home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

Word Gems 

self-knowledge, authentic living, full humanity, continual awakening

Soulmate, Myself:
The Wedding Song

First Tier of 50 Poems 

24. Farai un vers de dreit nien

I will make a verse about pure nothing

return to '100' contents page 

Commentary by ChatGPT

First Tier of 50 Poems: a curated list selected not merely for fame but because they illuminate the philosophy of love embedded in troubadour lyric culture (c. 1150–1250) as opposed to definitions of love imposed by church and king.

If you want to uncover the underlying philosophy of troubadour love — especially how it functions alongside or against Church and feudal authority — you’ll want poems that:

• Define fin’amor (refined / courtly love)

• Reflect on secrecy, loyalty, merit (pretz), and worth

• Stage debates about love’s ethics (tensons / partimens)

• Critique kings, clergy, or power structures

• Show women’s voices (trobairitz)

• Address Crusade politics and moral authority

• Wrestle with desire vs. spiritual idealization

Farai un vers de dreit nien – William IX of Aquitaine (c.1100)

1. Farai un vers de dreit nien,
I will make a verse about pure nothing,

2. Non er de mi ni d’autra gen,
it will not be about me nor about other people,

3. Non er d’amor ni de joven,
it will not be about love nor youth,

4. Ni de ren au,
nor about anything else,

5. Qu’enans fo trobatz en durmen
for it was found while sleeping

6. Sus un chivau.
on a horse.

7. No sai en qual hora’m fui natz,
I do not know at what hour I was born,

8. No soi alegres ni iratz,
I am neither happy nor angry,

9. No soi estranhs ni soi privatz,
I am neither a stranger nor familiar,

10. Ni no ai cor,
nor do I have a heart,

11. Qu’anc non fui d’amor endormatz
for I was never put to sleep by love

12. Ni n’ai paor.
nor do I fear it.

13. Qu’eu ai una dompna trobada,
For I have found a lady,

14. Non sai qual es, ni de qual lada,
I do not know who she is, nor from where,

15. Ni m’es amiga ni parrada,
she is neither my friend nor my kin,

16. Ni no la vi,
nor have I seen her,

17. Qu’anc non m’en fo gensor donada
for no greater lady was ever given to me

18. Ni no’m fo vi.
nor did she ever exist for me.

19. Qu’eu ai una amor en tal loc,
For I have a love in such a place,

20. No sai si es de glatz o foc,
I do not know if it is of ice or fire,

21. No la’m pot far fred ni caloc,
it can neither chill nor warm me,

22. Ni no’m pot senh,
nor can it mark me,

23. Qu’anc non la vi per nulh joc
for I never saw it in any way

24. Ni no la’m genh.
nor does it deceive me.

25. Qu’eu ai una amiga non sai quala,
For I have a lady friend, I know not which,

26. Que no m’es ni prop ni lunhana,
who is neither near nor far,

27. Ni non es autra ni pargana,
nor is she another nor the same,

28. Ni no m’agrada,
nor does she please me,

29. Qu’anc non la vi en semblan’a plana
for I never saw her clearly

30. Ni no’m desplada.
nor does she displease me.

31. Qu’eu ai una benvolenssa,
For I have a goodwill (love),

32. Que no m’es pros ni no m’es nensa,
that is neither useful nor foolish,

33. Ni no’m val mais que no’m menç’a,
nor is it worth more than nothing to me,

34. Ni no’m estor,
nor does it hinder me,

35. Qu’anc non la vi ni no’m destenç’a
for I never saw it nor did it depart

36. Ni no’m valor.
nor is it of value to me.

37. Fait ai lo vers, no sai de cui,
I have made the verse, I do not know about whom,

38. E trametrai lo a celui
and I will send it to the one

39. Que lo’m trameta per autrui,
who will send it to me through another,

40. Enves Peitau,
toward Poitou,

41. Que m’ajuda de son estui
so that he may help me with his case

42. A trobar clau.
to find the key.

Completeness Note

This is a complete version of the poem, including all 6 coblas plus the tornada (lines 37–42).
No truncation; full text preserved in accordance with standard scholarly editions of this lyric.

