As Dr. Mueller's vassal, I am in the enviable position of beginning the debate on Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival. As maybe one of the most interesting grail texts (after mine of course), Parzival offers an entirely new vision of the grail. What do we learn about its qualities? And how different is Wolfram's Parzival from Chretien's Perceval? For one thing, Wolfram is clearly more interested in an Eastern origin for the grail. What are the implications for such a fetish for the East? And finally, is Wolfram's version playful or serious? Or both?
And remember fellow grail seekers, response to this entry is required. I suggest that you comment on the most recently posted comment on this entry, but as long as you write a thoughtful post in response to Parzival, you will remain golden, and truly worthy of the grail, in Dr. Mueller's eyes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
After reading this text, the Grail qualities are much different then in previous readings. The first change is that it appears to be a stone or rock, no longer the usual cauldron or cup. The Hermit, on page 220 says, “ Then know, by a stone they live, and that stone is both pure and precious”. The Hermit goes on to discuss how the Grail can make someone “forever young”, once again, this quality did not appear in other text. Finally, the feelings toward the Grail are much different in this story. Normally, people would admire the Grail or find it astonishing, but Parzival says he feels the most sorrow for the Grail.
But how can someone feel sorrow for an object that can’t feel anything? Unless some people actually believe the Grail is more then simply a cup or stone and has feelings? Another interesting quality about the Grail in this text was the Hermit, claiming the Grail has previously elected individuals to serve it. “ On the Grail, in a mystic writing, appeareth each chosen name”. No longer is the question, who serves the Grail an option, but possibly why or how were the individual’s chosen?
Another quality of the Grail that is presented is about the hope people put on the Grail. This quality is also present in other Grail text, but its very obvious in Parzival. “ Then the knights of the Grail knelt lowly, and for help to the Grail they prayed”. In previous text the Grail was presented as being helpful, but Wolframs text actual recites a time when knights are praying to the Grail, and it eventually helps. Finally the Grail also helped to feed people when they couldn’t find food.
This text is different from Chrétien’s Perceval in a few ways. In the Perceval text, the Grail appears with a bright light, and it’s said to be a Talleors (dish or bowl). This differs from Wolframs because the Grail is only supposed to be a stone and besides the “mystic writing” has no unusual powers. Another difference between the two texts is that in Chrétien, Perceval was a very courteous knight, and helped women. In Wolframs version, Parzival talks about how he fought women from different parts of the earth. He does not seem to respect women to the extent that Chrétien portrayed Perceval. Another difference is that Wolfram does not focus as much as the damsels carrying around the Grail and Parzival not asking any question. Chrétien spends a few pages discussing how the Damsels carried around the Grail and candles and how beautiful they were. I think this is interesting because Wolfram seemed to give more of a background on the Grail and its different qualities and who possibly serves it, unlike Chrétien who simply discussed the importance of Perceval not asking questions. Also, both stories talk about how the Fisher king was injured, but Wolfram discuses in detail how knights tried to find a cure for the injury, through rivers, mystic creatures, or plants.
Wolfram might have been so interested in the east because many stories of the Grail were not portrayed with an Eastern viewpoint. Some of the possibilities for this fetish with the East occur when the concept of the rivers come into play and the use of mythical creatures such as a Unicorn and Pelican. Finally, another eastern part of this story was when Parzival was discussing the women from Asia and Africa that he fought.
Finally, Wolframs version was very serious. He used a lot of detail and did not seem to show any amusement in his story, or “ light” subjects. Chrétien text at least contained some minor humor with the Fisher king, but Wolfram even made that part of the story extremely serious.
