in which the green knight suggests
his game of trading blows is a blatant satire of the tradition of courtly games
that were often violent and were deeply rooted in chivalry. Chivalry has deep
roots in violence and often justifies violence as a way to bring yourself honor
and prestige (Martin), this tradition spawned the tournaments, jousts, and
games that are now deeply ingrained in our understanding of the medieval
court. The author uses a seemingly insane level of violence to make fun of
the games of war, and tourneys that served as a way to achieve the same
sort of courtly honor without the horrors and cost of war itself. These games,
understandably, play a large part in the realm of courtly chivalry and the
author wastes no time in making them out to be grotesquely violent acts.
The author goes on to make the jape that those who play these games are
feminizing themselves by connecting the metaphorical castration of the
Green Knight with the courts fascination with games. Similarly, the notion

that a being as feminine and monstrous as the Green Knight could surpass a
knight of the round table in a game of the court acts as a slight onto the
success of chivalry as the court of Arthur is portrayed, ironically in this case,
as the perfect chivalrous entity. The author continues to poke fun at the court
as they kick at the Green Knights head as it rolls along the floor. This is akin
to the unchivalrous act of attacking an already incapacitated enemy and
further displays that the court of Arthur as an entity that, while presented as
an ideal of chivalric values, cannot follow the complex rules involved when
presented with a situation in which the rules apply.
Forgoing all their courtly poise, the horrified lords and ladies
react with violence of their own by kicking the severed head
away from them. Like the Green Knightwho despite all his
nuanced self-stylization cannot control the cut of the ax or the
trajectory of his fallen headthe courtiers reflexively drop their
social graces. Matter momentarily overwhelms manner. (Martin)
It is even possible to concede that Gawain, a seemingly perfect paragon of
pious chivalry, acted in a non chivalrous manner when he decapitates the
Green Knight as this shows a willingness to kill someone who clearly doesn't
have any way to defend themselves. According to Carl Grey Martin The
Green Knights proposal to endure a decapitating stroke in return for the
chance to deal one himself appears to subvert the tenets of courtly civility
and of Christian fellowship. (Martin). This is key to the understanding that
while the Green Knight is an excellent example of courtly poise that he is not

meant to show that chivalry is a worthwhile venture, even as the Green

Knight shows that he is in some ways more beholden to the ideals of chivalry
he subverts those same ideals with a mischievous zeal.

In Lord Bertilaks castle the bedroom seduction scenes show the

author's intentions to criticize the chivalric trope of courtly love in all its
paradoxical wonder. Keeping in mind the conditions of the game of taking
and giving back that gawain has agreed to with Lord Bertilak Gawain is
forced to choose between accepting the sexual favor of the lady and,
presumably, repaying Lord Bertilak with his own body. On the other hand
Gawain is clearly denying the sexual courtesy of Lady Bertilak as well as the
often seen trope of the courtly love triangle in which a dispassionate spouse
finds excitement and love in a chivalrous knight. According to Lawrence
Warner To a knight keenly aware of both, conflicting options, it is an
impossible dilemma. Gawain cannot act. Any decisive action he might take,
whether to accept or reject her, would place him in great peril... (Warner).
This is a direct parody of the usual paradox a knight finds himself in when
confronted with an opportunity for courtly love; to be chivalrous a man must
not commit adultery or steal a wife from their husband, while at the same
time he is expected to succumb to the idyllic passion and love associated
with a courtly romance. This is a satirical representation of a similar sort of
paradox, Gawain must deny the ladies advances or himself be made to take
a submissive and therefore weak role. It is worth noting that this line of

reasoning relies on a very heteronormative and homophobic way of thinking,

which was the norm at the time of Sir Gawain and the Green Knights
conception. Medieval Gender and sexuality are as much about positionality
active/passive, top/bottom--- as much as they are about genitality per se.
(Boyd). Gawain being a receptacle for Lord Bertilak is the author's way of
saying more so than it is a remark on sexuality. These scenes make fun of
and shine light upon the paradox that is courtly love in a way that is
consistent with the constant japes of the Green Knights author, whenever
a character tries to be chivalrous or live up to a courtly expectation they are
shortly feminized and therefore, in the authors eyes, made to appear weak
and submissive. These bedroom scenes are the authors way of dismantling
the paradox that is courtly love in a way that would have been humorous and
easy to comprehend for his contemporaries.

As Sir Gawain and the Green Knight reaches its climax and Gawain
makes his final appearance in front of the Green Knight he is ultimately
feminized with the Knights blow to the neck. Even in his final act of the
courtly game Gawain cannot seem to escape the authors constant
connection between the feminine/submissive and the chivalric. Gawain can
not even seem to stay within the rules of his game with Lord Bertilak when
faced with the possibility of bodily harm which, in and of itself, shows that
even the round tables most chivalrous knight can not seem to overcome his

