Chivalry takes on many forms in modern day discourse.

Some emphasize a higher need

for it, some analyze the truth behind it, and some ridicule it for its barbarity. The creative

structuring of My Chivalric Fiasco by George Saunders is meant to mock the similarities

between the seemingly barbaric era of chivalry and our current ‘civilized’ society. Saunders

could have related this strange chivalric story to critique any other time period but chose the

present for a reason, as his choice is a deliberate satirical admonishment towards the supported

ideals found in our society today. Even before taking the first leap into the text, the title My

Chivalric Fiasco should indicate the anticipated approach towards chivalry. ‘Fiasco’ in no way

insinuates a classic romantic narrative, but rather suggests that the following story is one of wild

failure and humiliation. Noticing this intent encourages critical hesitance in viewing the way

Saunders paints chivalric norms when analyzing current social norms.

The fictionalized and romanticized version of chivalry people are exposed to today not

only stems from movies and texts of the like, but commercialized fairs that travel across America

each summer. Saunders is playing into this commonality in hopes of reaching the audience with

his point about chivalry in a way that makes most sense to them. If you asked someone if they

have ever attended a Renaissance fair, they would most likely say yes, or if not, would have

definitely heard of one. With the national Renaissance fair touring the United States every

summer, people are constantly exposed to romanticized depictions of knighthood and chivalry as

it functioned in medieval daily life. Saunders’ initial setting of the short story, sounding

completely nonsensical at first, is in fact that of a classic Renaissance fair. Turkey legs and all.

The only anomalous aspect of this tale is the presence of a drug that seemingly ‘transforms’ it’s

users into perfect practitioners of chivalric deeds. The sheer goofiness of this notion playing out,

as well as the intentional sentence shaping should definitely raise curiosity in readers. In the text,

1
after said KnightLyfe® kicks in, the change in punctuation and vocabulary is downright comical

as Ted verbalizes, “Turning to Martha, I requested, by inflection of my Head, her Assent in these

Statements, and Confirmation of the Truth of that which I had Declared. But alas! The wench did

not Affirm me. Only drop’d her Eyes, as if in Shame, and fled that Place.” (Saunders 212). This

frequent capitalization is common in medieval texts, used to personalize abstract ideas--Love and

Generosity--or because most texts were written in poetic form. Now knowing that Saunders has

also included stylistic writing choices to deliver his point, one can only assume that he will

utilize these forms of writing as ways to portray additional clues in the text to further enhance his

argument against modern chivalric transgressions.

While in the first stages of the text the language choice and structuring may be

disorientating to the reader, there is a very clear suggestion of sexual misconduct that, if caught

onto quickly, will give purpose to the events that follow. This deliberate addition of sexual

influence in the text along with the chivalric condition to reprimand abusers of said

influence--while oftentimes hypocritical--is Saunders’ way of paving the path towards a more

realistic definition of chivalry in the counterfeit reality we live in today. Not even half a page in,

Ted recounts that “Don Murray flew past me, looking frazzled. Then I heard a sob. On her back

near the armor pile I found Martha from Scullery, peasant skirt up around her waist.” (Saunders

203). We then witness Don Murray bribing Martha and Ted for their silence with $1,000 and a

raise, as well as convincing Martha that it was nothing more than a “...voluntary fling.”

(Saunders 204) which, in today’s society, would not be permitted. However, accounts of excused

wrongdoing can be found even in historical chivalric narrative, such as Perceval by Chretien de

Troyes. In the beginning of the story, we can sense the naivete of Perceval from his first, irksome

encounter with the knights. However innocent his persistent questions may be, it sheds light onto

2
his initial character before becoming a seasoned knight. Spoiler alert: it’s not ideal. As readers,

we witness this foul self-conduct as Perceval embarks on his first encounters as a self-proclaimed

‘knight’ equipped only with the advice his mother gave him. After spotting and entering a lady’s

tent in the wilderness, he “...embraced her clumsily because he knew no other way: he stretched

her out beneath himself, but she resisted mightily and squirmed away as best she could. Yet her

resistance was in vain, for the boy kissed her repeatedly, twenty times as the story says,

regardless of whether she liked it or not...” (Troyes 389). His encounter with the lady is

embarrassing to witness, however, it raises the question if Perceval’s assumed definition of

chivalry in the beginning, is a large contributor to the doubt other knights have towards him. Do

different assumptions of chivalry lead to chivalric violence simply because one individual’s

interpretation of the flawed practice contradicts others? Saunders may very well be hinting

towards a similar theory when Ted is portrayed just as villainous as Don Murray. I digress

however, as that topic could formulate another thesis. The primary takeaway to focus on from

Perceval’s encounter is that the large amount of good deeds he performs as a legitimate knight

cancel out his less moral acts from the exposition of the story. The hypocrisy emerges when in

My Chivalric Fiasco, readers recognize that even in the present day, shortcuts are used to avoid

punishment.

As we discussed before, Don Murray using monetary methods to ensure the silence of his

colleagues is a pristine example Saunders has included of the rewarded absolution of guilt we see

in medieval texts as well. If you as a knight were able to successfully erase any trace of a

misdeed, people would cherish you longer, and you would remain in high standing with your

leaders as well. However, in Don Murray’s case, that absolution didn’t last long. After the

KnightLyfe® has already peaked with its influence on Ted, and he has addressed to the crowd

3
that “...Don Murray had taken Foul Advantage of Martha, placing her against her Will, his Rod

into her Womanhood...” (Saunders 211), one may believe that he has successfully avenged his

colleague Martha. While it may seem that way at first, remember that this short story is intended

to mock the hypocrisy of chivalry. Chivalrous and honorable deeds to one man may not appear

the same to another. Don Murray still gets away with his acts as Ted recounts that “Security,

being then summoned by Don Murray, didst arrive and, making much of the Opportunity, had

Good Sport of me, delivering many harsh Blows to my Head & Body.” (Saunders 212)

signifying that even bad people can cover up their misdeeds if enough effort to do so is taken

advantage of. The fabrication of past and present as well as fictional and factual chivalry

becomes clear when we realize that even ‘chivalrous’ people would partake similar, if not worse,

actions while still claiming to be advocates of peace and generosity.

Saunders expertly sets up the framework for readers to begin theorizing on what chivalry

really was. Does ‘chivalry’ mean honor and goodwill? Or is it an abstraction for the horrors that

lurk underneath the consciences of those who swear by it? While Saunders nudges along the

progression of the well known discourse “Is Chivalry dead?”, his work is meant to influence the

reader to connect and theorize for themselves if chivalry continues to contribute to society today,

or if it remains to be an echo of a dysfunctional and corrupt societal practice.