The long poem full of wonderful narration and tongue twisters was first written by an unknown writer in the 1400 in the northern part of England . Sir Gawain and the Green Knight was not necessarily an instant hit, understandably so, at its birth period was not the high note of domestic reading. It was at first owned by private persons up until the queen Victoria acceded the throne when it was brought into the light once again along with other great works of literature . There have since been a long array of translations, …show more content…
In the epic poem, he describes himself as such: “I am weakest of your warriors and feeblest of wit; … Were I not your nephew my life would mean nothing; to be born of your blood is my body’s only claim. ” As he steps up to the challenge of the Green Knight that has just showed up uninvited to King Arthurs Christmas party in Camelot and offered one of the party guests a chance to chop of his head in exchange for the same gesture in a year exact. Thus, Sir Gawain’s quest begins.
As the story unfolds Gawain’s morals and knightly duties are scrutinised and tested thought the story and it all comes to an end as it culminates in part five of the poem. In the end, it seems that Gawain failed in his ultimate quest, not the quest of his body, but the quest of his self. However, the question remains, did he really fail, and if so, how serious is the nature of his moral failing?
In this essay, I will attempt to analyse the text and look at Gawain in the contest of …show more content…
The Green Knight is given his blow but does not take Gawain’s head, it is revealed that the Green Knight and the lord was one and the same the whole time, and that the wager had been a moral test which Gawain had failed at length. For Gawain this seems to be a blunder too big to bare, and as he returns home to his court, he wears the green stash draped over his shoulder as a sign of his tainted soul. The other knights seems not to think the same way as our grieving Gawain, for they adopt the stash as their own, as a sign of courage and camaraderie and so the question remains, was his moral frailer in the end so great? His peers does not seem to think