Supervisor wanted me to use a different translation to my old one (the Everyman 1993 edition). So I had to get this one. It's supposed to be more accuSupervisor wanted me to use a different translation to my old one (the Everyman 1993 edition). So I had to get this one. It's supposed to be more accurate -- I don't know about that, but it does seem a bit more immediate and colourful than the old Everyman edition. The little I know suggests it is a good translation, and it's certainly readable, and has a full complement of explanatory notes, introduction, etc, which is more than I can say for the Everyman edition. Slightly odd order of tales, not sure what she's organising them by -- certainly not date, as Culhwch and Olwen is almost the last.
As for the tales, they are always a thing of unchanging delight, for me. Especially nice to reread them after reading Seren's New Stories from the Mabinogion series....more
Need to read this again to let it sink in properly, but a couple of my tutors have very much subscribed to Sedgwick's line of thought, in part if not Need to read this again to let it sink in properly, but a couple of my tutors have very much subscribed to Sedgwick's line of thought, in part if not in whole, and it all made a lot of sense to me. It's easy to apply it to the Arthurian legends, or to the 'Sagas of Warrior-Poets' in Norse studies...
My perennial problem with literary theory is that people make it sound far too complicated when they write books like this, but this isn't too bad, at least....more
Some of the essays in here are very interesting and relevant, some less so. I picked it up for the essay on Loholt, which was very helpful. The font iSome of the essays in here are very interesting and relevant, some less so. I picked it up for the essay on Loholt, which was very helpful. The font is awful though, in this edition. It looks like it was done on a typewriter, and it's pretty hard to read......more
All of these collections are excellent if you're looking for scholarly essays on a range of Arthurian topics within each tradition. There wasn't much All of these collections are excellent if you're looking for scholarly essays on a range of Arthurian topics within each tradition. There wasn't much here helpful specifically for me, but it is a well edited and interesting collection of work if you have a more general interest (or if the English Arthur is closer to your interests, of course)....more
All of the 'The Arthur of...' books are really useful, I find. Even when you're just doing index-based research like me, they're really well indexed aAll of the 'The Arthur of...' books are really useful, I find. Even when you're just doing index-based research like me, they're really well indexed and the contents are a helpful pointer to content, too. I don't recognise as many names in the contents as I usually do, but the reputation of this series is enough that I trust them all anyway. My only problem is that, dipping in and out of it as I was, it seemed to be all Chrétien, all the time. I know he was massively influential, but there's also Robert de Boron -- who has people who've never heard his name convinced that the Grail is a biblical story -- and the Vulgate Cycle to contend with, not to mention anything else....more
This had some useful checklists and suggestions about structuring your research, but it wasn't terribly relevant to an English Literature dissertationThis had some useful checklists and suggestions about structuring your research, but it wasn't terribly relevant to an English Literature dissertation, since it goes into stuff about case studies and ethical considerations and questionnaires. Most of the advice is common sense, but it did prod me into considering a few things I'd forgotten to think about, so it wasn't a waste of time. If your degree is more along the lines of sociology, geography, science, that kind of thing, it'd be more useful....more
Reread for my dissertation -- and all the more bittersweet this time because I knew how everything would play out. It's beautifully written, and it prReread for my dissertation -- and all the more bittersweet this time because I knew how everything would play out. It's beautifully written, and it pretty much exemplifies Rosemary Sutcliff's usual shtick about male friendships (and a sepulchral voice that sounds like my dissertation supervisor whispers the words "homosocial bonds"...), to the point where there is actually an explicitly gay couple in the story, and Arthur and Bedwyr's relationship is deep and intense -- perhaps not sexual, but the subtext is there.
Sutcliff handles Guinevere well, too, and I have a lot of love for her version of Gwalchmai, too. But of course for my dissertation I was looking at Cei: a big, larger than life figure who drinks and womanises and is always, always faithful to Arthur, like a big faithful hound. Some of his role from the Cymric stories seems to go to Bedwyr, complete with the betrayal part (in 'Culhwch and Olwen', Cei and Arthur fall out, and that event is referenced in some of the other Cymric material).
Interesting that I'd say this is the closest to a Celtic Cei I've read anywhere outside the Cymric stories, but nonetheless Sutcliff didn't find him interesting enough to do more than reference him as a faithful hound type character without much depth whenever she needed him.