own fear in order to have honor and finish out the game without breaking
some of its rules.
Convinced that honoring the game is not worth giving up on a
chance at survival, the knight keeps the life-preserving tokena
suitable countermeasure to the Green Knights enchantment
and with uncharacteristic discourtesy breaks the rules.
(Martin).
It could be argued that the magical sash, in the context of the game of
blows, levels the playing field between mundane Gawain and the magical
Green Knight and is therefore not dishonorable but it clearly breaks the rules
of the game Gawain is playing with Lord Bertilak in a very unjustifiable way.
Where the classic knight is supposed to value honor and discipline over most
all else Gawain is portrayed as very quick to abandon chivalric customs when
threatened with bodily harm. Even the blow that Gawain receives carries its
own weight as a metaphoric demasculinization. Similar to the Green Knights
decapitation, Gawains neck wound is symbolic of castration. This
metaphorical castration accompanied by the submissive stance that Gawain
must take to receive said blow is yet another show of the faults of chivalry
and courtly games, in the authors eyes these games ultimately feminize
everyone involved. It was no doubt amusing for readers at the time to see
each man, Gawain and the Knight, participate in a game that while rooted in
chivalry ultimately emasculates each man involved.

Perhaps the ultimate mark against chivalry within Sir Gawain and the
Green Knight is that the plot and character actions are largely driven by
women. While the women who drive the plot are generally silent figures they
are nonetheless important to understanding the underlying criticism within
the story. Arguably the most powerful character within the tale, the Green
Knight, Has gained his power through Morgan le Fay as a way to antagonize
the court of arthur. This is what ultimately drives the entire story, knowing
that the Green Knight and Lord Bertilak are the same character it follows
that they are both acting on Morgans will to aggravate and test Gawain. At
the time of its circulation the notion that a woman, regardless of how
powerful she may be, is the driving force behind Sir Gawain and the Green
Knight would have made all of the male characters within the story seem
weak. This is the kind of satire that pervades Sir Gawain and the Green
Knight, to the readers of time it would seem laughably implausible that
women could have such an influential role over so many men. While this may
seem wildly sexist by today's standards it wouldn't have been that out of
place for the readers of this time period. Even ignoring all other aspects of
the authors feminization of men in correlation to chivalry, the plot of Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight is ultimately one female using chivalrous men
to achieve her personal goals, which heavily underscores all of the following
plot. The author uses this device so that no matter how chivalrous any
character behaves they cannot escape the judgement that they are acting
largely upon the will of a woman. This follows with the authors continual use

of feminine, weak, and submissive as all nearly synonymous and his almost
constant use of those ideas in connection to chivalry.

The antithesis between the Green Knight and Gawain serves to

highlight the failings of the arthurian court as a whole.The calm, professional,
and composed way that the Green Knight carries himself throughout his
appearances draws attention to the ineptitude of King Arthur's court. On his
initial appearance, one cannot help but notice the almost childish reactions
of the court which are starkly contrasted by the Green Knights strict
adherence to the rules of the court Despite his [the Green Knights] abrasive
discourse and intimidating physique, he can outperform the entire royal
court in matters of protocol. (Martin). This contrast continues throughout
the narrative as Lord Bertilaks warlike hunting scenes clash with images of
Gawain lounging in bed into the late morning. Arthur's court was, and still is,
considered the platonic ideal of chivalry. While it may not raise many flags
for todays audience this contrast would have been striking to the readers of
the time. These readers would have been familiar, at least in part, with these
tales of King Arthur's court and the heroic actions that take place within it.
The contrast between the stoic Green Knight and the unruly court of Arthur
shows the reader the childish caricature that the author intends for them to
see. The use of comparison continues, with similar effect, in the scenes of
Lord Bertilak's castle. The contrast here is meant to highlight Gawains
laziness against Bertilaks action and violence. As I mentioned before,

violence was often associated with chivalry, and the hunting scenes are no
different. Gawain's comparative inaction, therefore, represents a lack of
chivalrous value on his part. With respects to the contrasting depictions of
Bertilak/The Green Knight and Gawain/King Arthur's Court I tend to agree
with J.J Anderson; Anderson argues that the contrasting imagery is used to
show faults in characters generally associated with immaculately courtly and
chivalrous behavior. While this is by no means the sole way in which the
Author devalues the Arthurian court, and therefore chivalry as a whole, it
certainly adds a deeper level of complexity to the critique in its entirety.

The Author makes sure to highlight the faults of Gawain and therefore
chivalry as a whole. When Gawain fails it carries the unspoken commentary
that chivalry itself has failed. Throughout the story Gawain is almost
sarcastically shown as the ideal chivalric knight, the kind of person who will
wander for months and brave the treacherous road just to uphold a courtly
game even when it means he will most likely lose his head in the end. This
makes it all the more glaring when the author has him fail, it is the way in
which Sir Gawain and the green Knight tells its audience that chivalry is an
impossible thing to uphold even for the most chivalric of knights and that
therefore it is a social construct with no value in pursuing. The Author of Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight heavily relies upon the gender roles of his
time to achieve this effect, associating any kind of fault with the feminine
and weak to create an almost satirical criticism of chivalric values. This

extends with particular note to the author's decision to have women drive
the overarching plot of the narrative in a way that subverts the ideals of the
Arthurian court. The antithesis between the factions of Arthur/Gawain and Lord
Bertilak/the Green Knight serves to highlight the failings of the former and is used in
conjunction with the gender stereotypes presented by the author to underscore this criticism. Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight is ultimately a criticism of chivalry masquerading as a tale of
chivalrous deeds. <3