Arthurian Literature

[Kailana]

One thread that was popular on the other forums in this section was Arthurian literature. So, I thought I would start the ball running again over here by starting a thread.

[Cerridwen]

I am quite a fan of Arthurian novels - Bernard Cornwell's is brilliant, I love Mists of Avalon too and also Nancy McKenzie's.

[MLE]

for me, nobody beats Mary Stewart's four-novel set:
The Crystal cave,
the Hollow Hills,
the Last Enchantment, and
the Wicked Day.

For you Marion Zimmer Bradley fans, it seems Evangeline Walton's goddess-themed rewrite of the Welsh Mabinogion legend cycle has dropped completely into out-of-print obscurity, but I remember them as excellent books:
Island of the Mighty
The Children of Llyr
the Song of Rhiannon
Prince of Annwn (an afterthought and not so well done as the others.)

[Cuchulainn]

Bernard Cornwell is one of my favourite contemporary author and can do no wrong in my eyes, but I think his Warlord Chronciles are among his weakest works. The concept was good, but they never grabbed me.

Right now I'm reading Merlin which is the second book in Stephen Lawhead's Pendragon cycle, which is a retelling of the Arthurian legend. I really enjoy and appreciate Lawhead's take on the legend. I like the fact that he incorporates the legend of Taliesin into the legend, and I also particularly like the fact that he follows the legend as is told in Wace and Layamon. Also, I find Lawhead's unabashed, but completely undogmatic Christianity, very compelling.

I can think of two other retellings that I really never got into: T.E. White's "Once and Future King" and Jack Whyte's "the Saxon Shore"

I didn't like the Once and Future King because it is too fantastic. I think I would have enjoyed it if I read it when I was much younger, though, maybe in the 10 - 14 year range.

The Saxon Shore is the first part in a series, but I couldn't even finish Saxon Shore. The concept was good, right down to Excalibur being crafted from a meteorite, and Camelot being a left over Roman settlement, but the writing was so dry and square, with repititious cadences and uninteresting language, that I just couldn't finish it.

I guess among the old tellings, Malory can't be topped, Chretien De Troyes isn't as gripping, and Wace and Layamon are more interesting than enjoyable.

I always get the sense that there are all kinds of other existing tales and tellings of Arthur, but I'm not sure where you would find them. If you read the notes and such to various editions the editors always seem to be talking about a fairly large tradition with characters who are more prominent at some periods than others (an example of this is Cornwell's Derfel who doesn't appear in later tellings of Arthur). I wish I had more time to get into the history of the legend.

I keep calling it a legend. Is it more correct to call it a myth?

[Margaret]

I second MLE's recommendation of the Mary Stewart and Evangeline Walton novels. I'm not a big fantasy reader. For me, the fantasy often obscures the history, and many fantasy authors are not particularly good at developing depth in their characters. But I loved the characterization of Merlin, especially in The Crystal Cave, and of Mordred in The Wicked Day. I've read and reread these novels.

The Evangeline Walton novels are pure fantasy in one sense, but they are extremely faithful renderings of real Celtic myths and legends. For people interested in how the pagan Celts thought and how they viewed the world, these make valuable reading. Too many authors of Arthurian novels and novels set in the pagan Celtic world create plots revolving around a great battle between absolute good and absolute evil. A pagan Celt would never have thought in these terms.

[MLE]

I'm glad you liked Walton's books too, Margaret! But I'm not sure I agree with the absolute good and evil theory. The first of the series I read (1970, I think) was the Children of Llyr, which centers around the birth of twins into the world, (Nissyen and Evnissyen) one representing pure good and the other pure evil.
As I recall, despite the best upbringing possible, Evnissyen was rotten to the core and plunged his family and two nations into war just for the hell of it. So as not to give spoilers, I won't go into his twin as the redemption-figure, but that was the essence of the novel.

I think the choice between doing right and doing wrong is a human universal that informs the stories and creeds of all cultures. What fascinates me is not the differences, but the similarities.

Though I will agree that Walton's hero Gwyidion from Island of the Mighty is a tremendously complicated heroic figure indeed! I loved the way she presented him. But I liked Manawyddan in the Song of Rhainnon best. Sorry to say, but Pwyll, Prince of Dyvedd, was a bore, mostly a foil for a lot of (yawn) philosophical preachyness. Too much even for my teenage neo-pagan stage.