Commentary

Paraphrase:
The speaker begins by saying he will compose a poem about “nothing”—and he means it seriously. It will not be about himself, nor about anyone else, nor about love, youth, or any recognizable subject. In fact, the poem itself came to him in a strange, half-conscious state—while he was asleep on horseback—suggesting it emerges from dream or absurdity rather than intention.

He then describes himself as equally indeterminate: he does not know when he was born, and he exists in no emotional state—neither happy nor angry. He belongs nowhere socially, neither stranger nor familiar, and claims not even to possess a “heart,” meaning he lacks the inner seat of feeling. Love has never affected him—he has neither been overwhelmed by it nor fears it.

Yet immediately he contradicts himself: he claims to have found a lady. But this lady is unknowable—he does not know who she is or where she comes from. She is neither his friend nor his relative; in fact, he has never even seen her. Despite this, he declares that no greater lady has ever been given to him—while simultaneously saying she has never existed for him. The “lady” is both supreme and nonexistent.

He continues this pattern with “love” itself. He claims to possess a love, but it exists in no definable place. He cannot tell whether it is cold like ice or hot like fire. It has no effect on him—neither warming nor chilling him, leaving no mark. He has never perceived it in any way, and yet insists it is not deceptive. It is a love that neither appears nor acts, yet somehow is.

He repeats the paradox with a “lady friend”: she is neither near nor far, neither distinct nor identical, neither pleasing nor displeasing. He has never seen her clearly, yet she produces no emotional reaction at all. She exists in a state beyond all categories.

Likewise, his “goodwill” or affection is neither useful nor useless, neither valuable nor worthless, neither present nor absent. It has never appeared to him, nor left him, nor had any measurable worth. It is a kind of non-existent existence—emotion emptied of all content.

Finally, he concludes by saying he has made this poem without knowing its subject. He will send it along through intermediaries, toward Poitou, hoping that someone there can help him “find the key.” The poem itself is a puzzle, and even its creator does not fully understand it. The “key” suggests meaning exists—but remains hidden.

Glossary
• dreit nien – “pure nothing”; absolute emptiness or absence of subject
• gen – people, others, mankind
• joven – youth; often associated with courtly vitality and love
• trobatz – “found” or “composed”; also evokes the act of troubadour creation
• chivau – horse
• estranhs – stranger, outsider
• privatz – familiar, intimate, socially connected
• cor – heart; the seat of emotion, especially love
• dompna – lady; typically a noblewoman in courtly love tradition
• parrada – kin, relative
• gensor – more noble, more excellent
• glatz – ice
• foc – fire
• senh – mark, sign, trace
• genh – deceive, trick
• lunhana – distant, far away
• semblan’a – appearance, outward form
• benvolenssa – goodwill, affection, inclination of love
• pros – useful, beneficial
• nensa – foolish, trivial
• estor – hindrance, obstacle
• estui – case, situation, condition
• trobar clau – “to find the key”; to discover meaning or solution

Historical note:
This poem belongs to the earliest phase of troubadour lyric, emerging in southern France around 1100 in the courts of Aquitaine. Unlike later, more refined courtly love poetry, this piece is playful, ironic, and even subversive. It deliberately undermines the emerging conventions of love poetry—especially the idealization of a noble lady and the emotional intensity of devotion—by turning them into paradoxes and negations. It reflects a court culture that delighted in wit, verbal games, and intellectual display, where poetry could be both performance and puzzle.

Author:
William IX of Aquitaine (1071–1126) was one of the earliest known troubadours—and significantly, a powerful nobleman (Duke of Aquitaine). His poetry often blends boldness, humor, sensuality, and irreverence. Unlike later troubadours who systematized courtly love, William’s work feels experimental, even mischievous. This poem likely arises from a courtly environment where poetry functioned as both entertainment and intellectual challenge. Its riddling nature suggests it may have been performed aloud, inviting listeners to puzzle over its meaning.

