The Grotesque Body In Early Christian Discourse: Scatological Humor
As István Czachesz stated in The grotesque Body in Early Christian Discourse: Hell, Scatology and Metamorphosis, Scatological humour is “…the simplest and perhaps the most ancient dramatic device to make readers, onlookers and listeners laugh…” ¹. Bearing this assertion in mind, as a part of this analysis, we shall discuss the significance of Scatological humour as a means of underpinning the integral themes of: le pet dou vilain, le farce de menuyer and la chanson d’audigier. In addition, we shall contrast and compare these three farces with regard to their application of this literary device. This is in order that, as contemporary readers, we can grasp the motivation behind the usage of Scatological humour during this period, whilst ascertaining its function in medieval literature.
…show more content…
Now that the path that will be taken in this analysis has been elucidated, a clear definition of the term Scatological humour must be provided.
Peter J Smith describes Scatological Humour as “… a humour that derives from a sense of physical imperfection or decay.”². A more succinct definition of this style of humour is Mouton de Gruyter’s novel the Primer of Humor (which was edited by Victor Raskin) where he states Scatology is “literature that discusses excrement and its production”³. These definitions deliver a distinct framework of what is purported by the term Scatological Humour; as a consequence, we can now commence on our exploration of this representation of humour and how it is expressed in these three medieval
farces.
Now that we have established what is meant by the term Scatological humour, we shall discuss its use and significance in Rutebeuf’s Le pet dou vilain. This is so that we are able to portray its connection with religion, and also how Rutebeuf employs Scatological humour as one of the methods to demonstrate the negative association of the Vilain in French medieval society.
In Rutebeuf’s le pet dou vilain the uses of the soul exiting from the anus instead of the mouth is one of the effective methods Rutebeuf adopts to clarify the supposed link between Scatology and religion. This apparent link is expressed on line 29 where the Vilain uses « Un sac de cuir au cul li pent »4 and then 2 lines later Rutebeuf demonstrates a point of view which could counteract where the soul leaves the body, according to religious beliefs. Valerie Allen stated “…popular tradition has it that soul exits through the dying person’s mouth.” 5 p.69 Conversely, in this line of the farce it highlights that «Que l'arme par le cul s'en aille »4. This gives us the impression that Rutebeuf uses scatology to discuss and possibly question the religious belief of where one’s soul leaves the human body. This could also be a way for Rutebeuf to contradict the purity of the soul and the impurity and malevolence of metabolic processes. In addition to this, Valerie Allen supports this idea of the darkness associated with Scatology and faecal matters in literacy. In her book On Farting, she highlights that “Dark things happen in the toilet, where ominous fumes are literally inspired”5. This observation, although focussing on bathroom humour in general, is an apt representation of its use in le pet dou vilain. This is due to the fact that the audience is told that this metabolic act is for the purposes of the labourer to enter hell, as we are told on line 27 4 that the devil is present at this process. As a consequence, this corroborates with Valerie Allen’s theory that the toilet is a place of evil and sinful acts. In this case here, the toilet activity is used for the devil to extract the soul of the poor labourer so that it may enter hell.
Having seen Scatology’s linkage with religion in the previous point, we are able to analyse in greater detail the importance of the devil’s role in the farce. In this farce there is a suggestion that the Devil is an unintelligent being that has been easily duped by the poor labourer. « Et maudient arme a vilain »4. In this particular line and several corresponding lines, Rutebuef cleverly implements Scatological humour to underline the stupidity and naiveté of the Devil by confusing a fart with the human soul. Since, “… devils are so stupid they cannot tell the difference between a fart and a soul.”5 This statement succinctly illustrates one of the key components of scatology in this farce. This is the method to represent a malevolent force, with a connotation that it portrays an imbecile and a creature that lacks any discernible intelligence. In addition to this, the farce utilises the devil character in order to reverse the conventional roles of ‘the deceiver’ and ‘the deceived’. This peripatetic representation of the devil could be another demonstration of its lack of intelligence in this farce. “… the demon gets a taste of his own medicine, gaining nothing but a stinking fart for all his efforts.”5 This is a possible use of superiority humour by means of scatology to further underline the inherent foolishness and candidness of this demon as it has been easily deceived by a simple labourer. The line “Ne puet estre qu'ele ne pue. »4 strengthens how the devil has been tricked by the labourer. This fart is still creating a foul stench but yet there is nothing physical that the demon can bring back to hell in relation to a human soul.
Altogether this gives the audience a clear message of how we should visualise the devil character. We should not perceive it as a being to be fearful of, but rather a being that we can mock. Now that we have established the significance of scatology in le pet dou vilain in relation to conveying the devil character, it is time to turn to how scatological humour is used in this farce to express the religious and social representations of the poor labourer in the mediaeval period. As we have already discussed the old labourer has been successful in his deception of the demon, whether this was intentional or not is unclear. Nevertheless his interaction with the devil possibly gives the contemporary reader an insight into the attitudes towards labourers during this era. Line 64 « Qu'en enfer ne en paradix. »4 provides a succinct message that the poor labourer’s soul is so corrupted and foul smelling that he is refused entry from both heaven and hell . Given that “… peasants are rejected by heaven and hell alike…”5 contemporary readers can ascertain from this line that one of the principal usages of scatological humour in this farce is to highlight the level scorn that is associated with the labouring class in a religious context. Adding to this Valerie Allens affirms that this farce is “…yet one more story that displays revulsion for the labouring estate as repulsive in their physicality…”5. As a consequence, modern readers can gather from this statement that this farce was another piece of work to employ scatology in order to emphasise the disgust the audience should feel towards the labouring class in regards to their ordures.