[donroc]

My favorite of all Arthurian tales is the one I read as a boy and have again over the years -- Scribner's 4 volume Brandywine edition of Howard Pyle's story of Arthur and his knights of the Round Table.. They are illustrated by Pyle and his student disciples.

The Story of King Arthur and his Knights
The Story of the Champions of the Round Table
The Story of Sir Launcelot and his Companions
The Story of the Grail and the Passing of Arthur

[Melisende]

Love Mallory - also loved Tennyson's Idylls of the King.

Would not recommend Victor Canning's The Crimson Chalice (hated it!)

[sweetpotatoboy]

There were two series of Arthurian novels that I started reading a few years ago but couldn't get on with at all. I was wondering if anyone else tried them and what they thought of them.

The first one was by A. A. Attanasio. I think the series was called Arthor, and the first book was The Dragon and the Unicorn, which was the only one I read. It was plain weird. Any real linkage to the Arthurian series was tenuous, though presumably the series was going to develop more in that direction. The main thing it brought to mind was some of the Norse legends, which doesn't by itself seem a bad idea in terms of Arthur, but it was written just way too fantastically with little clear plot or recognisable characters. Stream of consciousness more than anything resembling conventional storytelling.

The second one was by Haydn Middleton. It was called the Mordred Cycle and the first book was The King's Evil. I may even have read part or all of the second book, The Queen's Captive, but gave up after that. Also just plain weird, though more readable than the Attanasio. My recollection is that there was very little plot as such - just strange goings-on and ramblings.

Did anyone else ever read these books?

[nona]

didn't Rosalind Miles write a few books on Arthur and others? maybe I have the wrong author.

[sweetpotatoboy]

didn't Rosalind Miles write a few books on Arthur and others? maybe I have the wrong author.

Yes, she wrote a trilogy on Guenevere, followed by a trilogy on Isolde. I have all 6 books but not read any of them yet. At one point, I read her saying that she was planning a third trilogy, creating a triptych of loosely related trilogies, but she's not released a new book since 2005 and her website hasn't been updated since then either.

[Barbara Passaris]

[QUOTE=MLE;655]for me, nobody beats Mary Stewart's four-novel set:
[I]The Crystal cave,
the Hollow Hills,
the Last Enchantment, and
the Wicked Day.

Iloved these books, too. I started reading them when I was a teenager. I read some of Idylls of the King to my children. When my husband presented a golden retriever pupy to them, they named him Arthur. :)

[Spitfire]

We can't forget EC's First Knight. An excellent tale of King Arthur's Camelot and how he met Lancelot and both of their relationship with Guenevere. It's an interresting deviation off the popular theme of Merlin and the sword in the stone story. A must read!

[nona]

The First Knight, I've seen the movie but have not read the book , should I, is it better then the movie?

[Spitfire]

The First Knight, I've seen the movie but have not read the book , should I, is it better then the movie?

Of course the book is better than the movie. (most are aren't they?) Yes I would recommend that you read it. But I was impressed with the movie rendition of this book, I wonder if EC had input?

[nona]

I'm worried Gere left a bad taste in my mouth with that movie, I didn't really care for the movie itself that why I was wondering. I know I've never been let down by EC but my not liking the movie might effect how I like the book or am I totally wrong in that?

[Spitfire]

I'm worried Gere left a bad taste in my mouth with that movie, I didn't really care for the movie itself that why I was wondering. I know I've never been let down by EC but my not liking the movie might effect how I like the book or am I totally wrong in that?

I know what you mean about the Richard Gere thing. That is why I really try not to watch a movie before I read the book that it is based on, and that I am really interrested in reading. It is really hard not to visualize the actor and what the actor was doing in the movie whilst reading the novel. I hadn't watched the movie First Knight since the 80's (or close thereabouts, can't remember when it came out...long time ago anyways) so it no longer came to mind when I read the book. If this is the same for you, I say go ahead and read the novel, EC won't let you down. But if the movie is still fresh in mind, you just might want to wait abit...or alot!:rolleyes:

[nona]

well I watched the movie before I really got into Historical Fiction otherwise I would have read the book first. I've read one or two here and there but it's only been the last two or three years that it's become a huge past time.