The end is a tragedy, as it should be, with all the dignity Arthur deserves. I cried....more
A very good book if you're just about to go to university. Since I'm out the other side of undergrad and into postgrad work, it was less helpful for mA very good book if you're just about to go to university. Since I'm out the other side of undergrad and into postgrad work, it was less helpful for me -- particularly because I've been taught by one of the authors, so I've encountered most of the advice before. The section on how to structure an essay can definitely be a bit too rigid a framework, even if Martin Coyle himself is marking it, but it does make a good start for planning an essay.
This is actually my sister's copy, and she's just starting medical sciences, so it's not just relevant/useful for English Lit: this was recommended reading on her course, too....more
The Book of Merlyn is a bit odd to read, particularly in the omnibus edition, because T.H. White cannibalised it for the version of the novels which wThe Book of Merlyn is a bit odd to read, particularly in the omnibus edition, because T.H. White cannibalised it for the version of the novels which were published together -- if I'm remembering the publishing history right, anyway. It's also not really much of a story: just an old Arthur reunited with Merlyn and the animals of his education, trying to puzzle out where things went wrong. It's all very political, with references to socialism, communism, capitalism, Karl Marx, anarchism, etc, and trying to relate them to the natural world.
There are still some beautiful parts, like the extended part where Arthur flies with the geese, so it is worth reading.
(But not for a dissertation on Sir Kay, who is not so much as mentioned. Still, I had to make sure.)...more
The Candle in the Wind redeems Gawain a bit for me, and brings Arthur back, and deals with Mordred. I remember studying this in class and it being poiThe Candle in the Wind redeems Gawain a bit for me, and brings Arthur back, and deals with Mordred. I remember studying this in class and it being pointed out that the timescale of these books is very clever: you start with bows and arrows in the early middle ages, with Arthur not being that far away in time from William the Conqueror, but by the end, there's cannons and Sir Thomas Malory. It was interesting to notice that properly this time, instead of being carried along by it.
Lancelot and Guinevere... Malory and White both talk about their constant love and so on as if it should excuse them, but neither of them make me believe it. Steinbeck might've, if he'd ever finished his work. But it's hard to get swept up in the drama and passion here when I believe the only really decent person is Arthur -- and then he's frankly unbelievable compared to everyone else.
The warmth and humour of the other books is pretty much gone by this point, though there are still moments of beauty and a lovely scene from which the title of the book is taken.
Absolutely useless for my dissertation, though....more
T.H. White doesn't make me feel as sympathetic and tender toward Lancelot as Steinbeck does, though there are some similarities in the two treatments.T.H. White doesn't make me feel as sympathetic and tender toward Lancelot as Steinbeck does, though there are some similarities in the two treatments. The way he talks about Guinevere, too -- I don't know, it bothers me. It's tender and it tries to understand her, but at the same time it's so condescending and just... knowing from research how closely the portrayals of Morgan/Morgause and Guinevere are linked, and knowing how Morgause is portrayed in the earlier books, it shades T.H. White's portrayal uglier.
He does very well at exploring Lancelot's character, though I miss the insights into Arthur's character that the first book promised. And I can't get on with White's version of Gawain.
Anyway, this isn't very useful for my dissertation, but I thought I'd revisit it anyway in case something thematic popped up....more
I have to stand by my old review of this almost to the letter. It's shorter than The Sword in the Stone, and the humour is less evenly distributed -- I have to stand by my old review of this almost to the letter. It's shorter than The Sword in the Stone, and the humour is less evenly distributed -- there's a sort of humour about Morgause and her sons, I suppose, but it's not the same warm kind that Pellinore and Palimedes carry in this book, or that attended just about everyone in the first book. Again, some parts are surprisingly beautiful given the overall tone of the book, and it introduces a lot of characters and begins to develop Arthur into a king rather than just a boy.
Of course, now I'm trying to remember the publishing history of this -- it was once longer, maybe? It got totally revised as some point, I know that much. That might be part of what makes it less appealing....more
Dissertation reread time! I acquired a distaste for T.H. White sometime during my MA, and I'm not sure exactly why: rereading The Sword in the Stone, Dissertation reread time! I acquired a distaste for T.H. White sometime during my MA, and I'm not sure exactly why: rereading The Sword in the Stone, I still rather loved it, with its gentle humour and the character of the narratorial voice and its understanding of each character. I note that in my first review I noticed the way it treats Kay, which is a good sign for this dissertation...
