Transitioning from the Classic Hero to the Medieval Hero
"The Song of Roland" is an important piece in helping us understand the movement from the classic Greek epic/tragic hero to the hero we see in the literature of the Middle Ages. Many of the stories we read will place the protagonists in situations in which fighting or warrior skill alone will not solve their problems, nor bring them glory. The world view changes when the Roman outlook gives way to the Holy Roman outlook--when we move to a Christian outlook, in other words. There are a couple of important distinctions to note in this transition:
1) The shift in values creates a shift in conduct. Think about it this way: when what was important to people changed, their goals and objectives in life changed, and therefore they changed their behavior. The classic hero was motivated by wealth, trophies, and glory; therefore, honor and valor in battle would help the hero achieve those. The bigger and more valiant the victory, the larger the reward in reputation.
On the other hand, the knight fights not for himself, but for his king, queen or country, or for his lady. The shift here is away from kleos (glory) to fides (loyalty) and chivalry, a French term which came to define the relationship between a knight and his lady (so, something to do with love...). For these goals, the knight must conduct himself with a bit more honor, since it's not just his own reputation that's at stake.
2) The shift in religious ideas creates a shift in the relationship to the gods/God. The classic hero lived in a world (albeit a mythical one) where the gods had direct interaction with people, and conducted themselves with human personalities and faults. They are petty and flakey, and play favorites. Fate was, then, paradoxically your fault and out of your control.
For the Medieval hero, God is distant except for certain miracles; He is either vengeful or merciful, and rarely anything else; and He lives in heaven, not down the street atop Mt. Olympus, so there is not a lot of direct contact. The knight is subordinate to God, not interacting with Him, and never challenging Him.
3) The shift in a view of the afterlife creates a shift in the approach to life. For the classic hero, to die in battle was glorious, and if you make good in life and don't die horribly (which was ironically the case for most heroes), you'd be awarded a spot in the Underworld, which is somewhere in the middle of the earth. There were some pretty nice spots down there, too; sort of like "paradise" in the Old Testament, which was actually in the upper parts of Hell, where the Old Testament saint lived before Jesus took them to Heaven. Sort of like that.
For the Medieval hero, Heaven was, well, in heaven! They live a live of purity, forsaking worldly wants to get to heaven and be with God forever. Whereas some of the eternal home's of the classic world resembled placed on earth, Heaven is like no place on earth, because it's not on earth--it's out in space somewhere...
4) The shift in the understanding of the hero's goal creates a shift in the journey. The classic hero will reach the goal and die, or die while reaching the goal. Death, really, is part of the goal, which is somewhat of a bummer, you can imagine. You will win, but you will die. If you don't die, you haven't won. All that wealth and booty equals street cred in the afterlife, but you can't take it with you.
For the Medieval hero, the knight may or may not actually achieve the intended goal. Their journey does also involve some humbling, though not necessarily death; their reward is much more intangible often, as the enlightenment they receive was not the reason for the journey, but gained over the course of the journey. In other words, they don't seek enlightenment as a product; they receive enlightenment as a process. Again, although there is often some failure, the lessons they learn to translate into some street cred with God when they get to heaven. Maybe this shift isn't so much a difference as a variation...
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER:
* How does "The Song of Roland" act as a transitional piece between the classic hero and the Medieval one? In what ways does the story reflect the classic ideals? In what ways does it show the shift to the new ones?
* Which hero, in your opinion, is superior, the classic or the Medieval? I don't mean if they squared off in a fight (though that would be somewhat exciting), but in terms of values and qualities?
The most virtuous hero would be the medieval one. The classic hero fights for his honor and wealth, while the medieval hero fights for a special lady, king, or queen. A medieval hero would not strike the weak, although a classic hero would use every opportunity. The classic hero would not even bother with loyalt if it means his honor is at stake; this idea leads to selfishness and vanity. A classic hero will make himself look better to get a special spot in the Underworld, but a medieval hero will fight bravely and honorably to spend the afterlife in a virtuous Heaven with God. For a classic hero, death in battle was the ultimate glory. In advancing towards a goal, a classic hero will fight to the death, as death was part of the glory. In the journey of a medieval hero, the intended goal is not usually achieved, but wisdom is gained, which is much more important to bring one closer to God. In conclusion, a medieval hero submits himself entirely to God, authority, the honor of a special lady, and conducts himself well towards an enemy, unlike a classic hero.
ReplyDelete