Literary Analysis
The passage contained within the lines 63-88 describes the process by which the Lord transforms into a werewolf, and then back into a human. This passage sets up a metaphor which extends into the rest of the poem: the idea that the Lord’s clothes represent civilization and his humanness. He says to his Lady, when she asks where he hides his clothes:
“Oh, I’ll not tell you that:
I would be lost, you must believe,
If it were seen just how I live.
Bisclavret would I be, forever;
Never could I be helped then, never,
Till I for back my clothes, my own;
That’s why their cache must not be known.” (Marie de France 72-78).
Without his clothes, he would be lost from society, and would be forced to remain in the woods as a wolf. Essentially, the Lord believes that in his wolf form, he lacks the qualities that make him human. We typically associate humanness with morality and goodness, and especially with the concept of a soul. However, throughout the course of this poem, Marie de France subverts this idea by showing that even when he has been trapped in his wolf form, the Lord shows integrity by behaving gently and respecting his King. His behaviour shows that his human soul is still there even when he appears to be fully animal.
The Lord’s behaviour is contrasted with that of his wife who is shown to be selfish and shallow, even though she herself is not considered to be a monster. An example of this is when the Lord tells his wife that he is a werewolf. Marie de France states that she “could not lie with him again” (Marie de France 102). The Lady shows little concern for her husband, or even horror for any other reason than the fact that she no longer wants to sleep with him.
Looking at the morality of the Lord and his Lady, this poem asks and answers the question of what makes us human beings; of what attributes we should value most. The arc of the story suggests that Marie de France believed that simply being a werewolf does not make one a monster, but rather that a person’s goodness, wolf or not, determines whether they should be considered monstrous. This conclusion makes the use of the Lord’s clothing as a symbol for human society all the more integral to the story. The clothes represent our outward appearance, or our mask of civility; they are what make us palatable to other people, but they are not what make us human, and they are not what make us good.
This theme of what constitutes humanity has always been a popular inspiration for art. Whether we are studying a classic book like Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, or more recent films dealing with the reality of AI technology, such as Ex Machina or Her, it is a question we cannot seem to stop attempting to answer; does physical form make someone human and give them a soul, or is it something less tangible, having to do with the way we conduct ourselves, and the moral standards we adopt?
Another literary creature the werewolf in this poem can be compared to is Grendel in the epic poem Beowulf. Both are effectively shunned by society. Grendel lives away from humanity because he is a descendant of Cain, and therefore is considered to be inherently evil (Beowulf 106). The werewolf is isolated because of the form he takes once he loses his clothes. However, each monster has a radically different way of responding to their situation. Grendel is resentful, and attacks the Danes. The werewolf shows the King kindness, and refrains from attacking anyone but the people who harmed him. Beowulf shows a man triumphing over evil through physical combat. Bisclavret shows a hero who triumphs by remaining moral in the face of betrayal by someone he loves. Beowulf, on the surface, provides a less nuanced look at good versus evil, but a closer read shows an almost ironic subversion of the traditional hero’s story. Beowulf himself defeats first Grendel, then Grendel’s mother, and finally, the dragon which kills him. At the end of the poem, Beowulf’s people are left unprotected, and because of his actions during his life, they now have many enemies to contend with. The story can be interpreted as a cautionary tale against valuing traditional heroism too highly. Just as Beowulf is an imperfect hero, Grendel is an imperfect monster. Instead of being unfailingly evil, there are moments when we are encouraged to view Grendel in a more sympathetic light. For example, when Grendel is dying:
"Grendel was driven under the fen-banks, fatally hurt,
to his desolate lair. His days were numbered,
the end of his life was coming over him,
he knew it for certain." (Beowulf 818-822).
We not only sympathize with Grendel in this moment, we actually read in his perspective: “the end of his life was coming over him/ he knew it for certain.” (Beowulf 821-822).
Grendel and the Bisclavret are both cast-offs, and both poems provide a more complex study of goodness and heroism than the traditional good-versus-bad paradigm. In Beowulf, the hero is not infallibly good, and the monster is not devoid of humanity. In Bisclavret, the hero actually is a monster, while the villain is a human being who makes monstrous choices.