I’m looking pretty cool, if I may say so myself. I’ve just put on a pair of sunglasses to combat the glare we’re all accustomed to on a sunny West Campus morning. In spite of the ultraviolet protection, I squint out of habit. Standing near the entrance to Darling Library, I turn around to survey the crowds of students milling about. That’s when I see her.
A woman is gliding toward me with grace and poise. She’s headed to the library to study her morning devotionals, no doubt. She smiles at me. My mouth hangs open.
A switch in my brain flips. With two confident steps, I approach the doors of Darling Library, maintaining eye contact. My hand reaches out and I lean forward to grasp the door and pull it open in a classic gesture of gentility. My hand, however, finds no door, only air. Frantically, it clutches at empty space in a last-ditch effort to keep me upright, but it is too late. I’ve fallen all over myself. Literally.
While I wasn’t looking, the new automatic doors at the entrance to the Darling rotunda had opened before me. Once operated only manually, these doors now slide open anytime somebody nearby so much as sneezes. Here I am on the floor, cheeks burning, and no longer looking cool.
The illustration I have just posited is entirely fictional, but completely plausible nonetheless. In fact, I propose that the addition of automatic doors on this campus is nothing short of a menace to the existence of chivalry itself.
That’s right — Darling is just the beginning, the siren call of change on the horizon. Before we know it, the presence of any chivalric behavior on this campus will have been completely eradicated. Today, the library. Tomorrow? The world.
Certain persons may say, however, that this creeping change is for the better. Some feminists, for example, would love to see the archaic codes of chivalry become obsolete. Chivalry can hearken back to days of patriarchy, class distinctions and firm gender roles. At an egalitarian institution such as APU, kissing chivalry goodbye may seem like a good idea.
What do we mean, however, when we talk about chivalry? According to “Chivalry,” a book by French literary scholar Léon Gautier, chivalry was “the Christian form of the military profession: the knight [was] the Christian soldier.”
With the influence of the church heavily entrenched in Western nations, knights were expected to obey and defend the teachings of the church. There was a growing feeling that battle could be carried out in a righteous way and for righteous ends. Thus, knights were subjected to the honor code of chivalry.
I sat down with Dr. Carole Lambert, a professor of world literature and a specialist in medieval texts, to find out how this code has developed over time.
Chivalry is derived from the French “chevalier,” which literally refers to a knight, or one who rides a horse.
“I think by the 12th or 13th century we could show a movement away from the knight … to courtly love,” Lambert said.
This transition would be characterized by the knight in question doing heroic acts with the intent of wooing a woman. The importance of honor and integrity was maintained, but perhaps romanticized. This, according to Lambert, was followed by the Renaissance.
Shakespearean literature gives us clues as to how chivalry evolved, moving from the external gallant chevalier to someone with integrity, honesty and bravery.
“And that person doesn’t even need to ride a horse anymore,” said Lambert.
Thus, chivalry began to be defined by actions and less by status. Essentially, a man could show a woman that he was noble and upright even though he may not have pedigree. This trend developed through bourgeois citizens in the 18th century. After reforms in Western governments and the industrial revolution of the 19th century, chivalrous behavior became more commonplace.
It was then possible for the common man to find wealth through a stroke of luck and attempt to elevate his own status by learning good manners and etiquette.
“We have remnants in the 20th century and 21st century of holding a door for a lady or taking a hat off in church. Those are just good manners of cultured people who know how to act in society,” said Lambert. “I personally still appreciate someone holding the door for me. Often many young male students, when I’m racing, late as usual, into Wilden, you know, just stop everything. They’re racing too and just stop and make sure the door doesn’t hit me in the face.”
I remember when I was a mere child, just learning about such manners. I was exiting church with my family one bright Sunday morning, and my mother turned to me. “Jeremiah,” she said. “Would you like to know how to act like a gentleman?”
I was probably less than 5 feet tall at the time, but every inch of me replied, “Yes!” Over the next several weeks, she taught me that gentlemen open doors for ladies and help them carry groceries and are always courteous – even when they don’t feel like it. I’ve been opening doors for my momma ever since.
I was just a boy, but I began to think about what it would mean to be a man someday. As I observed my parents, I began to think about what it would mean to love a woman like my father loved my mother. Now that I’m older, I wonder what it would look like to love a wife like Christ loves his church.
These are thoughts that go far beyond opening doors, surrendering one’s seat to a woman on the trolley or walking a friend back from West Campus. However, I have to think that with every door I hold open, I learn a little bit more. I experience small amounts of service and practice honoring others in a world that isn’t so good at that anymore.
When I hold a door open at APU, I’m not always trying to point out a woman’s weaknesses or assert my dominance as the more-powerful sex. Sometimes, I stand there quietly acknowledging my own weaknesses. I think about my own pride and arrogance and how I always need to check it at the door.
If men on this campus desire to be leaders in any capacity, they need to learn to lead by serving others. Sometimes, it might involve checking your pride and letting a woman hold the door for you. The point, friends, is that we learn to serve one another as brothers and sisters who are equal before God.
The divide between feminism and chivalry is one that I think can get smaller. In fact, I see a lot of similarities between the two ideologies.
Feminism is about empowering women, yes. It is also about empowering anyone who has been disenfranchised or cast aside.
Chivalry, while originally a very male-centric idea, revolves around the same principles: defend the defenseless, esteem the lowly, honor God. Is this so different?
We can learn from these two schools of thought. We can certainly learn to have civilized conversations about them.
In the meantime, can we get rid of those pesky automatic doors, please?