Pandarus actually encourages Troilus feelings towards his cousin. At this point, Pandarus reaction can be initially defined as genuine. He seems to be happy about the fact that Troilus has fallen in love with Criseyde. However, this impression changes by the time, Pandarus tries to produce himself as the initiator of the relationship between Troilus and Criseyde. Though Troilus repeats that he does not seek fulfilment for his desire, Pandarus imposes himself into the situation since Pandarus brings up the idea to pair off Troilus and Criseyde.
Initially, he already explains Troilus how to behave and that he trusts in the fact, that Troilus will keep his relationship with Criseyde secret. It is interesting to note that Pandarus promises Troilus that he will have an affair with Criseyde- without even consulting Criseyde. Therefore, it can be said that there is a direct link between the fuzzy picture of Pandarus and his task to act in the background. The first dialogue of Pandarus and Troilus clearly indicates how the relationship between the two men needs to be defined.
Pandarus realizes that it is in his hands if Troilus and Criseyde become lovers. He therefore uses his influence on both Troilus and Criseyde to manipulate the situation for his needs. The relationship between Pandarus and Troilus can be seen from two different angles, which reveal either the positive or the negative side of the relationship between the two men.
It is now important to figure out how Pandarus influences Troilus regarding his feelings and actions towards Criseyde. This aspect automatically leads to the question whether the relationship between Pandarus and Troilus is based on true sympathy or on strategic intentions. Pandarus and Troilus are the same age however, both of them made different experiences through their lives. While Pandarus already experienced the consequences of unhappy love, Troilus has never had feelings for a woman before.
Troilus does not know how to handle the situation and above all, how to express his feelings towards the person he is in love with. When Pandarus comes to Troilus, he immediately senses that there is something wrong with his friend. It can be said that Pandarus starts to question Troilus for two reasons.
On the one hand, Pandarus might simply be a nosy character; on the other hand it could be possible that Pandarus truly feels for his friend. However, by the time Troilus confesses to Pandarus that he has fallen in love, it becomes quite clear that it is Pandarus who is in charge of the situation.
This can be seen when Pandarus blames Troilus not to trust him enough. For I would have given thee counsel and aid, and would have found some way to win thee peace. It is important to note that Boccaccio introduces Troilus as a strong and courageous warrior, but represents him quite helpless towards Pandarus. The sudden weakness of Troilus does not only cause an ambivalent picture of the character itself, it also gives Pandarus the necessary base to develop his strength within the relationship.
By claiming that Troilus does not trust him enough, Pandarus achieves that the actual information is being forgotten- namely that Troilus has fallen in love. Though Troilus doubts that Pandarus is able to help him, he is now forced to commit to Pandarus, if he does not want to lose him as a friend.
It can be said that Pandarus literally interferes himself in to the love affair between Troilus and Criseyde by using a trick. He does not only emphasize his hurt feelings towards Troilus, he also refers to the fact that he is the best advisor whatsoever since he has made the experience of being in love unhappily.
I mean Criseida. However, all these instances in which compassion appears to be the more powerful motive can also be viewed as an attempt to receive personal recognition and praise from Troilus. This motive of compassion is further undermined by his ability to switch between what appears to be sympathy in one moment to the ability to construct lies in the next:.
He can comically lament, with apparent sincerity, the hectic schedule. Furthermore, when compassion does not have any immediate effect on Troilus, Pandarus easily switches to a more aggressive attack, leaving sympathy behind. This initial interaction between Pandarus and Troilus differs greatly from the Filostrato. In turn, Chaucer satirizes the tradition of courtly love by showing the ridiculous lengths Pandarus goes to in order to force Troilus and Criseyde together.
Pandarus has a number of motives spurring him on. One such motive Pandarus reveals in his own speech is fame. This line, which is nonexistent in the Filostrato, reveals that Pandarus feels he may gain something from this affair.
This motive is absent from the Filostrato. Yet this does not stop him, and he continues to lead the lovers to their destruction. Pandarus also seems to display a homoerotic desire for Troilus. When Pandarus first bullies Troilus to reveal his secret woe, Pandarus himself says he understands how he feels as he too is in love. This desire is also suggested when it is left open to interpretation on whether or not Pandarus even left the room as Troilus and Criseyde consummate their love Chaucer III.
All these instances of potential erotic desire are not found in the Filostrato. Though Chaucer does not give any decisive proof on whether Pandarus harbors homosexual tendencies in relation to Troilus or not, he does give just enough clues to suggest it is a possibility. Whether for fame, materialistic gain, sympathy or love, it seems clear that no matter what the motive really is, Pandarus is well aware of his potential profit.
