Barban, Judith. “The Making of the Man: Woman as Consummator in the Lais of 

                   Marie de France.” South Carolina Modern Language Review, 1:1 (2002

                   Winter). 18-28

            In her Lais, Marie de France presents a wide cast of women, all of whom differ in character and circumstance. At first consideration, the reader finds it difficult to imagine the parallels in this diverse collection of female characters. In her article, published in the inaugural volume of the South Carolina Modern Language Review, Judith Barban explores this dilemma, attempting to identify a unifying factor linking the female personas of the Lais.  The awkward solution she uncovers lies in Marie’s construction of the female role in courtly love. In the male-female relationships depicted in the Lais, Barban argues, women serve as “consummators” who fulfill incomplete men, thus initiating them into manhood.

            Barban proceeds to apply her theory to several of Marie’s individual lays, beginning with Guigemar. The knight Guigemar, she argues, stands as a flawed man because “he is indifferent to love” (19), as symbolized by the curse of the white hind. Because Guigemar is an incomplete man, woman must complete him. His fulfillment is set in motion when his boat carries him to the tower of his imprisoned lover. The sufferings of Guigemar’s lady, Barban argues, transform him into a complete man and allows him to overcome the curse of the white hind.

            The next lay Barban analyzes is La Fresne. La Fresne’s sacrificial act of spreading her brocade on her lover’s marriage bed, Barban argues, initiates the events that will ensure the happiness of all of the characters.

            Barban continues enumerating examples of the “consummating” acts of Marie’s female characters. In Lanval, the lady’s act of “dropping her cloak of purity” (23) saves her lover from death, and in Yonec, the mother’s act of bestowing her husband’s sword on her son transforms him into an honorable knight. Similarly, in Eliduc, the self-sacrifice Eliduc’s wife, Guideluec, allows Eliduc to share true, pure love with Guilliadun.

Judith Barban engages in an ambitious attempt to link the Lais of Marie de France through an exploration of the role of women. While her claim is credible, it presents a few shortcomings.

Barban utilizes ample textual evidence in order to back her assertion that women serve as “consummators” of manhood in the Lais of Marie de France. However, her lay-by-lay analysis seems awkward at points; as if she is forcing the text to stretch in directions that it does not naturally bend. The structure of her textual support seems self-conscious of this shortcoming. She first presents her strongest evidence, a thorough close reading of Guigemar that expertly supports her thesis. However, the remainder of her textual examples becomes more and more problematic in descending order. For example, in her reading of La Fresne she claims that La Fresne’s selfless act of spreading her brocade over her lover’s marriage bed initiates a “reversal of fortune for all concerned” (21). While it is true that La Fresne initiates action, it is unclear how this action “fulfills” her husband. Indeed, this flaw is true for the whole of Barban’s argument. She is successful in proving that women are the major initiators of action in the lays, but fails to prove that they “complete” their men.

In her title, Barban asserts that she will discuss women as “consummators.”  Her choice of the word “consummator” implies that the women in Marie’s Lais initiate actions through sex.  However, Barban often deviates from the sexual role of women. For example, she asserts that in the lay of Yonec, the mother serves as “woman-consummator of her son (23). Barban’s reading does not seem to indicate that the mother’s act of initiating her son into manhood is in anyway sexual. Perhaps we can find the sexual nature of her “consummation” in the fact that the action of the lay begins with her sexual act of adultery. Perhaps we can even read the sword she gives to her son as a phallic representation. Barban never clarifies, but her reading indicates that she views the mother’s actions as purely asexual.

In addition, Barban glaringly omits certain of Marie’s other lays. Could her argument, for instance, be successfully applied to Bisclavret, in which the woman initiates her husband’s animal state?

Judith Barban’s article provides a valuable theory for linking the many female characters in the Lais of Marie de France. I believe that her argument would be stronger if she narrowed it and engaged in a more in-depth reading of the role of “woman-consummator” in Guigemar alone, rather than applying her theory to the entire body of Marie’s lays.

Rebecca Harpine

University of Mary Washington