[Margaret]

I didn't care for Rosalind Miles' first Guinevere novel and didn't read the others. She mixes time periods in a way that I suppose is allowable in a fantasy novel (isn't everything?), but I found it jarring. One moment we would be in a recognizably medieval world with knights in armor, etc., and the next we would be back in a sixth century pagan Celtic world. On the other hand, I like the fantasy elements in novels like Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave, which are of limited scope and feel consistent with the belief structure of the historical world of the setting.

MLE, I take your point about Nissyen and Evnissyen, but they were individuals. Granted, individuals who represented unmitigated badness and goodness, but the kind of badness and goodness that individual people display. (I'm sure we can all list a few individual people, besides Evnissyen, who have caused disastrous wars.) That seems fundamentally different, to me, than a view of the cosmos itself as essentially divided between the forces of good and the forces of evil, with people perpetually in danger of slipping into the clutches of the vast forces of evil.

[SonjaMarie]

Has anyone read "Arthurian Omen" by G. G. Vandagriff:
"Is the story of King Arthur history or myth? In this spellbinding novel, a Celtic scholar is murdered when she finds a clue to a priceless 13th century manuscript that will provide the true identity of King Arthur. The victim's sister takes up the quest to uncover the relic, but quickly realizes that someone close to her is the murderer. As pursuit of the manuscript winds through the ruined castles and monasteries of Wales, more than one reason emerges for keeping the manuscript and the legend buried in the past."

I have it on my queue at BF and I was wondering if it's worth reading, eventually that is, as who knows when I'll get it.

SM

[diamondlil]

I know what you mean about the Richard Gere thing. That is why I really try not to watch a movie before I read the book that it is based on, and that I am really interrested in reading. It is really hard not to visualize the actor and what the actor was doing in the movie whilst reading the novel. I hadn't watched the movie First Knight since the 80's (or close thereabouts, can't remember when it came out...long time ago anyways) so it no longer came to mind when I read the book. If this is the same for you, I say go ahead and read the novel, EC won't let you down. But if the movie is still fresh in mind, you just might want to wait abit...or alot!:rolleyes:


I am not 100% sure, but I think you will find that EC was contracted to write the movie of the book, not the other way around.

[alice]

I read a really good Arthurian series a few years ago, by Helen Hollick. I don't remember much about the Pendragon's Banner trilogy now, except that I really enjoyed it at the time.

[sweetpotatoboy]

I read a really good Arthurian series a few years ago, by Helen Hollick. I don't remember much about the Pendragon's Banner trilogy now, except that I really enjoyed it at the time.

Yes, Helen Hollick's trilogy is excellent.

[Vanessa]

Is that the Helen Hollick who wrote a couple of pirate books recently, which are currently in my TBR pile (I think I was attracted to them due to the Johnny Depp/Captain Jack Sparrow phenomenon!!:o)?

[sweetpotatoboy]

Is that the Helen Hollick who wrote a couple of pirate books recently, which are currently in my TBR pile (I think I was attracted to them due to the Johnny Depp/Captain Jack Sparrow phenomenon!!:o)?

Yes, that's the same author. She wrote the Arthurian trilogy, then two books on King Harold / Queen Emma (also excellent). Now she's moved on to pirates! I've not read those yet, though.

[Vanessa]

They look good fun!:)

[EC2]

Just trawling the forum before bed-time and started reading through this.
I was hired to turn the script of First Knight into a novel by Columbia Pictures as part of their marketing peripherals. I had enormous problems with it at first because it's a fantasy script and doesn't have that much medieval about. 'But Lancelot's a peasant! What's he doing with a sword!' 'And why is Arthur a hundred and three?' And the weapons and armour are all wrong!' Then I calmed myself down. Told myself it was fantasy and to get on with it already!
So.... I wrote the book of First Knight from the film script and it was an interesting learning curve. I got to see Pinewood studios and the film set and to meet Gerry Zucker the producer. Unfortunately Sean Connery and Richard Gere weren't there on filming day. Rats

Arthurian fiction. The Mary Stewart tales and Rosemary Sutcliffe remain my favourites.

I've got Helen Hollick's Arthur series but I haven't read it. However I've read her pirate books and they're excellent Sea Witch and Pirate Code. I'm seeing Helen and we're going out for a meal after attending a writers' festival weekend after next. Should be fun.

