Do you think it’s feasible to combine the way we usually imagine Arthurian Legend–the knights, magic, etc–with the story of the historical Arthur?

Honestly, I think everything is feasible! I think if someone really wants to combine the imaginary with an historical accuracy, there are ways. Maybe using two Arthurs (one from legends, like from the Welsh texts) and an Arthur in the “typical arthurian medieval times” who is named like the famous Arthur from the past but that does the majority of the Malory stuff. Basically separating the whole Annales/Welsh/Monmouth with the Malory (a part from the things that are copied into Malory).

Or, simply, just moving everything in a more aesthetically arthurian (as in, knights, castles etc.) period, like many movies do.

I am not sure about magic! 

My problem with Galahad is not from a dislike for Christianity, but from a strongly Christian upbringing. See, in Christianity, devotion to God is supposed equal devotion to altruism. If your devotion to God is unconcerned with altruism, horrible things happen. See, Galahad never does anything particularly altruistic (besides standard chivalrous stuff) and so his and Nacien’s behavior represents everything evil about religion.

Again, I don’t want to imply Paganism=Good Christianity=Bad, or Atheism=Good, Religion=Bad. Many good things have come from Christianity, such as the abolition of slavery and the Civil Rights movement, but many atrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity, such as the conquest of the Americas. Galahad only once shows an interest in the well-being of other human beings (especially the poor and marginalized), and is only interested in God and Destiny.

First thing, I am not sure if you are the same anon from the last Galahad asks, but I am going to answer point for point

(TW RAPE and MURDER AND STUFF):

1) If you are the same anon, no one is trying to force you into liking a character. There are plenty of people who don’t like Galahad (Example: Nancy McKenzie, who doesn’t like Galahad, but still managed to write a compelling book about him, or all the MANY other arthurian authors who don’t include Galahad in their stories or who include a tiny bit of awful!Galahad).

2) Second, not all Christians are the same. The family upbringing (and much more) has much more impact on morality than the religion one follows. That’s why we have “morally good people” who can be atheist or religious. 
As an atheist, I don’t really understand how bad things can happen to people who are unconcerned with altruism. There are plenty of people who are not altruistic at all and lead perfectly successful lives, even if religious. Sometimes, not being concerned with other people actually make them more successful in life (see: big companies ceo and some billionaire of the world).

3) “Galahad never does anything particularly altruistic”: first of all, you have to cite at least a text. What do you mean? In Malory? In the Lancelot-Grail? In the common imaginary of arthuriana? Second of all: compared to whom? What other characters act altruistically? Which other character from the SAME text are you bringing as a moral comparison? Merlin, maybe, who tried to molest a young girl? Arthur who tries to kill his own baby (and killed many babies in the attempt), Gawain who accidentally beheaded a woman? Elaine, who raped Lancelot? 
Also, what exactly is the list of “bad” actions that Galahad performed? Comparing them to the ones I just listed. 

I am pretty sure that wandering around the world alone and looking for a magic golden cup is not the WORST a person (religious or not) can do. Do you need a list of much worse things that have been done in the name of religion?

4) I am sorry to disappoint, but there’s no paganism in Malory. ALL the characters are assumed to be Christian. Arthur had the Virgin Mary on his shield at Badon, to help him. Christianism is the mythology of arthuriana.

5) Where do we see other characters showing interest in the well being of the poor and the marginalized? Do I have to remind you that no one was shocked or surprised, when Tor was made knight ONLY AFTER Arthur found out he was an actual nobleman (Pellinore raped a common poor woman. Tor wanted to be a knight. No can do! Because he is a peasant… but wait, isn’t his rape a blessing! Now he is a new found noble!). If you are looking for the modern values associated with Christianity in a text that is not written right now, you are not going to find them. 

It seems that Galahad is actually more liked by pagan fans than by people who still feel an affiliation to Christianity. Galahad didn’t get hated by writers until TH White, who probably saw a similarity between the Grail Quest and WWI.

It does seem like there are at least three positive books about Galahad pre The Once and Future King! 

About the first part of the statement, I am not sure. I am not a pagan, I am an atheist and have been for ages but I love Galahad.

