Laughing at Knights: Representations of Humour in Sir Perceval of Galles, Sir Beues of Hamtoun, Lybeaus Desconus and Geoffrey Chaucer's Tale of Sir Thopas

Romans gelenekleri, motifleri ve ilk örnekleri romans okuyucu/dinleyici kitlesinin manevi değerlerine hitap edebilmek amacıyla birbirleriyle uyum içindedir. Özellikle şövalyelik temalı romanslar İngiliz derebeylik düzenine ve Hıristiyanlık inancına bir şövalyenin ahlaki gelişim sürecini ya da soyluların hayatını tasvir etmek için uyarlanmış kahramanlık anlatılarıdırlar; bu nedenle, romans içerisinde mizah aranacak son yerdir. Ortaçağ romanslarındaki mizahın çoğu kahramanlık ifadelerinin ya da kahramanca hareketlerin abartılmalarının etkisiyle kahramanlıktan çok alaycı ve gülünç hale gelmelerinin sonucudur. Bu makale Sir Perceval of Galles, Sir Beues of Hamtoun, Lybeaus Desconus ve Geoffrey Chaucer'ın Sir Thopas'ın Hikayesi eserlerindeki mizah betimlemelerine odaklanmaktadır. Adı geçen romanslarda mizahın işlevini tartışırken, bu romanslara mizah katan öğeleri ve romans kahramanlarının mizahi figürler olarak sunumlarını ele almaktadır. Böylelikle, romans karakterleri ve durumları karşılaştırılmakta ve romanslardan belirli örnekler verilerek ayrıntılı bir şekilde sunulmaktadır. Romansın edebi bir tür olarak mizahı kahkaha, hiciv ya da şövalyelik erdemlerinin vurgusu olarak ele alıp almadığı da tartışmanın konusudur. Belirtilen romansların mizahi nitelikleri üzerinde durularak, bu makale - soylu şahsiyetlerin edebi türü olan - romansın nasıl tiye alındığını ve sıradanlaştığını, ancak temsil ettiği erdemlere nasıl dikkat çekildiğini ele almaktadır.

Şövalyelere Gülmek: Sir Perceval of Galles, Sir Beues of Hamtoun, Lybeaus Desconus ve Geoffrey Chaucer'ın Sir Thopas'ın Hikayesi'nde Mizah Betimlemeleri

Romance conventions, motifs and archetypes blend in order to appeal to the moral concerns of the romance audience. In particular, chivalric romances are heroic narratives adapted to English feudalism and the Christian faith, either to depict a knight's moral progress or the aristocratic way of life; therefore, romance would seem to be the last place one would look for humour. Much of the humour in medieval romance is the effect of the exaggeration of heroic expressions and deeds, which then becomes mocking and ridiculous rather than heroic. This article concentrates on the representations of humour in Sir Perceval of Galles, Sir Beues of Hamtoun, Lybeaus Desconus and Geoffrey Chaucer's Tale of Sir Thopas. It discusses what makes these romances humorous, how the romance heroes are presented as laughable figures, while it argues the function of humour in these romances. The romance heroes and situations are compared, and they are presented in detail with specific examples from these romances. Romance as a humorous genre is discussed as to if its use is for humour as a means of laughter, for satire or for emphasis upon the idea of chivalry. By arguing the humorous nature of these romances, this article discusses how romance -the genre of noble characters- is ridiculed and becomes ordinary, while the virtues it represents are highlighted.