Wolfram's Parzival poses a much different approach to the Grail as gwalchmel stated. THe one thing I have discovered while reading the text is the Grail's ability to heal. Because of this the keepers worship the Grail. Is it different from Crietien? Parzival and Percival seem to be the same person and we come in contact with a "Red Knight." But the actual Grail itself is much different. I do not believe there is a religious approach concerning the actaul Grail in this story but the Grail does have connections to go. What I mean by this is that Wolfram makes it very clear that the Grail is some sort of Rock...is this a Holy item? no the Grail is part of nature. The hermit says on page 223 "the Botherhood holdeth hidden the Grail from all stranger eyes: by their warlike skill and prowess they fold from the lands around, they keep afar, and none knoweth where the Grail and its Burg are Found." Just like all other Grail Texts, the Grail is hidden, but for what reason? I believe because it is similar to the fountain of youth or this story could possibly be connecting the Grail to the actual fountain. As King Anfortas was dying he asked who would be the keeper of the Grail, the maindens decided to show Anfortas the Grail and what happens? on page 227 the text states, "To the Grail, Then, They Bare Anfortas, if its virtue might bring relief, but alas! when his eyes beheld it yet heaveier waxed his grief as the life sprang afresh within him, and he knew that he might not die; and he livith...and the power of the Grail, and its glory, with their monarch have waxen week." This is a healing tool, the Grail has the power to heal possibly through god and it chooses who it heals. This speaks more to me as a newer text on the Grail, possibly a different approach rather than the Holyness that we get from other stories. What does everyone else think?
I must agree with gwalchmel in that women in Wolfram's text seem to be treated rather different then in previous tales. Chivalry seems to be of lessor importance to Wolfram if knights are fighting women.
The Grail seems to be much more Christian in this story, more religious. Knights pray to it, it feeds the sick and heals the injured, all miracles performed by Jesus. In Wolfram's text a dove brings down a wafer from Heaven on Good Friday. The Grail being a rock or stone in this text could be related to its supposed ability to heal the Wasteland.
Though none can doubt Lancelot's prowess in battle, I must disagree with his assessment that the Grail is not a Christian icon in Parzival. The first few pages deal exclusively with original sin, and the concept that the earth (made by God) is the mother of Adam. The "Earth-Maiden" , as the Hermit puts it, can be considered a close family relative of Jesus. Therefore, the fact that the Grail is a stone, although certainly a natural object, makes it no less holy than if it were a cup.
I also believe that the youth giving qualities of the Grail explain away some questions raised in previously written texts. For example, the huge gap in time between the crucification and Aurthur's day in Perlesvaus.
Another difference between Wolfram's Parzival and Crietien's Perceval, is that in this text, Parzival hates God before he talks to the Hermit. As Perceval, he seems to merely be remiss in his worship.
A further point of notability is the intricate explanation of the spear, and how the bloodiness of it is explained. The blood seems to be the result of the necessary jamming of the spear into the fisher King's thigh wound. This is another detail, vague in other texts, that is well explained by Wolfram.
Finally, the retelling of the killing of the unicorn only brought me sadness. As a boy, I, Sir Gawain, killed a unicorn, and am still much shamed by the act.
Sir Gawain your points are very good I like your interpretations of the Grail and I will definatley keep that in mind when I am analyzing Parzival for our final research!
When my brother Bendigeid Vran ruled over the Island of the Mighty, he had in his possession a magical cauldron that would restore a man to full health (except that it would withdraw that man’s ability to speak). This “Grail” referred to by Lord Eschenbach seems to have a similar property of restoration, as it stays both death and aging if it is beheld daily. Indeed, even if it is beheld but once, Lord Eschenbach writes that the Grail will stay death’s hand for a full eight days. However, the form of this Grail differs from both the cauldron that I know of and the dish described by Chrétien de Troyes. Indeed, the Grail described by Chrétien is “set with precious stones of many kinds, the richest and the costliest that exist in the sea or in the earth” (SG 153). Lord Eschenbach’s Grail is not set with stones, but rather is a stone. On this stone is written the names of the “Grail’s elect ones,” those members of a small band who serve the Grail (SG 221). Furthermore, on each and every Good Friday, a white dove descends from Heaven and lays a Host on the stone, “[a]nd the stone from the Host receiveth all good that on earth may be / [o]f food or of drink, the earth beareth as the fulness [sic] of Paradise” (SG 221). As shown in the magical picture display created by Master Roemer, Chrétien’s Grail does hold a Host, which is served to the Grail king. This is, I suppose, some common description of the two Grails.
