Tykwer's "Run Lola Run"

"In a society that has abolished all adventure, the only adventure is to destroy that society." That's a big part of what I now like about Run Lola Run since talking in class about the film. At first, the hugely comedic aspect of Run Lola Run kind of threw me off and made it seem kind of like a cheesy adventure movie going for visceral stimulation. And that's really boring and basic. It's really cool to think about the rebel element in 90s Germany and the construction in the film of the heroine being a pretty typically "unlikeable" character fighting against patriarchal, capitalistic society. Which is why, I guess, that a lot of intellectual-types and critics really enjoyed and passed it on. I mean Germany used to be this really rad place back in the early 90s, once the wall fell down all the creative types and artists and vagrants kind of took over Eastern Berlin and made it probably one of the most creatively dense places in the world. Maybe Run Lola Run was kind of looking at that culture with forlorn eyes, or something. I mean philosophically, in the movie, it speaks to determinism and fate. How it's portrayed that Lola sort of drives her fate in the three sections of the movie, but also how after she gets the money and everything seems to be going well in the second section she gets trumped by random circumstance. Which brings up questions like is there any reason in the world, how autonomous are we, where is the locus of control for us? My favorite bits of the movie that really spoke to me were the two scenes that Lola and Ronnie were in bed with the red filter. They were beautiful. And the red filter took out the harshness of Lola's hair and made them both look more natural. Also, in those scenes, there wasn't the intense cartoon-ish/comedic aspect of all the characters and the over-acting and such. And I think that's supposed to strike a nerve in people, because Tykwer's making the point; "do this! this is the type of love we need in the world! not hallmark engagement rings marrying the investment banker moving to martha's vineyard and two-and-a-half kids bullshit!"

The King With The Lion (Yvain) pg.353-380

In The Knight With The Lion, Chrétien further defines what it means to be truly honorable as a knight outside of the superficial realm of tournaments and aimless adventure. A theme that stands out in the text and proves to be most beneficial in the true honor of its main character is humility. At the beginning of the text, Yvain is portrayed as a fiery juvenile knight errant, who although acting in good cause, betrays a self-centered, attention-gaining flaw in his first action in the text. Spurred on by the words of the knight Kay, Yvain leaves in the middle of the night so he can get to the adventure first and claim the honor for himself. Eventually he does gain the repute of having won over the land of the well and the stone, and even knocks Kay off his horse, seemingly boosting his honor in full circle. However immediately upon this spike in respect, he abandons his wife and castle to go on jousting matches with Gawain, which turns out to be disastrous for both Yvain himself and Laudine. The main conflict of the story reaches its climax as Laudine's messenger confronts Yvain in front of the court, displaying the facade of great honor Yvain built around him crumbling. Chrétien shows us the true cost of an overblown image without true merit through Yvain's nervous breakdown and complete loss of humanity. Yvain eventually has a turnaround and slays a serpent fighting with a lion which represents Yvain beginning to overcome his insanity, his vanity, and his wild youth. The lion is personified to be the pure image of loyalty and humility, following Yvain's every order, never being presumptuous to attack or leave his side without Yvain allowing it. And in every battle that Yvain undertakes from there on out in the story (all of which are selfless battles for others), the lion helps him overcome his adversary. This is a symbol of humility helping us overcome difficulties and be more capable of helping others. By the end of the story, Yvain pays no attention to the mocking words of the sweatshop-court, a stark difference from the effects of Kay's words earlier in the story, and is not distracted by the challenge of fighting the two demons, but is instead forced to undertake it so he could be able to leave and help the younger sister. The final display of humility before the end of the story is portrayed between the two most respected knights in King Arthur's court, proving it is a most honorable trait.

The Knight with the Lion (Yvain) pg. 324-353

4. At the mid-point of the romance we have Yvain’s encounter with the snake and the lion. What do these animals represent within the romance (and within popular mythology)? What is the dilemma Yvain faces here (on a deeper level)?


