Every author has an Arthur...
Nov. 15th, 2008 04:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zalenaAlright, ya'll... I'm doing a review on Philip Reeve's HERE LIES ARTHUR and thought I'd use this space to do a little riffing. My review is almost complete, but I'm having some second thoughts about the book and my review.
Initially, I didn't like the book very much. This is a brutal, rationalist, Arthur. No magic. No chivalry. Certainly no honor. Instead, Arthur is a warlord who is consolidating power through a lot of strong-arming and the state craft of Myrddin. Myrddin orchestrates some events (Lady of the Lake) and covers up others (putting heroic spin on nasty things Arthur does, like massacres).
But here I am finishing a pedestrian, plot-driven review wondering if I need to tie it to the larger Arthur canon. (Example: Other rationalist Arthur's include: Mary Stewart's CRYSTAL CAVE series. Or other 'girl power' Arthur's include Jane Yolen's SWORD OF THE RIGHTFUL KING, (which I also remember not liking very much, though I can no longer remember why, and that was back in the days when I had a no longer accessible Open Diary. My entries are on disk, but it would likely be a lengthy task to find them.)
Then suddenly it hits me. What makes Arthur powerful is not the magic [I mean, who cares about a magic sword. I've always liked the Muppet Babies interpretation of the 'Singing Sword,' a sword that sings like Ethel Merman and is so annoying anyone who finds it quickly wants to abandon it], but the relationships. There are primal example of human forces of love, friendship, betrayal, revenge, etc. For example, I've long felt that George Lucas wimped out when he didn't go for the OBVIOUS love triangle inherent in the Obi Wan-Anikin-Padme relationship, including the homoerotic undertones that have always carried in Arthur tales.
Reeve understands the relationships. He also includes hints of some of the bizarre sexual undercurrents. His main character is a female who undergoes numerous transformations (in keeping with his version's Welsh origins, thank you very much). Not only does she swim 'like an otter' (the first tip-off we're in that territory), she plays Lady of the Lake, manufactures the Grail, spends half the book as a boy, and the second half as girl. She is also the first person to realize Peredur (Welsh predecessor to Percival) is also in disguise. A boy disguised as a girl.
[Gwyna loves Bedwyr. Bedwyr loves Gwynhwyfar. Gwynhwyfar is bonded to Arthur. Gwyna loves Peredur. Peredur doesn't get it. Nobody seems to be able to love anybody in their proper form... There is even reference to that weird Mabinogian tale about Blodeuwedd, the woman made out of flowers and the betrayal/transformation that follows.]
Sure we have the Arthur, Gwynhwyfar, Bedwyr triangle (no Lancelot: he's a later French addition, and Reeve seems very interested in limiting this tale to the lower part of Britain), but Arthur isn't so much a character as a force. Instead of being the unifying force of the righteous British Empire around which the narrative revolves, he's a ruthless warlord. A vision of almost unbearable violence that requires some kind of narrative split to tolerate. So Gwynhwyfar falls in love with one of his crippled warriors. (Brilliant take on both Bedivere, and the Fisher King.) Myrddin makes him out to be some kind of uniting force that will end violence and bring about a golden age of wisdom. They all fall prey to illusion, even thinking it's one they've created and/or can control, when their realities become to unbearable to tolerate.
And what follows: more violence. Arthur kills Bedwyr after finding out he's been cuckolded. Then realizing his actions have the potential to start a blood feud, he sends out a band of his closest friends and kinsmen (including Cai/Kay) into an ambush where they are all killed. He destroys all witnesses with the exception of Gwyna, who everyone seems to forget exists.
Gwyna returns to an ailing Myrddin, who it turns out, has always loved her like a father and is dying of a broken heart. Arthur is not the man he hoped he would be, and he wasted his life and energy on Arthur instead of fulfilling a more loving role with Gwyna. (Even this element of the story is a little creepy and has a psycho-sexual element.) He dies. Gwyna stuffs him into a hollow tree because the ground is frozen.
This is a villainous Arthur in a very minor key. And it is not about the redeeming power of stories, it's about their manipulative powers. And the air of tragedy that often floats behind them: loss, regret, betrayal, illusion.