Modern connection:
The poem feels strikingly modern—almost like absurdist or existential literature. It resembles the way people today sometimes describe feelings they cannot define: relationships that are “something but nothing,” emotions that exist but cannot be explained. It captures the confusion of trying to name inner experience in a world where categories break down.

Deeper significance:
At first glance, the poem seems like a joke—but it is more precise than that. It systematically strips away every stable category: identity, emotion, love, presence, absence. Everything is described only through negation or contradiction. Love, especially, is presented as something that both exists and does not exist—felt and unfelt, known and unknown.

This points to an early stage in troubadour thought: love is not yet fully codified as the exalted, suffering devotion we later associate with courtly love. Instead, here it is unstable, undefined, almost unreal. William is probing the limits of language—can love even be described? Or does it dissolve into contradiction when we try?

Over time, troubadour poetry moves from this playful negation → toward a highly structured ideal of love:

• from paradox and ambiguity
• to a disciplined emotional system (devotion, longing, service to the lady)

In later poets, love becomes a refining force, shaping the self through desire and restraint. But here, at the beginning, we see something more experimental: love as a conceptual problem, almost an illusion.

The “nothingness” of the poem is not emptiness—it is a space where meaning has not yet been fixed. The speaker’s inability to define love suggests that love is beyond ordinary categories: neither presence nor absence, neither pleasure nor pain. It is something that resists being grasped directly.

The final line—“to find the key”—is crucial. It implies that meaning is hidden, not absent. Love, like the poem itself, is a riddle. The troubadour tradition will spend generations trying to “find that key,” gradually transforming love from an unsayable paradox into a central organizing force of inner life.

Brief summary of the entire poem

In Farai un vers de dreit nien, William IX of Aquitaine (1071–1126) playfully constructs a poem “about nothing” by describing everything—himself, a lady, and love itself—through contradictions and negations. The speaker claims to feel nothing, know nothing, and experience nothing, yet continually asserts the existence of a mysterious, undefined love and lady who both exist and do not exist. The poem becomes a deliberate riddle, undermining normal meaning and ending with the poet sending it off in hopes that someone else can “find the key.”

At first glance, it doesn’t look like a troubadour poem at all—and that’s exactly why it belongs there.

1. The tradition was not fixed yet
When William IX of Aquitaine (1071–1126) was writing (early 1100s), troubadour poetry was still being invented. The later, familiar model—devoted lover, distant noble lady, refined emotional suffering—had not yet solidified. So this poem shows the tradition in formation, not at its final stage.

2. It’s a courtly performance of wit
Troubadour poetry wasn’t only about love—it was also about displaying intelligence. Courts valued verbal skill, paradox, and cleverness. This poem is essentially a game: a deliberately paradoxical composition that tests how far language can go. In that sense, it fits perfectly into the social world of troubadours, where poetry was as much intellectual sport as emotional expression.

3. It defines the rules by breaking them
By saying “this poem is not about love,” and then constantly circling around love, William is doing something foundational:

• he shows what love poetry could be
• by refusing to do it directly

In other words, this poem helps establish the boundaries of troubadour lyric by violating them. Later poets will define themselves against this kind of playful negation.

4. It anticipates core themes (in negative form)
Even though everything is denied, the key elements are already there:

• the mysterious lady
• the inner experience of love
• the difficulty of expressing it

But here they appear as contradictions. Later troubadours will turn these into a coherent emotional system. So this poem is like a “negative blueprint” of courtly love.

5. It reflects a deeper medieval idea: truth through paradox
Medieval thought often accepted that some truths—especially about love, God, or the self—cannot be stated directly. They must be approached through paradox or contradiction. This poem applies that idea to love: by saying what love is not, it gestures toward something that escapes definition.

Bottom line:
It’s included in troubadour poetry because it shows the tradition at its origin point—experimental, playful, and probing. Rather than a polished example of courtly love, it’s the moment before the system solidifies, when love is still a riddle and poetry is still figuring out how to speak about it.