It's written in a conversational way, but it's also beautiful. There are descriptions of the natural world that are almost breathtaking, and Wart can at once be a silly little boy and a very noble one. And Kay can at once be a proud big kid, prone to bullying, and a scared boy who really just wants to hold his own. And Merlyn can be a mysterious wizard and a kindly old man.
I'm looking forward to rereading the rest of it now -- although I think the warm sympathy for Kay is less of a thing in the other books, and they're probably not going to be so useful....more
I reread this for my dissertation, but also because I've wanted to for a while now, to see if I still loved it as much -- and I don't, I love it more.I reread this for my dissertation, but also because I've wanted to for a while now, to see if I still loved it as much -- and I don't, I love it more. I still mourn for the book it could have been if Steinbeck had finished it, if he'd edited it to be a more coherent whole. The first few sections are well-written enough, but it's later in the stories that he really decides how to handle his material. He takes the basic events of Malory and breathes the life of a modern novel into them: thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes, humour and understanding. He makes sense of the way Kay's character changes, makes Lancelot likeable and human and his love for Guinevere a real and painful thing.
(If you know me at all, you probably know that I regularly loathe Lancelot and, at best, tolerate him. Steinbeck can do what few others can, and make me not only like him, but make my heart bleed for him. Unfortunately, what time and interest he devotes to Lancelot, he turns away from Gawain, who is most of the worst aspects of himself here.)
More than anything, this time, I was caught by the beauty of Steinbeck's writing. I could quote a dozen bits of this for you and I'd still be here typing up some more tomorrow morning. Again, the first few sections aren't impressive, it's when he gets to Lancelot that he really shines.
I wish I could read and love Malory the way Steinbeck clearly did. But I don't mind so much finding the magic at second-hand, when it's Steinbeck showing me....more
I can't remember who recommended me this, but bless you, whoever you were. It was definitely useful for my dissertation, as well as an enjoyable book.I can't remember who recommended me this, but bless you, whoever you were. It was definitely useful for my dissertation, as well as an enjoyable book. Kay-wise, it has an interesting mix of portrayals -- the Loholt plotline is from the Cymric material, as far as I can gather, and yet Arthur's position in the court is very much that of the continental stories. Hmm.
You know how I said Sword at Sunset was homosocial? I think Exiled from Camelot was even more so: it's all about the bonds between the men of the Table -- strained as they are, it's clear that one has to hope for them all coming together and sorting things out. The bond between Kay and Arthur is so intense that it really excludes any other relationship for Kay: I did like that, though at times I did find myself questioning whether Cherith Baldry thought at all about authenticity. Kay does a lot of grovelling and crying, and acting like a coward, and yet it's all waved away by the other characters -- not likely, I would think, in a culture where merely calling Lancelot a coward is an invitation to a duel...
But whatever, I suspended my disbelief. My two main problems were Brisane -- oh can we be more typical, with an evil woman who was rejected by men and sold her soul for power and used her body to gain more? -- and Arthur being, well, stupid. He was so easily taken in, so easily led. Headdesk.
Still, more or less carried off, though it's likely to wear thinner the more I think about it. Ultimately, it distracted me from any such flaws when I was reading it, which is the main thing.
Reread 2018:
This was a reread of a book I read aaaages ago for my MA dissertation. Apparently I wanted to look back on more stressful times as I work on my BSc dissertation… In any case, I love what Baldry does with various strands of the mythology, drawing together a more modern Kay and a modern view of him with some of the chivalric world and some, even, of the Welsh mythology. I love what she does with Loholt and even though, per some of that stuff, Cai might end up in opposition to Arthur, and that definitely doesn’t happen here.
It’s also incredibly homoromantic. Kay says Arthur’s the air he breathes for goodness sake. This isn’t a criticism; I quite enjoy this book — but I wonder if it’s why the only copy I could ever find was second-hand and never republished…
Sometimes the emotional stuff does seem overblown to me, but it’s better than dudes who never say what they’re feeling, so why not? I love the value it gives Kay and his emotionality, his work to bring Camelot together and make things work that doesn’t involve pointy objects (other than cutlery).