After having considered the texts of both Lord Eschenbach and Chrétien de Troyes, I must say that Lord Eschenbach’s tale fills me with much more sorrow. Parzival seems to begin his dialogue with his host Trevrezent by railing against his God, blaming Him for all manner of woe and suffering. Even as Parzival once again warms to God and His goodness, both he and Trevrezent continuously return to feelings of woe and sorrow, either for Anfortas and his pain, or for the pain suffered by the entire Grail host as empathy with Anfortas, or for the lost opportunity Parzival had to end everyone’s suffering and achieve the Grail. Having been the cause of the destruction of two great islands—my brother’s and my husband’s—I deeply understand the last line from the excerpt given me from Lord Eschenbach’s tale: “Think ye with what grief and sorrow the twain [Trevrezent and Parzival] did asunder part” (SG 238). Is this deep sorrow and grief similar to the emotions presented by Chrétien de Troyes? Perceval, while grieved at his error in not having asked anything of the Wounded King, is yet barely incapacitated by his grief. Perceval says, “The dead to the dead, the living to the living,” urging both his cousin and himself to move on from their mourning and find some more proper course of action (SG 158). Perceval does not seem to be nearly as distraught as Parzival.
As for the nature of Eschenbach’s text, the presence of the possibly Eastern mythological presences of unicorns, dragons, and magical pelicans does not seem to deter the powerfully Christian seriousness of the tale. Those who would serve the grail must adhere to a similar vow to that of a monk or priest: “He who would to the Grail do service, he shall women’s love forswear” (SG 234). Furthermore, specifically in reference to the Grail, those who first tended it on Earth were the angels “cast forth from Heaven’s height” for “[taking] no part in the conflict, when Lucifer would fight / [w]ith the Three-in-One,” or God (SG 221, 222).
Comparing Chretiens text to that of Wolfram von Eschenbach's it is clear to see that the grail is viewed very differently and possesses traits that are not mentioned in other Perceval texts (at least of what we've read so far). The common idea of the grail being a cup is ommitted and in Wolframs view it is a stone that holds healing powers. Anyone that finds this stone (the grail), becomes forever young, and has all their sicknesses healed. It is also noticed that the grail has been found by many more individuals than in other tales; can even be found by women. This stone though is engraved with the names of the knights who are able to possess the grail themselves.
Instead of the quest of Parzival, this tale consists of the hermit relaying all its secrets and powers to Parzival. He also uses religion seriously to explain the origin of this stone and the reasonings that Parzival may not be able to obtain it due to his sins in life.
I find that Wolfram may be being a little playful as he refers to the grail as a stone or rock and has no reference to it being a cauldron or cup. The idea of a rock is not very luxiourious as a gold cauldron as other stories have told. His seriousness though in his religious beliefs makes its tone more serious. His references to main characters and events are viewed as very important and I found that it was difficult to follow Parzivals quest, for it is mentioned slightly.
There are some obvious differences between Chretien's text and this one. I agree with Branwen when he stated that Eschenbach's text is much more sorrowful then Chretien's. Right from the beginning a dismel mood is set for the text. Also, this text seemed to be much more focused on the Christian/ biblical origins compared to Chretien's text. Another difference is that in this text the grail is represented by a stone with healing powers, but in Chretien's text it is represented by the cup that is lined with precious stones. The characters of Parzival and Perceval seem to be very similar between the two texts, however it is the mood of the story and some of its details that are the major differences.
I undoubtedly agree with gwalchmel. This story is much different then the previous ones. Much more sorrow in this reading. As King I agree that Parzival should atone for his sins and then when done so return to my court of Camelot. Booze for everyone
As for the tone of this text, I found that the rhyming lightened the mood, if not made it altogether humurous. Still, Wolfram was trying to get across some serious Christian messages through Trevrezent the hermit. I thought the story about the earth-maiden was fascinating. Parvizal definately comes across as kind of an ignorant idiot in this one. What struck me most about this text was the imagery that came to mind: the "mystic writing" that supposedly appears on the grail, which chooses whom it will serve, immediately brought to mind a mental image of the Ring in Lord of the Rings, with the writing in the language of Mordor after it comes out of the fire. Also, the grail of Wolfram's text is The Philosopher's Stone from Harry Potter! (And from much earlier legend.) My point is that the compilation of frequently-used fantasy elements in today's literature has piled up throughtout history in texts such as these. And in the same way--not such a linear way--Wolfram's text uses elements of the grail and Perceval that we have seen before, but some different ones from other sources. The journey of those fantastical elements--such as the grail--is fascinating.
P.S. If this doesn't sound much like how I usually talk to humans, then remember that I (Jesus) am everywhere, even in the Blogging world, and I can talk like you 21st century Bloggers, too. Peace.
