"Hic Iathus Arthurus, Rex Quondam, Rexque Futurus"

Here lies Arthur, the once and future King.

And I’m off!
So much to say! It seems from Brants answers to my Arthur question that he lands solidly in the camp of a Historical Arthur - by way of declaring himself to Norma Lorre Goodrich. Parke Godwin is another author who writes from a Historical perspective in his “Firelord” (Arthur) and “Beloved Exile” (Guenevere) and “The Last Rainbow” (Saint Patrick - ??? indeed!) Anne Berthelot in “King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table” goes off about whether the real Arthur was Breton, Pictish, Roman, or Saxon. Get right back to the source with Geoffrey Ashe. There are a lot of others who will look at what a “Historical Arthur” would have been like from social to archeological perspectives.

All the way on the other end of the spectrum is the utterly magical, comedic bordering on satyric “The Once and Future King” by T.H. White. Or I guess if you want to go all the way, “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” is all the way at the other end of the spectrum.

I am an Arthurian from way back. The following are my opinions - for those of you who are interested but just beginning. Many children begin with T.H. White via Disney’s “The Sword in the Stone” which is done on “The Once and Future King.” I think this is rather a shame as it is almost patronizing, moralizing and I REALLY hate what he does to Merlin. I will admit up front, for anyone who doesn’t know that Merlin Ambrosius, Myrddin Emrys, is not only my favorite character of the cannon, but my favorite character of all time. If you have seen my Blog on the Jung Archetypes you will see Merlin appear as my Animus. I hate T.H. White’s bumbling fat wizard with spindly legs, even though I like his concept of living backwards.

I believe, all in all, that Mary Stewart’s “The Crystal Cave” series is my favorite Arthurian series. Mary Stewart often gets discounted because her other books are “best sellers” but her Arthur series is rock solid as far as scholarship goes. Stewart uses magic, but it is a good deal more “real” than that of T.H. White. It is based on extrasensory perception, including psi powers such as pyro-kinesis and a great deal of mysticism. The series is also really based on Merlin, another reason I probably like this series best. Stewart’s characters are well drawn and real as well, Merlin is a sensitive man, devoted to his country, and to his king, compelled by the 'will of the gods' to save his country, and doomed by his misplaced trust and impulsiveness.

Probably my second favorite series is Susan Cooper’s “The Dark is Rising” Series. The thing is, to even tell you it is an Arthurian series is a spoiler. These are children’s books, but I don’t make distinctions between good children’s books and adult books. I like them just as well. This series is, as someone noted, very uneven, however. The second book “The Dark is Rising” is one of the best books around, I adore it. It has some of the best “feel” of menace and darkness to be found and again, as someone mentioned, it holds tension all the way through. The first book of the series “Over Sea, Under Stone” seems like a Dick and Jane reader by comparison. The Third Book “Greenwitch” I have always liked, but it isn’t of the quality of TDIR. The Fourth Book “The Grey King” won the Newbury Prize (where TDIR was only an honor book.) But it isn’t as good. The last book “Silver on the Tree” is chaotic to the point of “Oh Wow WHAT is going on” at times as it seems she is trying to get as much myth packed in as possible and is running out of book. Still, I like the series very much.

Marion Zimmer Bradley’s “The Mists of Avalon” is a classic, of course. It is a problem book for me. I’ve read it about twelve times. I absolutely love the “feel” of it. There is an otherworldliness that is completely divine. But. This was to have been the story told from the woman’s perspective - and all the women (with the exception of Vivienne the “Lady of the Lake”) are such weak characters it’s amazing they can walk. I detest the Guenevere (which is not particularly unusual) Morgaine, who is the protagonist, is supposed to be being rescued from being the villain, but instead she just turns out being so wishy washy that she ends up losing everything because she is too weak to take a stand in what she believes in. I also don’t care for what she does with Merlin - which is make “The Merlin of Britain” a post rather than a person, so that through out the book there are several different Merlins. I’ll grant it’s plausible, but I don’t like it. And yet . . . I have dreams where I am gliding on a boat through thick, thick, mists on still waters . . . I stand up and raise my hands and bring them down suddenly and part the mists and they open to reveal . . . Zion Canyon. Yes sir. Go figure.

Stephen Lawhead, whose books in the series inclued “Taliesin” “Arthur” and “Merlin” (not a lot of imagination about titles here!) does, indeed, begin his tale in Atlantis, which BTW isn’t that far out, it is an established link of the genre; you’ll see it appear again in “The Mists of Avalon” for example. There is a tie in between the “the summer country” where Arthur was said to have been taken after his death and Atlantis, but, of course, there is a tie in with just about every thing that is said to be floating “out there somewhere” . . . Hy Brasil, Avalon, The Isle of Glass, Llyr and even Lemuria. Lawhead brings Taliesin into the equasion and also has books in this series titled “Arthur” and “Merlin.” The Taliesin/Merlin thing is interesting and often authors even go so far as to portray them as being the same person.

I mentioned that I tend to historically hate Guenevere. It is, of course, because she is always portrayed as a nitwit and, as in the case of poor Eve, gets the blame for the eternal triangle. For a series where the Guenevere is not only the protagonist, but also a character that you will actually like - try the Persia Woolley trilogy Child of the Northern Spring, Queen of the Summer Stars, Guinevere: The Legend in Autumn . And by Nancy MacKenzie: The Child Queen: The Tale of Guinevere and King Arthur, The High Queen and Queen of Camelot.

