The Play of Repetition and Resemblance in The Romance of the Rose

Abstract

The play of repetition and resemblance in The Romance of the Rose is a pervasive dynamic that contributes to the poem's general tendency to subvert straightforward interpretations of its allegorical meaning. To date, the workings of opposition and difference have received much more scholarly attention than those of repetition and resemblance. This is not surprising considering the Narrator's explicit endorsement of difference as productive of knowledge and understanding. (l) As a structural and organizational principle of the Rose, however, repetition possesses hermeneutic and thematic significance. By repeating central episodes in Guillaume, heightens ambiguities inherent in the first section of the poem, themselves caused by repetition. Repetition also implies similarity, or resemblance. Despite the differences between the character of the Narrator-Lover, the personification Fair Welcome, and the symbol of the rosebud, all three resemble one another. They are all characterized by a profound indeterminacy, which undermines not only the coherence of each, but also any definitive reading of the nature of their relationship. Because the central love relationships in courtly romance are overtly heterosexual, it makes sense to read the Rose as an allegory of courtship and seduction in which the rosebud and Fair Welcome stand for the female beloved and/or some attribute of her. Luce Irigaray argues, however, that sexual difference, the dynamic that informs heterosexuality, is really a mask for masculine self-sameness. Patriarchal discourses construct woman not as an other to, but as the same as, the masculine. (2) If masculine self-sameness constitutes feminine otherness, to what extent is the rosebud an image of the Narrator-Lover himself? The Narrator-Lover's desire for the bud is premised upon a dynamic of sameness, which is only partially masked by conventions of sexual difference. This sameness discloses itself in an underlying resemblance between the Narrator-Lover, Fair Welcome, and the rosebud as radically indeterminate constructs. Scholarly references to repetition usually focus on the relationship between the work of Guillaume and Jean. Per Nykrog sutas it up nicely: au niveau de l'action, de l'histoire racontee, ces 6500 premiers vers par constituent essentiellement une repetition et une expansion de ce que Guillaume avait deja raconte en 80 vers (2955-3134), l'Amant ecoutant les avis de Raison et ensuite, apres avoir refuse la resignation qu'elle recommande, les encouragements donnes par Atai. (9) at the level of action, of the recounted story, these first 6500 lines by essentially constitute a repetition and an expansion of that which Guillaume had already recounted in 80 lines (2955-3134), the Lover listening to the advice of Reason and afterwards, after having refused the resignation that she recommends, the encouragements given by Friend. (3) A number of reasons are offered as to why repeats Guillaume. C. S. Lewis states that he did not know what he was doing: Thus three of his episodes--the descent of Reason, the reassurances of Frend, and the coming of Venus--merely repeat episodes in his original (140). Nancy Freeman Regalado alleges that Jean's repetition of Guillaume is intentional and provides readers with a model of how to interpret the poeta: Jean himself practices the reading to which he aims to lead the future reader by reproducing the Roman of Guillaume and again (101). Readers of the romance are meant to repeat the lessons presented in the Rose. Kevin Brownlee argues that Genius rewrites Guillaume's Garden of Delight in order to criticize and correct it (125). Susan Stakel notes Jean's repetition of the Lover's recitation of the commandments of Love at the Fountain of Narcissus in Guillaume. The point of the repetition is structurally significant, with the Lover's recitation in Guillaume occurring at the midpoint of his 4000-1ine romance, and in at the midpoint of the conjoined romance. …