Justice
How do you think that justice is defined in Lanval?
posted by Natalie Grinnell @ 9:17 AM
11 comments
English Literature to 1800
This weblog is part of Natalie Grinnell's English 201: English Literature to 1800 course at Wofford College.
11 Comments:
Justice in the story of "Lanval" is determined by the King's perception of the situation. Lanval did not have any recourse to defend his statements to the Queen. If the fairy had not arrived at the castle then Lanval would have been unfairly put to death for trying to be loyal to the King.
Instead of being "innocent until proven guilty," Lanval is guilty until proven innocent. Even though there is a "jury" of vassals, it is ultimately Arthur who must decide Lanval's fate. Arthur, the monarch, could have wielded his power in order to affect whatever outcome he wished, had not the fairy queen interfered.
At first in "Lanval", justice is seemingly based on the word of the royalty. The King takes his queen's word as to what happened without any further investigation before the trial. However, as the story progresses we see that the jealous queen's story is overturned piece by piece, and Lanval is ultimately cleared of guilt. This indicates to me that the narrator sees justice instead much the way we see it, meaning that Justice is 'what is right, whether for the good or bad of the person in question.' This is further substantiated because the fairy is able to disreguard the breaking of Lanval's oath in order to help him be exonerated from the false charges. Therefore the concept of justice is reinforced as the lesser evil is forgiven in order to protect him from the greater evil.
The poem's justice system is unfair, and it is not the way I would see justice. The fact that Laval was going to be put to death because he thought that his woman looked better than the king's woman shows how unfair the system is. Then the only reason Lanval was declared innocent was because, in the opinion of the king and his "jury", the woman was more attractive than the king. The Romantics thought that blonde hair and blue eyes were the most attractive, but I am sure that different people in different places define beauty differently. Furthermore, the king can kill anyone he likes just because he doesn't like them. That is not justice.
It is clear that the narrator of "Lanval" perceives justice much the same way we do, in that people should be punished for wrongdoing, and safe if no crime was committed. However, the "justice system" in the poem is highly flawed. Cases are decided by whatever the king thinks is right. While there is some attempt at a trial by jury, the jury is by no means impartial. They tend to side with the king. If the fairy hadn't shown up, Lanval probably would've been wrongly executed.
The way that justice is handled in Lanval is interesting, I feel that there are several different versions of justice within the story. After Lanval refuses the queen’s advances and she tells her husband her own edited version of what happened the king becomes enraged and decides to kill Lanval for what he believes he did. If the king had put Lanval to death after the trial it would have been a form of justice. The matter would have been settled and the king and queen would have been happy. On the other hand it would have been an unfair death. With the testimony of Lanval’s lover there was another kind of justice. He was cleared off his charges when the king found the truth. This is justice in the sense that the true story came out and Lanval was not needlessly killed.
I think that there is a complete absence of justice in "Lanval." The queen's ego is hurt when Lanval rejects her and tells her his woman is far more beautiful. That was just the truth. The queen got all upset and took him to the court for treason, which I feel he did not commit. Then, the only reason the trial gets delayed is because beautiful women have distracted the knights.
The justice system of “Lanval” is somewhat backwards from our society’s judicial system. For instance, in our society, a person is innocent until enough evidence can be gathered to prove a case against them. In Lanval’s case, he will be proven innocent only if he can prove that his "amie" does truly exist and is, in fact, more beautiful that the queen. Also, the reader must recognize the hierarchy of the society. Lanval’s word is nothing against the queen’s accusation. The story defines justice by what the King decides and by the rule that one is guilty until proven innocent. It does seem horrible that Lanval would have been killed if his "amie" did not show up, and, if you think about it, our own justice system is equally flawed in that many innocent people have died because they were wrongly accused.
The only justice that I can see in this story is when his lady friend shows up and gets him off trial. It would of been unjust if he would of gone on trial and been punished becuase of a woman that was shot down. If the lady wouldn't of shown up then I would of been mad for not defending her lover.
"Lanval" is an interesting cross of government and love. Yes, Lanval is given a trial with a jury (of the king's knights) with much manipulation by the king evident, there is at least the structure present. A hundred men knew that this was unfair justice, but that still was not enough to combat the king. Even though Lanval is saved by the fairy in the end, it is not the justice system that saves him, but love.
Justice as an 'all men are equal' Law seems to be absent from "Lanval," but the word justice is not defined as such in the twelfth century. I do not know exactly how it is defined, but the king's law seems to prevail, and Arthur being a just king, lets his judgement be questioned through a jury. these does not seem totally unjust to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home