"The Good Morrow" and Tristan and Isolde

In 2006 Franchise Pictures realeased Tristan and Isolde, their last film before bankruptcy. In the course of this classical tale of doomed lovers there are several references to John Donne’s poem, “The Good Morrow”. Putting aside the fact that the film is set in a time frame that takes place before “The Good Morrow” was written, I thought it might be interesting to read the poem through the lens of Isolde (ie: why might she find it relevant to her situation) when she reads the poem to Tristan.

Verse 1

I WONDER by my troth, what thou and I
Did, till we loved ? were we not wean'd till then ?
But suck'd on country pleasures, childishly ?
Or snorted we in the Seven Sleepers' den ?
'Twas so ; but this, all pleasures fancies be ;
If ever any beauty I did see,
Which I desired, and got, 'twas but a dream of thee.

When Isolde first reads the poem to Tristan it is during his recovery from a near-fatal wound. She does not tell her father that she is tending to Tristan, both because it is improper for her to keep such company with a man and also because Tristan’s life would be forfeit since he is from a country that is at odds with hers. Tristan is unaware Isolde is a princess. They  both know that they will not be able to stay together, though Isolde seems much more distracted by this idea than Tristan.  This portion of the poem alludes to the idea of love vs. the reality of love, likely Isolde’s idea of love compared to the reality after she meets Tristan. In reality the love is stronger than she anticipated, but still bittersweet because it cannot last. Her idea of love before Tristan is like a dream, but Tristan himself will be like a dream after he leaves.

Verse 2

And now good-morrow to our waking souls,
Which watch not one another out of fear ;
For love all love of other sights controls,
And makes one little room an everywhere.
Let sea-discoverers to new worlds have gone ;
Let maps to other, worlds on worlds have shown ;
Let us possess one world ; each hath one, and is one.

The first four lines appear to advocate the idea of jumping into love despite the risks. Isolde is aware that her father will arrange her marriage, and as such Tristan may be her only chance at love. She feels it is better to at least know love, even if it cannot last, than to never experience it. Thus, when they spend time together they make “one little room an everywhere” in that the room they are in becomes their whole world. So, going into the last three lines, Isolde wants to jump right in and experience this while she still can.

Verse 3

My face in thine eye, thine in mine appears,
And true plain hearts do in the faces rest ;
Where can we find two better hemispheres
Without sharp north, without declining west ?
Whatever dies, was not mix'd equally ;
If our two loves be one, or thou and I
Love so alike that none can slacken, none can die.

The first two lines allude to the idea of love as making people mirror each other and become attached, as if they share a soul/body since they are in love. The second two lines evoke more of a sense of balance, of two people evening out and also attracting each other. Isolde is alluding to an idea that this love will, in a way, keep them together even though they have to part because they will have come to know each other so well. The last three lines continue with the idea of love providing a balance and/or an equalizer, to the point that they will be immortalized through their love for each other. Thus, Isolde feels she and Tristan are better for knowing each other, and they will be forever united in soul for having taken the opportunity to experience love.

The film returns to this idea at the end of the film, when the poem  is recited again as a backdrop to the idea of Isolde planting two willow trees over Tristan’s grave that grow entangled and then disappear. In this way the film hints that Tristan and Isolde are reunited in death because their souls are intertwined.

Ophelia could use a break.

In the documentary “Shakespeare’s Women and Claire Bloom” Bloom tells the audience that she feels actresses often don’t have the maturity to understand most of Shakespeare’s women until after they are too old to play them, thus creating a sort of cycle in the career of a Shakespearian actress since the roles are played by young actresses who don’t fully grasp the characters when they are portraying them.

A reader could certainly appreciate this point of view in regards to Ophelia, who goes mad, either through grief or even a full break from reality, after the death of her father. It is understandable that an older actress would likely be in a better position to appreciate Ophelia’s reaction to her experiences. But then again, part of the tragedy is likely that Ophelia endures so many negative experiences at such a young age, thus leading to greater catharsis for the audience (though rather Ophelia fits neatly into the category of the tragic heroine is a debate for another time, I would argue that Gertrude fits the mold better).

It is likely that part of the reason Ophelia’s madness is so hotly contested and interpreted in many different ways is because of her age. An older female character who experiences a similar mental break would likely provoke a different reaction from the audience, perhaps even a more sympathetic one if she lost, say, a son. In this way I would argue the character would benefit from more empathy. She is young, her brother has left for school, her lover (Hamlet) is crazy, she has been stuck in the middle of the machinations of both Hamlet and her father, and then her father is murdered. It is little wonder the 2000 movie Hamlet portrays Ophelia having a daydream where she jumps into a pool to escape the conversation between Polonius and Claudius. She basically loses every predictable, familiar, trustworthy person in her life in a short amount of time, and after all that I would think her mental break is more than understandable.

The Prioress in the Canterbury Tales

Within the General Prologue of The Canterbury Tales Chaucer takes great pains to describe several facets of the Prioress that make her unusual as a member of the clergy, such as her attention to cleanliness. To a modern reader her mannerisms might not seem so unusual, but taken in the context of the time when the text was written it becomes evident that Chaucer is attempting to tell his reader that the Prioress, who is supposed to identify as a member of the clergy, is in fact taking great pains appear aristocratic.

One of the first clues Chaucer gives is the fact that the Prioress speaks French (line 124), which is a language usually spoken by the upper class (enotes.com). It is also noted that she speaks provincial French and not “Parisian” or aristocratic French, which is supposed to be a source of humor.  She also wears clothing that is unusual for a Nun, specifically her rosary made of coral beads with a pendant on the end that, when translated, reads “Love Conquers All” (line 158). This is unusual in that decorative rosaries, and decorative clothing in general, were commonly worn by the upper class or even the male clergy, but as a nun she would generally be expected to wear a plain rosary and strive for a simple life. Of course, it would also be expected for her rosary to have a crucifix on the end instead of a pendant (shmoop). It is worth note that many of the sources I looked at were at odds over whether the rosary was meant to really be a religious rosary, or just jewelry.

However, what is most telling are her mannerisms. Her dainty mannerisms (lines 128-138) are more at home in a nobleman’s court than a nunnery (sparknotes). Specifically, the eating habits the prioress portrays would be expected from noble ladies trying to attract a husband, which the Prioress obviously is not supposed to be doing (since she is a high-ranking nun it can be assumed she is not really husband-hunting) (sparknotes). However, her mannerisms do show that she is invested in how other people perceive her personally, perhaps above how she is perceived as a representative of her station or her religious order.   

It is obvious within the text that Chaucer is both pointing out and poking fun at some problems he sees within the church. However, there are characters in the story who are shown to be much closer to the ideal of a person of their station in the clergy, such as the Parson; so Chaucer also acknowledges that there are still good people within the church, and therefore that there is still hope left.

 Sources

http://www.enotes.com/canterbury-tales-text/the-prioress

http://www.shmoop.com/canterbury-tales-prologue/the-prioress.html

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/canterbury/themes.html