It seems there are several questions here for both in the public and private sphere of tale-telling. First, we live in an age of almost unlimited access to information. How do we know what's true? If everything is being spun to influence our opinion, how can we discern between the Rightful King, and the Evil Warlord?
But worse, and perhaps more importantly, how do we apply the powers of discernment in our own lives? Reeve's book portrays Myrddin as a powerful manipulator of narrative, who falls prey to his own lies. And poor Gwyna can't seem to find anyone who will love her in her proper shape. (Alas, this is often the fate of shape-shifters.) In some ways, this is how most of the traditional Arthur tales end as well. The undoing of Merlin the Enchanter is enchantment.
All of this seems a bit heavy for a promotional YA website. But I thought I needed to at least write it down. To close the two following questions...
I've surmised that every author has an Arthur, which is to say either the Arthur they most love, or the Arthur they would like to add to the canon. So, here are my queries:
* What is your favorite Arthur adaptation?
* What would be your addition to Arthurian legend, should you create one?
Initially, I didn't like the book very much. This is a brutal, rationalist, Arthur. No magic. No chivalry. Certainly no honor. Instead, Arthur is a warlord who is consolidating power through a lot of strong-arming and the state craft of Myrddin. Myrddin orchestrates some events (Lady of the Lake) and covers up others (putting heroic spin on nasty things Arthur does, like massacres).
But here I am finishing a pedestrian, plot-driven review wondering if I need to tie it to the larger Arthur canon. (Example: Other rationalist Arthur's include: Mary Stewart's CRYSTAL CAVE series. Or other 'girl power' Arthur's include Jane Yolen's SWORD OF THE RIGHTFUL KING, (which I also remember not liking very much, though I can no longer remember why, and that was back in the days when I had a no longer accessible Open Diary. My entries are on disk, but it would likely be a lengthy task to find them.)
Then suddenly it hits me. What makes Arthur powerful is not the magic [I mean, who cares about a magic sword. I've always liked the Muppet Babies interpretation of the 'Singing Sword,' a sword that sings like Ethel Merman and is so annoying anyone who finds it quickly wants to abandon it], but the relationships. There are primal example of human forces of love, friendship, betrayal, revenge, etc. For example, I've long felt that George Lucas wimped out when he didn't go for the OBVIOUS love triangle inherent in the Obi Wan-Anikin-Padme relationship, including the homoerotic undertones that have always carried in Arthur tales.
Reeve understands the relationships. He also includes hints of some of the bizarre sexual undercurrents. His main character is a female who undergoes numerous transformations (in keeping with his version's Welsh origins, thank you very much). Not only does she swim 'like an otter' (the first tip-off we're in that territory), she plays Lady of the Lake, manufactures the Grail, spends half the book as a boy, and the second half as girl. She is also the first person to realize Peredur (Welsh predecessor to Percival) is also in disguise. A boy disguised as a girl.
[Gwyna loves Bedwyr. Bedwyr loves Gwynhwyfar. Gwynhwyfar is bonded to Arthur. Gwyna loves Peredur. Peredur doesn't get it. Nobody seems to be able to love anybody in their proper form... There is even reference to that weird Mabinogian tale about Blodeuwedd, the woman made out of flowers and the betrayal/transformation that follows.]
Sure we have the Arthur, Gwynhwyfar, Bedwyr triangle (no Lancelot: he's a later French addition, and Reeve seems very interested in limiting this tale to the lower part of Britain), but Arthur isn't so much a character as a force. Instead of being the unifying force of the righteous British Empire around which the narrative revolves, he's a ruthless warlord. A vision of almost unbearable violence that requires some kind of narrative split to tolerate. So Gwynhwyfar falls in love with one of his crippled warriors. (Brilliant take on both Bedivere, and the Fisher King.) Myrddin makes him out to be some kind of uniting force that will end violence and bring about a golden age of wisdom. They all fall prey to illusion, even thinking it's one they've created and/or can control, when their realities become to unbearable to tolerate.
And what follows: more violence. Arthur kills Bedwyr after finding out he's been cuckolded. Then realizing his actions have the potential to start a blood feud, he sends out a band of his closest friends and kinsmen (including Cai/Kay) into an ambush where they are all killed. He destroys all witnesses with the exception of Gwyna, who everyone seems to forget exists.
