The Song of Roland

After his vassals screw things up yet again, Charlemagne tramples infidels as an instrument of God.

You could write an excellent freshman English paper about how proud Roland and his traitorous step-father, Ganelon, are the dual victims/villains of this epic. Ganelon is the explicit villain, but Roland is just as much a proud individualist who disregards the tenets of his vassalage (despite Oliver's hissed injunctions to summon reinforcements with his horn) for the sake of his personal honor and distinction. Charlemagne's modern society calls for individual desires to be subsumed within the greater good of the state and the greater glory of God. Ganelon betrays that ideal for an old-fashioned blood vendetta; Roland betrays that ideal show more from hubris.

But more importantly, in the Song of Roland Drinking Game, every time a beard is mentioned, you drink. (Two drinks if it's Charlemagne's beard and described as "hoary" or "white.") show less

Yes, I am on a semi classical literature binge at present.

The Song of Roland is the story of Ganelon's treachery against Charlemagne's right-hand man, Count Roland. Whereas Beowulf offered a good look into the medieval and pre-medieval ideas of what made one a hero, The Song of Roland offers a brilliant picture of what compels one to follow their king. The praise of Charlemagne and the reasoning behind Roland's refusal to blow the oliphant in the midst of battle are both beautiful things to read.

I read the Harris translation, and am quite happy I did. The non-rhyming poetry still offers a sense of both rhythm and importance, and the introduction was very in depth. I left the text with a deep appreciation of the dignity that was so show more prized in earlier times, and a small wish that it was more apparent today. Chivalry, in theory, was a very beautiful virtue. show less

I like when non-fiction authors unintentionally give insights into their own lives and times when writing about other times. Reading the intro, my catch-phrase became "Who hurt you, Dorothy?" due to her regular asides on the behaviour of "modern" man (we're talking about the 1940s here).

Anyway, I looked her up on Wikipedia and it turns out it was men. Men hurt Dorothy.

Anyway, the substance of the poem. I enjoyed the translation, the rhythm and assonance, it was pleasing to read. The quality of the content was probably just fine in its time, recited aloud to audiences hungry for a heroic tale of national pride. However it lack the nuance craved by the modern analytical reader - the heroes are all objectively right, the villains are show more objectively villainous, everyone including his enemies knows it to be true that Roland is the greatest knight in Charlemagne's entourage. There's no variety of perspective or motive for the conflict beyond the actors playing their assigned roles.

Interesting elements: the existence of black African soldiers fighting in medieval Europe, the ultra-violence, the imagery of the beautiful flowered meadow become a place of sorrow and carnage. show less

It's difficult to appreciate 'La Chanson de Roland' for its literary value. Has it got any? Being a chanson de geste it was created to be performed in public, not to be read quietly and in solitary. As such, it obviously misses many of what we consider relevant when it comes to literature. Characterisation? There is no depth, simply because there is no depth intended. It was solely about portraying archetypes (e.g. the hero, the traitor, the villains...). Linguistic features? This was a laisse, so more concerned about assonances to resonate when being told/ acted than about creative figures of speech. The fact that the original text is lost (the oldest version that we have dates back from the 12th century and is in Anglo-Norman; which show more is quite baffling given that it depicts an historical event pertaining to the Franks and having occurred at the Spanish border in 778...) of course doesn't help either in deepening our appreciation. But then, so what?

Personally, I still loved reading this. How people are being portrayed surely is not as complex as in, for example, many Viking sagas and epics; and from a linguistic perspective it surely is not as creative as, said, a 'Beowulf' and its striking metaphors. If you read it like you would watch an action movie, though, you may get closer to what it was supposed to be like -a lot of violence, gung-ho heroes with an exaggerated masculine ethos and pathos, and the good old fashion 'they vs us' mindset (and we will prevail!). It can, obviously, sound very gimmicky to us now, but then again: how is that different from some of the idiocies churned out by our modern days Hollywood studios when it comes to POW! POW! BANG! CRASH! PAN! and their no less gimmicky, tough and ripped male heroes? At least, I want to argue here that, contrary to our era, here was the Early Middle Ages; hence an ethos which was, in fact, truly embraced -or, at least, encouraged- within the male ruling elites (e.g. blind loyalty to one's lord; readiness to die for a greater cause; honour and bravery on a battlefield...). We can smile, but people of the time would have taken it very seriously indeed. One wonder, then: how people, in a 1,000 years from now, will look at our action movies? Maybe not that differently...

On a very positive note, what I really appreciated is how, through repetitions and different ways of wording the same scenes over and over, there is a strong sense of doom being conveyed. Here's treachery leading to a tragedy and its ultimate heavy price to pay (the death of Roland and the whole rear guard of course, but, also, the sentence melted upon Ganelon...) that makes for a very enthralling, albeit gloomy, narrative. We know how it ended. And yet, we're there. We hope. We can smell the blood and hear the screams all around us. It is, then, not that bad in doing what it does.

Is it a good poem? No. Is it my favourite epic? No either. But, as a chanson de geste recounting the doomed deeds of brave men and their past ideals, this is probably one of the best one can get. It's a classic anyway. show less

The Song of Roland is a medieval epic poem detailing the feats of Charlemagne. It is, according to Wikipedia, the oldest surviving example of French literature. In The Song, Charlemagne’s Franks go to battle against the Spanish Saracens, a battle precipitated by a traitor in Charlemagne’s midst.

Really, this is an epic about Christians vs. Muslims. It was written around the time of the Crusades and serves as an excellent piece of propaganda about the glory of Christianity and defeating “the pagans.” Like every battle epic out there, the protagonists are pure and manly and valiant, their testosterone flying off the page. The Saracens, of course, are ignorant villains. This is medieval literature, remember, so one can’t expect show more too much in the way of cultural understanding. For example, the Muslims here worship three gods: Muhammad, Apollo, and Tervagant. Um, wrong.

But with all that said, The Song of Roland is a pretty enjoyable read. The translation I have by Glyn Burgess is accessible and plain, which makes it a welcome sight knowing the headache it usually takes for me to read really old works. The language is simple but effective, and if you’re looking for dramatic, chivalric values on the battlefield, you can’t go wrong.

Questionable politics. Decent battle epic. show less

Translations can be great, but they lose much of their original poetic cadence most of the time. While the Song of Roland was an interesting story, the whole time I was reading it I felt that there was something missing. As the title implies, this poem was most likely set to music and/or sung to a specific melody. In French I'm sure that the poem would hint at the rhythm and metre of its music, but in English the language is very flat. The only hint that it is part of the bardic tradition is the repetition of key phrases and motifs that would have served as mneumonic devices to the performer.

Stirring tale, but to be honest what I enjoyed most was recognizing how this work affected so much of Medieval literature that followed.