Masculine Perspective of Love

During my reading of The Art of Courtly Love by Andreas Capellanus, and of the language and focus of the writing, specifically that of the chapter “Between What Persons Love May Exist” on page 30, a consistent, persistent use of an invariably uniform undertone was made apparent. Throughout the entirety of the reading, there was a distinct focus upon masculinity, but the language used was also masculine in perspective. Most of the points that are made are done so through an almost blatant objectification of women, in such cases men are the ‘lovers’ and women are that thing which is to be loved. This contrasts with the modern use of the term lovers, which is often considered in the plural sense to include both of the people who are in love. The use in this writing, however, seems to indicate that only a man may be a lover to his ‘beloved’ and that this status of being a lover is one which is exclusive to the male gender.

            This does not mean that the woman, or beloved, is necessarily looked down upon, or that it would be impermissible for a woman to be a lover, but rather indicates to a modern reader the way medieval men and women thought about love. Indeed, some of these traditions of a man being stereotypically chivalrous or doting to a woman have carried themselves onward into the modern age, but our language and usage of it has evolved, to some degree. As Capellanus states, “Every attempt of a lover tends toward the enjoyment of the embraces of her whom he loves…” (Capellanus, p. 30).  This sheds some insight on the thinking of the beloved woman being a static or inactive party which must be acted upon by a male lover.