Gwyna returns to an ailing Myrddin, who it turns out, has always loved her like a father and is dying of a broken heart. Arthur is not the man he hoped he would be, and he wasted his life and energy on Arthur instead of fulfilling a more loving role with Gwyna. (Even this element of the story is a little creepy and has a psycho-sexual element.) He dies. Gwyna stuffs him into a hollow tree because the ground is frozen.
This is a villainous Arthur in a very minor key. And it is not about the redeeming power of stories, it's about their manipulative powers. And the air of tragedy that often floats behind them: loss, regret, betrayal, illusion.
It seems there are several questions here for both in the public and private sphere of tale-telling. First, we live in an age of almost unlimited access to information. How do we know what's true? If everything is being spun to influence our opinion, how can we discern between the Rightful King, and the Evil Warlord?
But worse, and perhaps more importantly, how do we apply the powers of discernment in our own lives? Reeve's book portrays Myrddin as a powerful manipulator of narrative, who falls prey to his own lies. And poor Gwyna can't seem to find anyone who will love her in her proper shape. (Alas, this is often the fate of shape-shifters.) In some ways, this is how most of the traditional Arthur tales end as well. The undoing of Merlin the Enchanter is enchantment.
All of this seems a bit heavy for a promotional YA website. But I thought I needed to at least write it down. To close the two following questions...
I've surmised that every author has an Arthur, which is to say either the Arthur they most love, or the Arthur they would like to add to the canon. So, here are my queries:
* What is your favorite Arthur adaptation?
* What would be your addition to Arthurian legend, should you create one?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 12:41 am (UTC)And my addition just came out: THE INDIGO KING.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 12:56 am (UTC)What would I add? A happy ending. Someone (probably Guenevere) says "Okay, look, this is just stupid. I love you both. Fuck this jealous doomed tragedy nonsense, let's make it work," and they figure out how to share.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 01:16 am (UTC)And that IS a tragedy.
You might enjoy Gerald Morris' Squire's Tale series, (you know, for kids!) which pokes fun at a lot of the stupidity of Arthur, (and romance generally,) while celebrating general decency. I particularly liked The Savage Damsel and the Dwarf, which is a send up of the Kitchen Knight tale and fairy tale norms.
There is a lot of Arthur that is jolly and bawdy, if not downright deviant... those versions rarely seem to be picked for contemporary adaptation. I wonder if some of the high tragedy that emerges is contemporary mores set to ancient sources.
BTW- I highly recommend the Terry Jones Medieval Lives television show to anyone who digs educational television in a Python vein.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 01:16 am (UTC)My favorite Arthur-related story will always remain The Dark is Rising. But it doesn't deal with Arthur himself much, so not sure it counts for this purpose.
I've really been wanting to reread Winter Prince lately.
Hmmm. I remember being intrigued by Firelord's take on it but I don't remember why.
Argh! I have the horrible feeling there's an obvious one I'm not remembering just at the moment!!! Bah.
For example, I've long felt that George Lucas wimped out when he didn't go for the OBVIOUS love triangle inherent in the Obi Wan-Anikin-Padme relationship, including the homoerotic undertones that have always carried in Arthur tales.
Obvious in one sense, but not in another. It seems to be part of the original jedi credo that they don't have personal relationships because that would distract from their devotion to the Greater Good; I've always thought of Obi-wan and the other jedi as asexual, because their denial of that aspect of themselves is so absolute. It could be argued that this is part of why they fail the first time around; when Luke rebuilds the jedi later on families are definitely abounding.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 01:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 02:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 03:01 pm (UTC)Also, haven't seen that Muppet Babies episode! *sheepish* Love the idea, though.
My addition to the Arthur legend, should I do one...lord. That's a thought-provoking question. And how to go about it without simply rehashing all that's come before...I'm not sure I know. I've always had a huge soft spot for Gawain's youngest brother Gareth. But truthfully, I admit I probably would want to look at Percival and the Fisher King; I've long been fascinated by the concept. (it snuck into my master's dissertation on fantasy here and there)
no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 03:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-16 04:34 pm (UTC)