A reread in preparation for my dissertation. I remembered Tony Hays' betrayal of Kay -- very human, noble and capable, without any influence from the A reread in preparation for my dissertation. I remembered Tony Hays' betrayal of Kay -- very human, noble and capable, without any influence from the later traditions. He isn't much of a seneschal figure here, but given that Arthur is an active king and not set dressing, it makes sense that Kay (always so closely linked to him) is active and capable too.
Overall, it's an interesting enough story and easy to read: it kept my attention despite being a reread, and it's full of interesting characters and interesting interpretations of characters. Some things bothered me (like the simile "nagged at me like a wife" -- thanks, yes, all wives are horrible nags, obviously) but for the most part it all fit in with the setting and the narrator.
I'm glad there's a personal thread throughout this -- Kay's love for Eleonore, Malgwyn's love for his wife and concern for his brother's family, Malgwyn's personal development from self-pitying drunk to functional member of society. The Arthuriana is all very well, but it wasn't enough to give the story life....more
I'll be writing my MA dissertation on the much maligned figure of Sir Kay, and the way his character has changed and been treated through time. This bI'll be writing my MA dissertation on the much maligned figure of Sir Kay, and the way his character has changed and been treated through time. This book does half my work for me, focusing on the impact of the Welsh tradition in wonderful detail, but it sticks to the medieval period. Despite having read a lot of the Welsh stuff, this teased out details I hadn't thought about, and attempted to answer questions about Chrétien de Troyes' sources.
Very very useful, and worth reading -- it's surprisingly fun to read, as well as informative, and provides a lot of context so that I could follow the argument even in the cases where I haven't read the text being discussed. ...more
Ah, Gerald Morris is back on safer ground here, sticking to what he understand -- Chrétien and Malory. Well, you have to be a bit of an ass, to my minAh, Gerald Morris is back on safer ground here, sticking to what he understand -- Chrétien and Malory. Well, you have to be a bit of an ass, to my mind, to dismiss one of Chrétien's works as a "clinker", and as I recall Chrétien never finished the tale in question himself, so...
In any case, Morris' shocking inability to research aside, this one is quite fun and Lady Sarah is a fun character. There are quite a few strong, positive female characters in this one, which made it that bit more fun, and he actually writes a Lancelot I give two hoots about, so that's something.
Of course, if the Arthurian legend is serious business to you, don't touch this with a barge pole, but I do find the light tone refreshing, myself....more
Like the rest of the series, Parsifal's Page is light and fun. It's also actually a treatment of Parsifal that I don't hate on principle, and that's rLike the rest of the series, Parsifal's Page is light and fun. It's also actually a treatment of Parsifal that I don't hate on principle, and that's rare for me. I didn't like him much at first, but I did get to like his character, or at least almost to like his character. I appreciate the way Gerald Morris handles all of the knights -- he sort of assumes good faith in all their deeds, even when in Malory they were shocking and terrible. (It occurs to me that he might make a good lawyer or PR agent, with his way of spinning things.)
The bits about Kai were excellent. I won't spoiler, but I liked his appearances in this book even though the portrayal of Kay during the Percival story is usually one of his lowest moments. And Lancelot, who I also usually detest on principle, was also likeable. I wonder whether he's going to come back into things, and how. I'm looking forward to finding out....more
These books really are fun. They're very light reading, but they do interesting things with the stories -- and they make admirable sense of Malory's sThese books really are fun. They're very light reading, but they do interesting things with the stories -- and they make admirable sense of Malory's stories without twisting them too far out of shape, which rather amuses me. It's a pity that Gerald Morris thinks women mostly bother about their looks and the men they're in love with, or seems to from the way he portrays Lyonesse and Guinevere, and sometimes Lynet. But he doesn't write delicate little flowers, either, so that's a point in his favour.
I love the way he portrays the Orkney boys. The brotherly squabbling really works, and I've always had a soft spot for Gawain and Gaheris, while not being so fond of Gareth (too attached to Lancelot) and Agravaine (too attached to Mordred).
A couple of useful bits for my dissertation, but not enough yet. At least they're quick, fun reads....more