When readers first meet Criseyde, they learn that her father, Calkas, abandoned her when he defected to the side of the Greeks Chaucer I. This portrayal differs largely from Boccaccio. Instead, Pandarus takes advantage of her devotion to control her actions and get his way. This manipulation can be seen through the many questionable tactics Pandarus employs when first speaking to his niece about Troilus. As Joan G. Though he does badger Criseyde into accepting Troilo, Pandaro is devoid of the deception Chaucer bestows on his Pandarus.
Pandarus does understand the all too real consequences of the deceptive games he plays. He is willing to accept these risks because he is convinced that Troilus' motives are true. Pandarus does not, therefore, act out of malice toward either individual. In a discussion with Troilus, Pandarus counsels that his own role in their courtship must remain a secret. He understands that wisdom can be distorted, harmed by well intentioned fools as well as villains.
Ironically Pandarus asks Troilus to heed the advice of a proverb that Pandarus himself could never put into practise: " 'first vertu is to keep tonge" As an ever-present observer, Pandarus is both the author and audience to a sequence of events he essentially helps to create. For which wel neigh thow deidest, as me thoughte. Pandarus feels the need to justify himself to Troilus, on whose behalf he purportedly put all this into motion. In this scene, Pandarus uses a deflection to reframe his actions in the context of courtly love rhetoric, further convincing Troilus that good intentions justify questionable actions, which is questionable in itself.
Pandarus knows that, despite his supposed good intent, others who hear the story will likely find fault with his actions. As in his conversation with Criseyde, Pandarus presents an opportunity to read his true intent—lust—beyond his rhetoric by posing a hypothetical scenario.
Even though he rhetorically justifies and dismisses the scenario, he acknowledges the less-than-courtly or -avuncular nature of his plan. Ida L. Troilus participates in this redefinition and thereby helps reshape his own beliefs away from the ideals he embodied at the beginning of the narrative. The extent to which characters within the narrative—namely Troilus and Criseyde—can detect the slippages and discern his true intentions demonstrate the juxtaposition of ideologies by which the two characters read Pandarus.
On an allegorical level, lust has successfully distorted courtly love to the point that courtly love acts in lustful ways without realizing it. In this scene, Pandarus deviates from courtly love ideals in both rhetoric and action.
Pandarus rhetorically drives Troilus toward consummation without pausing for courtly emotions. With Criseyde, Pandarus brings to bear her fears to coerce her into compliance with his plan.
Throughout the scene, Pandarus verbally reminds Troilus to keep moving toward the end goal, leaving behind much of the courtly speech upon which he previously relied. Throughout the scene, Pandarus involves himself in every action and conversation far more than one might expect of a go-between. In one notable example, after Troilus faints, Pandarus hauls Troilus to the bed, partially undresses him, and urges Criseyde to help him wake Troilus.
Pandarus and Criseyde proceed to rub his hands and wrists to revive him. His fixation on the sexual fulfillment waiting at the conclusion of the dialogue makes him rush the lovers through courtly expressions of love in speech toward action, which reveals his allegory.
Reading Pandarus allegorically casts his excessive intrusions as reminders to Troilus of their supposedly shared purpose to reach sexual fulfillment. Troilus allows lustful rhetoric to lead him to legitimize lustful actions, which demonstrates that his ideological position has been distorted so thoroughly that he cannot identify how lust subverts his noble courtly love beliefs.
Pandarus corroborates the consummation—and the ideological distortion it implies—in his visit to Criseyde the next morning. The scene begins when Pandarus visits Criseyde the next morning.
He makes veiled references to the activities of the previous night and asks how Criseyde fares. As before, Criseyde sees through Pandarus: his jollity mocks the serious social ramifications of the consummation.
She responds:. O, whoso seeth yow knoweth yow ful lite. Pandarus deflects attention from his actions and expends little rhetorical energy doing so: he knows that any protestations of innocence on his part will not fool Criseyde.
Pandarus stops speaking and continues the action of the scene in order to reach his full intent. And Pandarus hath fully his entente. Yet, plausible is not proven.
Readers are again left feeling like something has happened, but unable to prove any interpretation with certainty. But Pandarus remains the chief author of the narrative action in Books and his constant rewriting of himself and others serves as a model for readers outside the text, not just those within it. Chaucer invests Pandarus with allegory to make readers consider how they arrive at their own interpretation of the text. According to Maureen Quilligan, allegory inherently and explicitly asks readers to participate in interpretation.
Because allegory is and always has been the most self-reflexive and critically self-conscious of narrative genres, and because its purpose is always to make its reader correspondingly self-conscious, the reader necessarily belongs in its description.
He is a definite component of the form.
0コメント