When reading this question I struggled to recall pertinent myths that contained lions or serpents. The serpent of the Bible came to mind first, but the serpent solely representing the devil in Yvain didn't stick so much. The only mythological creature I could think of that even contained a lion was the chimera; part lion, part serpent, part eagle, and that at first didn't seem to hold relevance to the text. Upon considering further Yvain's dilemma in the text, and the contextual meaning of this drama for medieval times, however, the chimera made excellent sense.
Yvain struggles against an internal conflict of identity at this point in the story. His personal sense of honor and his renowned glory among the land built an untouchable image from his perspective. Yvain believed himself to be perfected from his ventures with Gawain, but he forgets his promise and utterly fails to uphold his word to his wife Laudine. Upon hearing the words of Laudine's messenger, words that entirely strip him of his male aegis, his character is torn in two. Yvain struggles between the pressure to maintain his honor among the court and the necessity to express his despair. This disillusionment breaks Yvain and sends him into the depths of insanity. 
When Yvain comes upon the serpent fighting the lion I believe it's a symbol of conquering shame and insanity to uphold honor. The serpent and the lion fighting one another mirror Yvain's conflict of identity, and his ability to entirely slay the serpent represent his ability as a man to move past his shame and regain his person and his knighthood. 

The King With The Lion (Yvain) pg. 295-324

2. What do you make of Calogrenant’s story? The reasons for its genesis? What particular elements in the story strike you as interesting or bizarre? How do you interpret these elements?


The best I can make of Calogrenant's story and adventure at this point is that they set a mirror opposite for Yvain's quest. Calogrenant, setting off to prove his courage and strengths, acts cowardly at almost every turn in his tale. First, as he leaves the vavasor's brattice, he describes his fear of the wild bulls he sees. Following that he comes upon the grotesque peasant which he dares not speak to until the peasant's intentions are made clear. At least he follows the path down to the magical tree and pool, gets bested by the knight (and describes in detail his fear / incompetence throughout the battle), and finally doesn't seek to regain his honor and simply returns the way he came. Therefore I cannot think of other reasons for its genesis besides a confessionary nature or seeking retribution from the aid of another knight. There were a number of elements in the story that struck me as almost absurdist. Firstly entering into this town / brattice (not really entirely sure what that is at this point) he is greeted with great respect, a gong is struck three times, he's entirely taken care of, and then left with a beautiful maiden until dinner. Perhaps I'm missing something because I don't know the customs of hosts in medieval times, but that section seemed a bit odd, for sure, and it's all breezed over so quickly as if it's natural and seemingly unimportant. Anyway, Calogrenant sets off the next morning and meets some sort of brutish peasant that is overseeing the wild beasts in a forest. The peasant speaks with a sort of mystic shortness that I surmise contains some foreshadowing  or thematic overlay or something. Finally, the last bit that I found bizarre was how absolutely incensed the knight that fought Calogrenant was, without a word spoken between them. Apparently Calogrenant was supposed to challenge him? Or he destroyed his home? The knight is quite unclear. All I can make of it all is fleshing out Calogrenant's role as a coward in the story. I look forward to hearing what other people say in Friday's class though, definitely. I'm left a bit dumbstruck. Maybe I'll update this if more comes to me.

Erec & Enide pg. 90-122

I don’t know quite how I came to the conclusion, but I believe I finally “get” the main thematic device that Chrétien is using in Erec and Enide. The text itself is ostensibly shallow; a knight’s tale of winning the heart of a beautiful maiden, love lost, and a happy ending with banal imagery throughout matching the apparent simplistic plot. Luckily, Chrétien lends a hand to the unobservant or unimaginative reader in the first sentences of his story, the peasant’s proverb. In it, Chrétien tells us we must look past our first estimation of the story and peer deeper if we’re to find any appreciable meaning. So we do, and we see that he is actually writing sardonically about the social construct of masculine honor and authority.  The stylistically dull narrative circularly mocks the intellectually devoid culture of kings and knights and tournaments; men scurrying over each other in a rat race of empty accomplishments and little humanistic progress. See how Erec’s character changes not one instance throughout the story, there is no moral lesson attached to his journey. Enide, likewise, does not progress as a character, but is merely sad and then happy again. What has she learned, not to speak? The story begins as it ends, a joyous celebration of a morally/culturally/intellectually empty ceremony.