PDF

___

Barron W. R. J. (1987). English Medieval Romance. Harlow 1987.
Baugh A. C. (1967). "The Middle English Romance: Some Questions of Creation, Presentation, and Reservation". Speculum 42/1 (1967) 1-31.
Benson L. (2008). Riverside Chaucer. Oxford 2008.
Boffey J. (2007). "From Manuscript to Modern Text". Ed. P. Brown. A Companion to Medieval English Literature: c. 1350-c. 1500 (2007) 107-122. Oxford.
Braswell M. F. (1995). Sir Percevall of Galles and Ywain and Gawain. Michigan 1995.
Brewer D. (2004). "The Popular English Metrical Romances". Ed. C. J. Saunders. A Companion to Romance: From Classical to Contemporary (2004) 45-64. Oxford.
Brewer D. (2002). "Chivalry". Ed. P. Brown. A Companion to Chaucer (2002) 58-74. Oxford.
Broughton-Willett T. H. (1992). Imperfect Analogies: Parody in Chaucer and Medieval Literature. Amherst (1992).
Burrow J. A. (1984). "Chaucer's Sir Thopas and la Prise de Nuevile". The Yearbook of English Studies 14(1984) 44-55.
Cawsey K. (2011). Twentieth-Century Chaucer Criticism: Reading Audiences. Surrey 2011.
Charney M. (2005). Comedy: A Geographic and Historical Guide. Vol. 1. Westport 2005.
Childress D. (1978). "Between Romance and Legend: 'Secular Hagiography' in Middle English Literature". Philological Quarterly 57/3 (1978) 311-322.
Echard S. (1996). "Of Parody and Perceval: Middle Welsh and Middle English Manipulations of the Perceval Story". Nottingham Medieval Studies 40 (1996) 63-79.
Eckhardt C. D. (1974). "Arthurian Comedy: The Simpleton-Hero in Sir Perceval of Galles". The Chaucer Review 8/3 (1974) 205-220.
Eddy E. R. (1971). "Sir Thopas and Sir Thomas Norny: Romance Parody in Chaucer and Dunbar". Review of English Studies 22/88 (1971) 401-409.
Everett D. (1955). "A Characterization of the English Medieval Romances". Ed. P. Kean. Essays on Middle English Literature by Dorothy Everett (1955) 1-22. Oxford.
Fellows J. (1993). Of Love and Chivalry: An Anthology of Middle English Romance. London 1993.
Finlayson J. (1980). "Definitions of Middle English Romance". The Chaucer Review 15/1 (1980) 43-62;15/2 (1980) 168-181.
Frye N. (1976). The Secular Scripture: A Study of the Structure of Romance. Cambridge 1976. Gautier L. (1965). Chivalry. London 1965.
Gaylord A. (1979). "Chaucer's Dainty 'Dogerel': The 'Elvyssh' Prosody of Sir Thopas". Studies in the Age of Chaucer 1 (1979) 83-104.
Gibbs A. C. (1966). Middle English Romances. London (1966).
Goodman J. R. (1998). Chivalry and Exploration, 1298-1630. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.
Haskell A. S. (1975). "Sir Thopas: The Puppet's Puppet". The Chaucer Review 9/3 (1975) 253-261.
Herzman R. B., Drake G. & Salisbury E. (1999). Four Romances of England. Michigan 1999.
Hudson H. E. (1989). Toward a Theory of Popular Literature: The Case of the Middle English Romances.Journal of Popular Culture 23/3 (1989) 31-50.
Ker W. P. (1931). Epic and Romance: Essays on Medieval Literature. London 1931.
Kiernan K. S. (1973). "Undo Your Door and the Order of Chivalry". Studies in Philology 70/4 (1973)345-366.
Kooper E. (2006). Sentimental and Humorous Romances. Michigan 2006.
Kooper E. S. (1984). Inverted Images in Chaucer's Tale of Sir Thopas. Studia Neophilologica 56/2 (1984)147-154.
Lawrence W. W. (1935). "Satire in Sir Thopas". PMLA 50/1 (1935) 81-91.
Liu Y. (2001). "Clothing, Armour, and Boundaries in Sir Perceval of Galles". Florilegium 18/2 (2001) 79-92.
Loomis L. H. (1924). Medieval Romance in England: A Study of the Sources and Analogues of the NonCyclic Metrical Romances. New York 1924.
Mehl D. (1968). The Middle English Romances of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. London 1968.
Nilsen D. L. F. (1997). Humor in British Literature, from the Middle Ages to the Restoration: A Reference Guide. Westport 1997.
Pearsall D. (1994). The Canterbury Tales. London, New York 1994.
Pearsall D. (1988). "The Development of the Middle English Romance". Ed. D. Brewer. Studies in Medieval English Romances: Some New Approaches (1988) 11-35. Cambridge.
Perfetti L. (2006). Women and Laughter in Medieval Comic Literature. Ann Arbor 2006.
Purdie R. (2005). "The Implications of Manuscript Layout in Chaucer's Tale of Sir Thopas". Forum for Modern Language Studies 41/3 (2005) 263-274.
Radulescu R. L. (2010). "How Christian is Chivalry?". Eds. R. Field, P. Hardman & M. Sweeney. Christianity and Romance in Medieval England (2010) 69-83. Cambridge.
Ramsey L. C. (1983). Chivalric Romances: Popular Literature in Medieval England. Bloomington 1983.
Salisbury E. & Weldon J. (2013). Lybeaus Desconus. Michigan 2013.
Seaman M. (2001). "Engendering Genre in Middle English Romance: Performing the Feminine in Sir Beves of Hamtoun". Studies in Philology 98/1 (2001) 49-75.
Severs J. B. (1967). A Manual of the Writings in Middle English, 1050-1500. Vol. I. New Haven 1967.
Welsh A. (2005). "Arthurian Romance". Ed. M. Charney. Comedy: A Geographic and Historical Guide,Vol. I (2005) 153-166. Westport.
Whetter K. S. (2008). Understanding Genre and Medieval Romance. Aldershot 2008.