The interaction of oral and written traditions in twelfth-century Old French verse romances

The interaction of oral and written traditions in twelfth-century Old French verse romances It is generally accepted that the Old French verse romances, lais, fabliaux and other octosyllabic couplet forms of the late twelfth century belong to a somewhat different context from that of the chansons de geste. Though there are obviously elements of continuity in both the cultural milieu and mode of production, the former represent an important extension of the written tradition and the accompanying notions of authority and canonicity. Zumthor considers the opposition between sung and non-sung genres as one of the most important considerations in the formulation of a theory of twelfth-century poetics, and this distinction to a large extent coincides with that between oral improvisation and written composition. While it is true that many of the methods pioneered by scholars like Rychner, Nichols, Duggan and others in the study of the romance epic can be extended to the romance, some caution must be observed in the conclusions drawn. Michael Curschmann, speaking of the symbiotic relationship between oral and written culture in the late twelfth century, says of the courtly romance that "in subject matter it looks towards the aristocratic illiterate lay culture, but it has no oral past and depends on literacy for its existence." Obviously the meaning we assign to such terms as oral, popular or traditional is of crucial importance in any discussion such as this. From a position of relative insignificance, the study of oral literature has, in the last twentyfive or so years, become a vigorous and productive area of activity. Yet there are traps for the unwary, perhaps even more so when a subject acquires not only academic respectability but even a degree of modishness. Oral literature in the true sense should, it is suggested, be reserved for the literature produced in those largely non-literate cultures described by Finnegan and Horton, Goody and others. W e should heed the warnings of these experts against comparisons made between the cultural output of a non-literate society and the situation of the illiterate individual or class in an extensively literate society. This true oral literature is composed by improvisation, which usually means the combination of thematic and formal techniques from a conventional repertoire, aided by a high degree of rhythmic and visual reinforcement and a vital interaction between performer and audience. It is often ultimately fixed in writing for a wide variety of purposes, of which a few are as follows: the pursuit of scholarly research or more general dissemination in cultural contexts far removed from the original, the necessary adaptation of a particular society to changing cultural parameters, or a threat to the continued survival of an indigenous tradition by a dominant alien group. Oral transmission is obviously closely linked to improvisation but it is also true that written items can be transmitted orally: a wide variety of examples past and present 98 W. Ann Trindade demonstrates the passing into oral circulation of something originally conceived in writing. Finally, oral delivery can merely mean the reading aloud of a prepared discourse, even one written by someone else. Medieval romances are prima facie examples of written literature of course, but they represent the end product of a complicated process in which all these factors are involved. In this article we are primarily concerned with this particular process rather than with the intrinsic nature of oral literature in the first sense, which is a topic best treated by the appropriate experts. Another problem on which much recent discussion has focussed is how best the medievalist can use the resources of modern disciplines like folkloristics, social anthropology, narratology and semiotics, which have contributed considerably to the study of oral cultures in modern times. The question shows signs of becoming more urgent as the field is invaded by more and more young scholars somewhat less well equipped in the traditional skills than their predecessors (though not necessarily less insightful in literary sensitivity). Having at best a scanty grounding in Latin, unable to read a wide range of languages, impatient with the demands of laborious disciplines like philology and paleography, often slightly hostile to what is perceived as the Christian context of...