I found that this perspective of the grail and the story behind it very original. Rather than concentrating primarily on the vanity of what the grail looks like it concentrates on the religious aspects. There has been much focus of the material side of the grail. In previous texts that we have read, it was usually described as something with jewels, gold, or other other desirable possessions. The grail in this text is a stone. Which makes sense when you think about it because in texts that we have explored, the Fisher King is linked to the land, and it is said that the only way to restore good health to him and is land is to lay with a woman who is less desirable, who in turn is actually mother nature. Again, there is less entertainment of Knights and their deeds in helping distressed damsels, and more about the religious side of things. Although this tale is somewhat serious, the rhyme makes things a little less fierce. Also, not only can the knights have part in the grail and it's doings, woman, and men can as well.
Well done Jesus, in terms of your comparison between the Lord of the Rings and Wolfram's version of the grail. It shows that even today, the history and literature of the grail is still visible today in such movies as this, and it's elements move on and will probably continue to do so.
On another note, did anyone find the description of the dove to be interesting? I found it interesting that the messenger be a female, it was quite refreshing. And again, the significance of the white color, why a dove???
Wolfram von Eschenbach's text on the grail is more interesting to me than the previous stories have been. The dialogue between Parzival and his uncle the Hermit allows for a more serious tone than a story that was told to us by someone who heard it from someone else. The dialogue format makes the text more significant and gives it more appeal. The family lineage of Parzival and the grail family is more in depth than other texts and the religious context is pouring out of the pages. The Old Testament stories about Adam and Eve and their children Cain and Abel are the reason why the Earth has sin, wrath, envy, and strife. What I find most interesting is that this text reads like a conduct/moral manual in the sense that if you don't fear God than you will go to Hell. For example, "They who took no part in the conflict, when Lucifer would fight With the Three-in-One those angels were cast forth from Heaven's height. To the Earth they came at God's bidding, and that wondrous stone did tend" (pg 222). Even the angels that did not pick a side were punished and were banished from Heaven. (This reminds me of Azrael in "Dogma"). To me this reads, if you are a coward and do not fight in God's honor than you will be punished and most likely go to Hell. Parzival says on page 222, "my soul ever longed for knighthood, and I fought where'er strife might be". The Hermit warns Parzival that he must beware of pride because "the proud God doth punish". Parzival we learn later in the story is the knight that fails to ask the maimed King of his sorrow and has lost his chance to end the King's suffering and recieve a heavenly prize. It seems that Parzival failed to act because he did not have enough faith in God. The fact that the story begins with Parzival bearing hatred and wrath against God is why I think he is incapable of taming his desires and his pride. By failing to ask the question and speaking out against God he proves that his lack of faith and his pride is his greatest folly.
To answer Messire Gawain's question, Why the Dove? The line from the text is "white as the Host the Dove That, her errand done, swift wingeth her way to the Heaven above. Thus ever upon Good Friday doth it chance as I tell to thee: And the stone from the Host recieveth all good that on earth may be Of food or of drink, the earth beareth as the fulness of Paradise...For His sevants He ever feedeth and the Grail for their needs doth care!" (pg 221).
The fact that Good Friday (the day that Christ was crucified) is mentioned makes the Dove a referance to Christ's baptism by John the Baptist. When John the Baptist baptized Christ he saw a Dove and he knew that Christ was the prophesized son of God.
This text gave insight on many aspects of the grail story. If it didn't explian it completly than it allowed you to glimps a bigger picture. For instance it explains how the Fisher King became the Fisher King. On page 233 " The king, he rideth never, nor may he walk, or lie, and he sitteth not, but, reclining, in tears his sad days pass by. And the moons changes work him evil- To a lake they call Brimbane They bear him full oft for fishing that the breezes may sooth his pain." This text also brings on a pagan aspect with trying to use the stone along with a unicorns heart to heal the wound. The portrayel of the grial as a stone instead of a cup or a platter is interesting because it has a very natural feel rather than something that has been man made. White seems to be the color of choice with all of these stories like the lance and the dove. This is probably due to the fact that white symbolizes purity and only the pure in heart can see the grail. I like how you gain insight as to why the hermit is a hermit. This is a very interesting twist on the legend and I enjoyed it.
It seems to me that everybody has already touched on the major differences between this account of the Grail and others. But something that I find most interesting is the change in the portrayal or conveyance of Perceval/Parzival.
