We are lucky. Rare it is when a publisher tells us his or her purpose in publishing a book, and even rarer for this to occur half a millenium ago. Such is the case regarding Malory’s text, whose first publisher, Caxton, tells us in the 15th century that this book is intended:
...That noble men may see and lerne the noble actes of chyvalrye, the jentyl and vertuous dedes that somme knyghtes used in tho dayes, by whyche they came to honour, and how they that were vycious were punysshed and ofte put to shame and rebuke; humbly bysechyng al noble lordes and ladyes wyth al other estates, of what estate or degree they been of, that shal see and rede in this sayd book and werke, that they take the good and honest actes in their remembraunce, and to folowe the same; wherein they shalle fynde many joyous and playsaunt hystoryes and noble and renomed actes of humanyté, gentylnesse, and chyvalryes. For herein may be seen noble chyvalrye, curtosye, humanyté, frendlynesse, hardynesse, love, frendshyp, cowardyse, murdre, hate, vertue, and synne. Doo after the good and leve the evyl, and it shal brynge you to good fame and renommee.
Caxton, then, believes that the stories presented in Malory will teach people of the noble acts that were done, and will remember the good that was done. Interestingly, he admits that terrible acts are also present in these tales, such as murder, hate, virtue, and sin. However, his solution is that we should ignore these “problematic” areas and focus on the good, even turning this into a religious virtue by paraphrasing the first half of the Biblical Psalms 34:14 to this effect, “Turn from evil and do good…”
But is Malory’s text successful in giving us inspiration of the knights and nobles? We don’t see this very much at least as regards to Sir Gawain. Caxton admits that there are stories that describe, “how they that were vycious were punysshed and ofte put to shame and rebuke,” but Sir Gawain is not always punished for his knightly misdeeds in Malory. The strangest aspect, the one we will focus on in this paper, is that the character of Sir Gawain is changed by Malory from indeed a noble, almost perfect person in the earlier Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, to something of a villain in his text. Although Caxton may have seen purpose in Malory’s text as inspirational and of telling over good deeds of knights of old, it seems that Malory did not think so. By setting Caxton against the frame of Sir Gawain’s change in character, we can see that Caxton’s reading does not hold up to scrutiny.
In Gawain and the Green Knight, we see many noble and chivalric deeds of Gawain, more than any other knight at the round table. Often, this is represented by the description of Gawain being “good”. We can rightly note that the very first mention of Gawain, which finally arrives after much prehistory, is not a simple “Gawain”, or “Sir Gawain”, but “good Gawain” (line 109), with all the alliteration attached to him, not to mention is adjacent placement in the same line with Guenevere, Arthur’s queen. Thus, our introduction to his character is formed as to his character and abilities.
This phrase, “good Gawain” returns over and over, especially in reference to his noble deed at that moment.When Arthur is confronted by the Green Knight in a game of beheading, no knight is willing to take up the challenge and save King Arthur from this uncouth and dangerous game. No one, that is, except Gawain, and who stands up and says, “I beg you in plain words / To let this task be mine” (341). And again, to introduce his words in line 340, he is referred to as “good Gawain.” Thus, Gawain straight away presents himself as the most courageous of all the knights, and the most loyal to the king. These elements describe the best qualities of a knight. When the challenge is over and Gawain is made to go on his quest, we can tell that the king and everyone else are sore to see him go. As we see in line 558, “Much deep sorrowing was heard in the hall / That one as noble as Gawain should go on that quest…”
We also find Gawain described as “good man Gawain”, emphasized by alliteration, “Gawayn the god mon in gay bed lygenz” (1179) when confronted in bed by the host’s wife, some of the most pivotal scenes of the story. This description of his character is to emphasize his near-perfect quality of his virtuousness, just before he is tempted to sin. When he refuses her advances, she replies using this fact, saying to him that if he is so good, he cannot let her go without a kiss, in line 1297, “So good a knight as Gawain is rightly reputed…” She employs his “goodness” for her near-infidelity, one he is reticent to offer to her. This sets in motion his eventual acceptance of the girdle, something that will haunt him till the Green Knight reveals what the girdle really means. In the end, Gawain sees the girdle as a stain on his reputation. Though this adds complexity to his character, his overall description is most definitely noble, brave, and good throughout. One cannot read Sir Gawain any other way in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight than as a good and noble knight.
This is not so when it comes to Malory’s stories of Sir Gawain. Several sections have Gawain doing quite ignoble things. We begin first by noting that Sir Gawain is first introduced in Book III by his envy (63, line 7), certainly not a noble trait. Though he is called upon by Merlin as one of the most appropriate to secure the white hart (64), it is not clear why, especially since at the end we find that he is unsuccessful, and in fact kills the hart. Merlin’s election certainly has no bearing on the quality of his character in terms of virtue.
As we quickly find out, his interactions with other men prove to be unwarranted in iciness. Two men fighting over who should be the better to find the hart are insulted, “for uncouth men ye sholde debate withall” (64). A knight named Alardyne of the Oute Iles challenges Sir Gawain to several bouts of knightery. Though these were clearly meant for contest purposes and not fights to the death, Gawain smites him to kill, “so harde thorow the helme that hit wente to the brayne and the knyght felle downe dede” (65). This elicits such shock from his compatriot that Gaheris has no choice but to excuse it as “a myghty stroke of a yonge knyght” (65).
Indeed, as this story plays out, he is crueller and crueller, and eventually Gaheris cannot excuse his actions. After the slaughter of his hounds sent into another castle to chase the hart, Gawain demonstrates incredible anger, apparently for their deaths. He and the knight who killed the dogs are fighting, “blode thirled downe to their feete” (66), and again Gawain smites so hard the other knight fell down. We find that the knight even “cryed mercy and yelded hym”, yet Gawain shows no mercy, “but sir Gawayne wolde no mercy have”. Gawain declares that he is just for killing the knight, because of the death of his dogs, “for sleynge of my howndis”. His willingness to kill humans to avenge for his dogs is downright mad. As he is about to put down the bitter last blow, a lady comes out to protect, and it is her “hede by myssefortune” that is beheaded.
Again Gaheris is taken aback by such unnecessary evil and death. He cannot excuse this as the folly of youth. He cries that “that ys fowle and shamefully done.” This was too far, the death of an innocent lady. But we can tell that he is also against the slaying of the knight himself as well. He begs mercy for him, invoking the code of a proper knight, “for a knyght withoute mercy ys withoute worship.” Thus, had Gawain truly killed the knight, he would have violated this truism. In the end, his mercy is useless, as we find out that the lady he killed was the love of this man’s life. For this, Gawain’s apology is fascinating. “Me sore repentith hit… for I mente the stroke unto the.” Again and again, there is a failure here, well beyond normal interaction, even of a young knight. Indeed, his newcomer status as a knight is not an excuse when the four knights later fight him for having done such a shameful act. We learn that we cannot attribute this to mere greenhorn ignorance, and that there is something very rotten with Gawain. These are just a few examples from this story involving Gawain.
When we look at this character progression of Gawain from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight to Malory’s text, we clearly see that whatever Malory’s intent was with Gawain, it was not to show his virtuousness as a knight. If it was, we should have expected the same type of character as in Sir Gawain: a virtuous man, noble to a fault. Instead, cruelty, coldness, and perhaps sadism, abound. A lesson from Sir Gawain would be ill-received. Caxton’s faith in this text as abundant in “good and honest acts” is upended by this intentional and deliberate change in Gawain. We must conclude that Malory did not have in mind as his publisher wished for the rest of the book as well.