1/2 Arthur definitely turned a blind eye to his wife’s affair. The reason for this is that, as the king’s wife, Guenivere is committing high treason by having an affair, and Arthur acknowledging it happening means that she will die. (It doesn’t matter that she’s barren, that’s the nature of the law.) This is why I personally find Arthur/Guenivere a more tragic love story than Guenivere/Lancelot.

2/2 Arthur and Guenivere aren’t a Forbidden Love story, they’re a Failed Love story. How can they remedy the situation? They cannot get divorced, or rekindle their romance, or even start a threesome. So the sitch sits and festers until Mordred exploits it as his scheme to usurp the throne.

Mmmmm I mean. I don’t think there’s a “reason”. Do you mean in Monmouth? Because in that case Arthur doesn’t turn a blind eye to the affair of Mordred and Guinevere at all, he is quite mad. 

If you mean in Malory, I don’t remember anything about Arthur knowing before Agravaine and Mordred told him.

The idea that Arthur pretends to not see is very compelling and it is a canon that has been used in basically all modern movies and a lot of modern novels. 
About the idea of a Failed Love story… if Guinevere loves Lancelot and Arthur loves Guinevere, that’s still a love triangle, in my opinion… if someone loves a person but they don’t love them back, it’s not a failed love story, it’s unrequired love (failed love story presumes that the other person would have fallen in love with them, somehow, eventually).

Regarding the “opposites attract” of Galahad/Mordred: the difference between them is not their actions, but how the narrative frames them. Both are bastards with daddy issues who put place events calculated to end up destroying everything that their fathers ever worked for. The difference is that the narrative directly tells you that that is what Mordred is doing.

I love this so much. Thank you for sending this take/perspective!

image

A Celtic rewash of the Love Triangle could be that there is a geis/tynged on Arthur to never acknowledge that his wife is cheating on him.

INTERESTING! I would love something that explores this. It would be a different take from the “Arthur pretending not to see” / “Arthur being in love with both”

The reason I despise Galahad is because I don’t think his actions in Malory are that of a good man. He invited the Knights of the Round Table onto a quest that he knew would kill most of them to find an object that was AT HIS HOUSE. He a darkly fascinating character: he’s spent most of his childhood praying for Lancelot’s soul (which can’t be good for his psyche!), and he’s been raised to be sacrificial lamb by Nacien.

2/2 (An extremely spiritual chalice that gives you unending food? Yup, it’s the Cauldron of Regeneration, all right!)

I think the beauty of arthuriana is that there are so many themes and characters that everyone can find something they do and don’t like! I understand what you mean!

I personally really enjoy the character, but of course my interpretation of it might be wildly different (being so young, for me it’s more about people manipulating him /leading him to that grail point and him truly believing that he’s doing good).

Do the Chronicles of Prydain count as Arthurian novels? It’s more (loosely) based off of the Mabinogion than anything else, but there are references to Cwlhuch and Olwen.

Sorry for answering this late! 
I feel like the Mabinogion has a bigger picture that has a bit of arthuriana in it, like an overlapping, or even more, like a big mix of texts and traditions where then we have one of them (arthurian related one) take a new road (a bit like an evolutionary tree).

About the Chronicles of Prydain (I love those novels), I think because not many people consider Culhwch and Olwen as 100% arthuriana, it would probably not be considered an arthurian novel. The arthurian theme in Culhwch and Olwen was the (very common) theme of having the story happening in arthurian times, with arthurian characters in the background. If I remember correctly, they did take that out from The Chronicles pf Prydain. 

I think it mostly depends on how much people consider Culhwch and Olwen to be arthurian characters instead of only overlapping with arthurian characters that then remained in future arthurians texts.

Screw Tomboy!Guenivere. Give me competant ruler!Guenivere. Give me a Guenivere that was taught battle tactics and diplomacy on her father’s knee. Give me a Guenivere whose mind is full to the brim of Roman and Celtic law, who is an ardent feminist (by the standards of the time period). Give me a Guenivere who teaches Arthur how to be a good ruler, because it’s not like a bullied country bumpkin knew something like that.

Maybe not the same but it reminds me of Firelord’s Guinevere (by Parke Godwin).

But yes, I agree! also if I love all the Guineveres!

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started