Whereas he seems only to sin in a somewhat absent-minded manner in Chretien and others, in Wolfram's text, our Grail hero appears to be more 'proactive' in his wrongdoing. On the very first page we find him shaking his fist in the face of God, as it were, (much to the dismay of the hermit) and blaming Him for all the sadness and misfortunes he has done or encountered. Indeed, "For I against God bear hatred (SG 216)" pretty much summarizes Parzival's demeanor at this point.
Of course the hermit seems to pull Parzival 'up by the bootstraps' ... or perhaps by the spurs, in this case, and set him back on the path he should follow.
As for Parzival's "sorrows (SG 220)" - first for the Grail, second for his wife ... perhaps third for his faith? - these seems to be more his burdens and cares than any sort of pity objects. These are items more of difficulty, longing, and desire rather than sorrow in the sense as we might think it.
Women most certainly come much more hardily into play within this text than any other yet read for our purposes. The earth is likened to a maiden, the story of Eve's sin and her children, Parzival seems to have developed a wife from out of somewhere, women are mentioned specifically as capable of having their names upon the Grail, etc. Perhaps it is out of this particular tradition that the whole spiel of Christ's having had a wife and bearing a child came? It would seem that because these stories change so much with every author, historical fact becomes very much blurred.
In any event, I, pre-eminent Taliesin, am tired and must needs chew upon some hazelnuts in search of some new seeds of wisdom.
Right, so i just read this guy Wolframs Parizval, and, well lets just say, it didn't go down like that.
I never saw a stone, or a dove lay a wafer on said stone. This castle business Monsalvasch, or the kingdom and the grail company known as the templars. Certainly there was a castle, and a company of courtesans, but I'm telling you when I left the Fisher kings castle, it up and disappeared. My boy Chretien knew the score, no rock, no Monsalvasch, but he was right about one thing, I still keep that youthful glow from the first day I saw the graal. I do have to thank Wolfram for letting me know about my family. My mother kept me in the dark about a lot of things.
So Percival, you say that you never saw a stone or a dove lay a wafer on said stone, so what exactly did happen to you then? It just up and disappeared? That sounds a lot like some black magic to me. Atleast you're willing to admit that there was a castle and we all certainly know that the graal exisits. Who could forget the glow that it let out. I am pleased that you show your appreciation to Wolfram. He certainly has helped all of us in many ways.
Hello All you Grail Seekers,
Since you just read Wolfram's Parzival, you all know quite a bit about me. My name is Trevrezent, and I am one of the many uncles of Parzival himself. I gave up my knighthood for a life of poverty and repentance. Young Parzival comes to me to discuss his sins, and I enlighten him fully. He is a body full of sin, for he did not ask the right questions. I am the one who told this youth that his mother died from his grief of leaving home, just as I am the one who told him secrets of the grail. I tell Parzival that he must put his trust in god if he wishes to be forgiven for sin. Likewise, I told him that he actually killed his own cousin when he didn't know. One last piece of information that I tell him is that my brother, his uncle, is the Grail King, who was wounded while jousting with a poisonous spear. I tell him that the reason I gave up my knighthood is because of the wounding of my brother. I try to boldface the point to him that the Grail only selects men of religion
It's reasonable to see why, in Wolfram's Parzival, Wolfram would transform the grail into a stone. A stone is something natural, it is a piece of Earth given to us by God, just as the Holy Grail was given to us by God. Wolfram also specifies the powers of the "stone" Grail, by explaining that it can youth, heal and serve food. These innovative ideas are classy to be sure, however I feel that they depart from the Christian roots of the grail story; and because of this the grail once again becomes legend instead of history. I also feel that by naming the exact powers that the grail can perform, Wolfram demystifies the grail. I liked it better when the powers of the grail were so great that one who did not achieve the grail could not possibly understand it, back when achievement of the grail meant Enlightenment. I do think that Wolfram added much more detail to the grail story, however on the other hand I also think he distorted it while doing so. It was interesting to observe that Wolfram's Parzival was actually angry at God upon visiting Trevrezent, when in all previous versions of the grail story "Perceval" had just seemed to forget about God. Lastly, I enjoyed the fact that in Wolframs version, before achieving the grail, Parzival would have to throw away his pride.
Post a Comment