I’m curious what people think
about our introduction to the Prioress, and if there’s a possibility that our overall
interpretations of her as some sort of floozy are founded or not.
In looking at line 118, we see a
woman who, at first glance, is high-born and sent to a priory. She has become a Prioress, and knows how to
appear the most proper of ladies through her upbringing. She eats her meat daintily,
and even saves scraps for her lapdogs.
She has a large heart, which we see in how she feels about a mouse
caught in a trap, or if one of her pups were to die. Why is it that these things aren’t lauded or
praised? Is it because her French isn’t good? She is kind hearted, generous,
and looks out for the smaller of God’s creatures—so what makes us think she’s
not living up to the role of Prioress? A simple love token. A set of beads
which includes a piece of coral and the words engraved in gold “Amor Vincit
Omnia”—love conquers all.
This beaded bracelet, I think,
is the key to understanding more about this Prioress, especially because I no
longer think that she is the tarty woman she is so often made out to be. Many
feel that this bracelet must be a love token from a lover, someone who the
prioress loves more than the God she is supposed to be serving. I feel
differently.
While my first idea is definitely
a simplistic one, and one that I’m sure will be shot down by many, the
immediate phrase which comes to mind is something that was taught to me in
church and church school repeatedly: “god is love.” If this is the case, isn’t
she making a subtle statement that, perhaps, God can conquer all? (at this
point, I’m well aware that the concept of “amor” is going to be more earthly
love, etc. You may crucify me now, as I’ve opened the door, but at least see
where my mind is going.)
Second, and the more compelling
argument, brought about by my first point, is that the other prominent element,
other than the golden words, is a piece of coral. Seemingly insignificant, as
it’s essentially a piece of stone to the untrained eye, coral signifies so much
more to me. Coral has a long history in art, being used in artwork depicting
Perseus’ battle with Medusa (after he cuts of her head, it’s thought that her
blood turned to stone, which could explain why coral is so brightly red).
Because of this, and the fact that it grows so slowly, there were many who
believed that coral had healing and protecting qualities. Additionally, because it was thought that the Pegasus
sprang forth from Medusa’s body, there is an element of rebirth also associated
with coral, should it be related to the blood of Medusa.
Later, as Christianity takes precedence,
we no longer see coral solely used in the stories of Greek and Roman myths, but
begin to see coral being associated with Christ. Firstly, because of the connotation of
rebirth, the connections between Christ and coral are obvious. To further this
idea, the bright red of the coral is connected to the blood of Christ, and is therefore
thought to represent his blood solidified as protection and help for those lucky
enough to have a piece of it. In fact,
coral became something which was given to babies in beads, especially those of
a child’s rosary, for many years, to ward evil away. We can see an example of this protection in
the painting, seen below, of the Madonna Della Vittoria, where a large piece of
coral hangs above Mary and the Christ child, used both to reinforce the idea
that coral is protecting, and life-giving, as Christ will eventually be
resurrected.
So, returning to our Prioress, I
raise two questions: If she is the opposite of what a prioress should be, which
is almost always what I have said, and what I hear everyone else who has discussed
her has said, then here are my problems with this assumption. First, what if
the love she holds for someone is really an overly ornate trinket which is
really about her love for God? Second, what if she is actually an extremely clever
person who is using her potentially educated background to have a lover’s token
which is heavily disguised to be a religious bauble instead? Third, what if she
is overly superstitious and is using the coral bead as a talisman of protection
for the trip she is currently undertaking?
Here are pictures of the
Madonnad Della Vittoria. The first is the entire painting, the second is the dangling bit of coral from the top, center of the painting. Both images are taken from Wikipedia... (I know, I know. It's terrible, but at least they can't screw up images of art...)
DOA: 9/14/13 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna_della_Vittoria
I actually never thought of the prioress as a floozy. My original image of her was of an innocent (because of her soft-heart for fuzzy animals and her inexpert French). Someone who is trying to live up to what she imagines the upper class to be, not what it is.
ReplyDeleteI've always taken the "amor vincit omnia" as an innocent fascination with the idea of courtly love (which is very different than real sexual love).
Margery Kemp, a medieval mystic, writes about having Jesus as a husband and a lover, which would tie in with the amor vincit omnai:
THE BOOK OF MARGERY KEMPE
CHAPTER 36 LINES 2097 TO 2198
http://college.holycross.edu/projects/kempe/text/main2.htm
For it is convenyent
the wyf to be homly wyth hir husbond. Be he nevyr so gret a lorde and sche so powr
a woman whan he weddyth hir, yet thei must ly togedir and rest togedir in joy and pes.
Ryght so mot it be twyx the and me, for I take non hed what thu hast be but what thu
woldist be. And oftyntymes have I telde the that I have clene forgove the alle thy
synnes. Therfore most I nedys be homly wyth the and lyn in thi bed wyth the. Dowtyr,
thow desyrest gretly to se me, and thu mayst boldly, whan thu art in thi bed, take me to
the as for thi weddyd husbond, as thy derworthy derlyng, and as for thy swete sone,
for I wyl be lovyd as a sone schuld be lovyd wyth the modyr and wil that thu love me,
dowtyr, as a good wife owyth to love hir husbonde. And therfor thu mayst boldly take
me in the armys of thi sowle and kyssen my mowth, myn hed, and my fete as swetly as
thow wylt.
THE BOOK OF MARGERY KEMPE: SUMMARY OF CHAPTERS
Chapter 36
http://college.holycross.edu/projects/kempe/text/kempecap.htm
Christ continues her consolation to Kempe begun in the previous chapter. Fasting, penance, or praying with beads are good beginnings. The most pleasing devotion, however, is weeping, and contemplation. In the most explicit passage of the book, Margery Kempe describes Christ as a husband, who will lie in bed with her and she may kiss him. She then describes other tokens, these of hearing, such as a sound like bellow or a little bird.
Can't she be not-what-a-prioress-ought without being a floozy? I guess I never actually thought of her as having actual lovers, but perhaps someone who pines for them. She's definitely sentimental (not just the love knot, but feeding her little hounds, crying over the mouse, etc) and a bit "missish." She definitely has similarities to Absolon from "The Miller's Tale" - they are both very much into the ideals of courtly love in a way that is inappropriate to their station in life. But I don't see the Prioress taking it as far as Absolon. Whereas she cries for the mouse, he wants to catch it!
ReplyDeleteThough she must has a darker side, as we find out from her bizarrely gruesome tale...