Not to be Sneezed at:
The Mabinogion: Arthur's first major mention as a fabled king in literature appears in a collection of Medieval Welsh tales known as the Mabinogion, which was the title given to them by Lady Charlotte Guest who translated them into English in the mid-19th Century. These are to be found in their most complete form in the 14th Century manuscript known as the Red Book of Hergest. The tales are thought to date from the songs of a much earlier period, when the bards of both the Breton and Gallic peoples shared common legends and passed down their myths through speech anywhere between the mid-11th Century and 1250 AD. It is from the Mabinogion that the Lloyd Alexander’s Prydain Tales are taken also.

Malory's Morte D'Arthur: Sir Thomas Malory was something of a rogue. In fact, 'something of a rogue' is an understatement. He was arrested and charged at various points with such crimes as cattle rustling, ambushing with intent to murder, stealing valuables from an abbey, rape, extortion and insulting an abbot. Still, it is to Malory that all subsequent chroniclers and authors of works about Arthur owe a great debt. He wrote the Morte D'Arthur, the single most important collection of Arthurian myth in the English language, during his final and most lengthy imprisonment. Based on all the available sources Malory could muster, principally the French prose Vulgate Cycle, this work set out to reclaim Arthur as an English monarch and legend, not merely an amusement for French nobility. Hence the definite placement of the mythical Arthurian kingdom of Logres to Britain, and the dominance of patriotism over chivalry. You see the Brits and the French were at it even then. Mallory’s greatest achievement was not as a writer, actually, but as an editor. He took all the work available and ruthlessly chopped out everything he thought unnecessary or overblown . . . this consisted of a lot of the “romantic” elements (like Lancelot soul searching for 40 pages.) What he left in was a lot of blood and guts and good old fashioned gore.

Tennyson: Alfred, Lord Tennyson, who wrote The Lady of Shalott and Idylls of the King, which were both based in the mythic and mystic setting of the Arthurian legends. I happen to adore Tennyson and both of these poems.

FINALLY! No one ever mentions this, but The Musical CAMELOT, not only has some enchanting, beautiful music, the book for the play is charming, funny, witty and absolutely delightful. It was done on Broadway by Richard Burton and Julie Andrews - Robert Goulet and Roddy McDowall. When I get my time machine, that is one of the first places I am going to go. It was turned into a very, very sad movie in which Richard Harris was an OK Arthur, but Vanessa Redgrave whispered her way through Guenevere instead of singing and the Lancelot sounded like he didn’t even speak English - his fake French accent was so bad. So WHY isn’t this fantastically darling Lerner & Loewe, Moss Hart musical done more often?

Because there are only two female parts in it, both are high, high soprano’s and one of them only has one song. You go to case this show and you are essentially casting chorus and one woman. Nobody will do that, so it never gets done. Boo! It is one of my favorites. The book is good enough that if you ever see it (as a play) in the library, it is worth checking out and reading. If you ever get the chance to see it live, I would do so. I wouldn’t watch the very sad movie, however.

The end of this movie just about sums up what I love the most about the Arthurian legend however. My father and I used to have little mock battles about Arthur. He would tell me that he didn’t exist. Then in the next breath he would tell me he was a composit of a bunch of “ragged chieftans.” Then he would tell me that the Dane’s whipped him soundly and sent him into the hills. “Rolf the Ganger beat his pants off and sent him skulking off into Wales.”

My Daddy was a little ethnocentric. I would smile at this point and say, “So Dad, you think Rolf the Ganger won, do you?”
“Of course he did.”
“Do you think anyone has ever heard of Rolf the Ganger, Dad?”
“What?”
“How many people do you think have heard of Arthur of Britain?”
“What?”
“Who do you think really won?”
“I’m talking about History!”
“I’m talking about reality.”

The Pen is Mightier than the Sword.

In the last scene of Camelot Arthur sees his dream go up in smoke. He sees everything he has worked for turn into nothing. The “kinder, gentler” world that he tried to create is gone and all his knights are killing and raping and pillaging again. He believes himself a failure and says to himself, “no one will ever even know. It will all be forgotten . . .” Then you can see in his face that he has realized something. He finds a small boy named Tom who has stowed away with the army and he knights him right there on the field. He tells the boy his task as a knight, the task of his life, is to make sure the story of Camelot is never forgotten. Because as long as the story is told, as long as people remember - Camelot will live. Then he sings the final verse of “Camelot”

Each evening, from December to December,
Before you drift to sleep upon your cot,
Think back on all the tales that you remember

of Camelot.
Ask ev'ry person if he's heard the story,
And tell it strong and clear if he has not,
That once there was a fleeting wisp of glory
Called Camelot.
Camelot! Camelot!
Now say it out with pride and joy!
TOM:
Camelot! Camelot!
ARTHUR:
Yes, Camelot, my boy!
Where once it never rained till after sundown,
By eight a.m. the morning fog had flown...
Don't let it be forgot
That once there was a spot
For one brief shining moment that was known
As Camelot.

Then Arthur tells Tom to run behind the lines . . . always behind the lines, where he will be safe and live to tell his tale. Tom runs off - usually into the theater - Arthur watches him go and the last lines of the play are Arthur yelling: Run boy, Run Boy, Run!