Erec & Enide pg. 60-90

1. If the first part of the romance belongs to Erec, the second part most certainly belongs to Enide. How do we see her character emerging here? In what context do we finally get her name?


3. What do you think are Erec’s intentions in taking Enide on this journey? What kind of journey is this (from Erec’s perspective)? One of adventure? Self-discovery? Renewal? Something else? Point to specific scenes within the text to support your argument.



1.) We see Enide's character emerge as a lady who is as blessed in social graces as she is in her beauty. Chrétien puts it best; "she was so noble and honourable, wise and gracious in her speech, well-bred and of pleasant company, that no one ever saw in her any folly, meanness, or baseness." Despite this almost super-natural combination of personality and beauty, we only acquire her name when it becomes necessary in the marriage ritual. Until then, apparently, she was only a pretty face. Later, in her monologues, we see that she is also capable of logical thought and loyalty as she struggles whether or not to speak to Erec and warn him of thieves. Also, her trickery of the count who wanted to court her displays her keen wit.


3.) Erec's intentions in taking Enide on the journey out of the castle walls are to re-affirm in her eyes, and the eyes of the nobility, that he is still a valiant and competent knight. I don't believe that Erec sees this journey as a renewal of character as much as a simple reëstablishment of his greatness. I see this because he wears his most brilliant armor, has Enide ride on her finest palfrey, and then forces Enide to be silent as if to prove that he doesn't even need warning if things should go bad. Furthermore, he carries along the horses of the knights that he kills as a signifier of his power. He needs to prove that he himself can accomplish any goal to silence his detractors of his family castle. This is why he turns down help from King Guivret and later lord Gawain. Maybe later in the story some more light will be shed on his intentions, but as for now that's all I really gather.




 

Erec & Enide pg. 37-60

2. How would you describe the opening scene in King Arthur’s court? What evidence in the text brings you to your ideas? We have the idea of a contest and the outcome it will bring. What might the possible ramifications of this contest imply (about gender, the court, society, etc.)? 


     The opening scene describes an opulent gathering of lords, knights, ladies, and maidens. It seems to be a merry time until King Arthur announces that he wants to organize the hunt of one White Stag, an apparently ceremonious hunt that ends with the man who kills it earning a kiss from the most beautiful maiden. Upon this announcement the court enters into a bit of a tizzy, for of course each knight and lord believes their respective lady to be the most beautiful, and even this prospective challenge unsettles their respective egos. Wise Lord Gawain, sensing the discord the hunt may bring, attempts to dissuade the king of his choice but is stubbornly rebuffed by the king, who claims his born right that "the word of a king must not be contravened". The hunt is set for the next morning and the action in this particular scene ends. There are a number of problematic issues raised in this scene that should be discussed.
      Firstly, the contest itself turns the women of the court into trophies to be had by a more or less random champion. It's not as if the women in the court had agreed contractually (almost laughable in this context) to any contest, it seems their free will is non-existent in this narrative. The gender situation is summed up nicely by Lord Gawain, "the one who pleases him is the most beautiful and the most noble." As if the beauty and nobility of a woman is dependent on how she is able to please her spouse. 
     Secondly, the foolishness of contending "by deeds of arms" such a subjective and transient thing as beauty paints man, and furthermore the most noble of men, a knight, as a base and most naive character. 
     Lastly, the paradigm of kingly right and authoritative right, though much more defensible in this archaic context, is something that certainly leaves a lot to be desired.