Now that the path that will be taken in this analysis has been elucidated, a clear definition of the term Scatological humour must be provided.
Peter J Smith describes Scatological Humour as “… a humour that derives from a sense of physical imperfection or decay.”². A more succinct definition of this style of humour is Mouton de Gruyter’s novel the Primer of Humor (which was edited by Victor Raskin) where he states Scatology is “literature that discusses excrement and its production”³. These definitions deliver a distinct framework of what is purported by the term Scatological Humour; as a consequence, we can now commence on our exploration of this representation of humour and how it is expressed in these three medieval
farces.
Now that we have established what is meant by the term Scatological humour, we shall discuss its use and significance in Rutebeuf’s Le pet dou vilain. This is so that we are able to portray its connection with religion, and also how Rutebeuf employs Scatological humour as one of the methods to demonstrate the negative association of the Vilain in French medieval society.
In Rutebeuf’s le pet dou vilain the uses of the soul exiting from the anus instead of the mouth is one of the effective methods Rutebeuf adopts to clarify the supposed link between Scatology and religion. This apparent link is expressed on line 29 where the Vilain uses « Un sac de cuir au cul li pent »4 and then 2 lines later Rutebeuf demonstrates a point of view which could counteract where the soul leaves the body, according to religious beliefs. Valerie Allen stated “…popular tradition has it that soul exits through the dying person’s mouth.” 5 p.69 Conversely, in this line of the farce it highlights that «Que l'arme par le cul s'en aille »4. This gives us the impression that Rutebeuf uses scatology to discuss and possibly question the religious belief of where one’s soul leaves the human body. This could also be a way for Rutebeuf to contradict the purity of the soul and the impurity and malevolence of metabolic processes. In addition to this, Valerie Allen supports this idea of the darkness associated with Scatology and faecal matters in literacy. In her book On Farting, she highlights that “Dark things happen in the toilet, where ominous fumes are literally inspired”5. This observation, although focussing on bathroom humour in general, is an apt representation of its use in le pet dou vilain. This is due to the fact that the audience is told that this metabolic act is for the purposes of the labourer to enter hell, as we are told on line 27 4 that the devil is present at this process. As a consequence, this corroborates with Valerie Allen’s theory that the toilet is a place of evil and sinful acts. In this case here, the toilet activity is used for the devil to extract the soul of the poor labourer so that it may enter hell.
Having seen Scatology’s linkage with religion in the previous point, we are able to analyse in greater detail the importance of the devil’s role in the farce. In this farce there is a suggestion that the Devil is an unintelligent being that has been easily duped by the poor labourer. « Et maudient arme a vilain »4. In this particular line and several corresponding lines, Rutebuef cleverly implements Scatological humour to underline the stupidity and naiveté of the Devil by confusing a fart with the human soul. Since, “… devils are so stupid they cannot tell the difference between a fart and a soul.”5 This statement succinctly illustrates one of the key components of scatology in this farce. This is the method to represent a malevolent force, with a connotation that it portrays an imbecile and a creature that lacks any discernible intelligence. In addition to this, the farce utilises the devil character in order to reverse the conventional roles of ‘the deceiver’ and ‘the deceived’. This peripatetic representation of the devil could be another demonstration of its lack of intelligence in this farce. “… the demon gets a taste of his own medicine, gaining nothing but a stinking fart for all his efforts.”5 This is a possible use of superiority humour by means of scatology to further underline the inherent foolishness and candidness of this demon as it has been easily deceived by a simple labourer. The line “Ne puet estre qu'ele ne pue. »4 strengthens how the devil has been tricked by the labourer. This fart is still creating a foul stench but yet there is nothing physical that the demon can bring back to hell in relation to a human soul.
Altogether this gives the audience a clear message of how we should visualise the devil character. We should not perceive it as a being to be fearful of, but rather a being that we can mock. Now that we have established the significance of scatology in le pet dou vilain in relation to conveying the devil character, it is time to turn to how scatological humour is used in this farce to express the religious and social representations of the poor labourer in the mediaeval period. As we have already discussed the old labourer has been successful in his deception of the demon, whether this was intentional or not is unclear. Nevertheless his interaction with the devil possibly gives the contemporary reader an insight into the attitudes towards labourers during this era. Line 64 « Qu'en enfer ne en paradix. »4 provides a succinct message that the poor labourer’s soul is so corrupted and foul smelling that he is refused entry from both heaven and hell . Given that “… peasants are rejected by heaven and hell alike…”5 contemporary readers can ascertain from this line that one of the principal usages of scatological humour in this farce is to highlight the level scorn that is associated with the labouring class in a religious context. Adding to this Valerie Allens affirms that this farce is “…yet one more story that displays revulsion for the labouring estate as repulsive in their physicality…”5. As a consequence, modern readers can gather from this statement that this farce was another piece of work to employ scatology in order to emphasise the disgust the audience should feel towards the labouring class in regards to their ordures.