[Christine Blevins]

It has been years since I read it, but I remember THE ACTS OF KING ARTHUR AND HIS NOBLE NIGHTS by John Steinbeck being a great, albeit unfinished, work.

[EC2]

It has been years since I read it, but I remember THE ACTS OF KING ARTHUR AND HIS NOBLE NIGHTS by John Steinbeck being a great, albeit unfinished, work.

Yes, I enjoyed that one - apparently! I can't remember anything about it now, but it has a 9 out of 10 in my ancient reading diary from the late 70's/early 80's.

[donroc]

Steinbeck's Tortilla Flat is supposedly based on King Arthur.

[sweetpotatoboy]

I've got Helen Hollick's Arthur series but I haven't read it. However I've read her pirate books and they're excellent Sea Witch and Pirate Code. I'm seeing Helen and we're going out for a meal after attending a writers' festival weekend after next. Should be fun.

Oh, that's nice. I'm sure she's lovely. She was good enough to respond when I emailed her after reading her Arthur series (she had included her email address in the books) and I received some news updates from her occasionally at one point.

[Scrapcat]

I absolutely love Arthurian fiction. I am reading the 3rd of the Lawhead series. I have a bit of a problem with this series because of the writing, but it's a really interesting reworking of the legend.

My absolute favorite of all Arthurian books is Rosemary Sutcliffe's SWORD AT SUNSET, which posits Arthur as a 5th century war leader trying to hold together the last remnants of Roman Britain. She has written many other books which are classed as children's books, but British kids' books are really well written.

[nona]

I'll have to check her out, I like that kinda twist.

[chuck]

Sutcliffe is terrific.....Check out Gillian Bradshaw's Arthur series, Bernard Cornwell, and Jack Whyte's Camulod series.....All are interesting plausible reads...that tie into the Romano/Celtic tradtion of Arthur Rex

[Leo62]

I don't think anyone has mentioned Alice Borchardt's celtic/fantasy Tales of Guinevere series, The Dragon Queen & The Raven Warrior. I think there was supposed to be a third book but it doesn't seem to have materialised...

[ejays17]

If you like the idea of Arthur as a Roman, one of my favourite books ever is Parke Godwin's "Firelord". There are also 2 sequels whose names currently escape me, and he also wrote 2 Robin Hood books set during the time of William the Conqueror & William Rufus.
And Anne McCaffrey also wrote one called "Black Horses for the King", which is aimed at younger readers - I found it in the "Childrens Section" of the bookshop if it wasn't with her others in the "Fantasy Section".

[sweetpotatoboy]

I don't think anyone has mentioned Alice Borchardt's celtic/fantasy Tales of Guinevere series, The Dragon Queen & The Raven Warrior. I think there was supposed to be a third book but it doesn't seem to have materialised...

Hmm, she passed away, I think, which might have something to do with it.

[Leo62]

Hmm, she passed away, I think, which might have something to do with it.

omg really? I had no idea...

What a shame - she was a much better writer than her sister Anne Rice IMO.

[annis]

Yes, Alice Borchardt died some time ago. As my son said in horror when I told him David Gemmell had died; "Oh no, not in the middle of a trilogy?!" :)
(Though he was genuinely sorry to hear that DG had died)

I really enjoyed AB's tenth century books set in France (Devoted and Beguiled), and also her historical fantasy series featuring werewolves set in ancient Rome and Gaul.

[*Brittany*]

She has a triology actually and I loved it really. It was a very diffrent version than what I'm used to reading.

[*Brittany*]

Queen of camelot-
my all time fave king arthur book. I haven'r read many others that top that one. I'm actually having a hard time finding new guienevere books so any suggestions?

[annis]

You might like Parke Godwin's "Beloved Exile" (http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/g/parke-godwin/beloved-exile.htm), the sequel to Firelord". It's the story of the widowed Guinevere.

*Edit
Persia Woolley wrote a trilogy about Guinevere
Child of the Northern Spring
Queen of the Summer Stars
The Legend in Autumn
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/w/persia-woolley/

[Anna Elliott]

Gillian Bradshaw's Hawk of May trilogy is very good, although not as well known. The third book focuses on Gwenevere.

And then if I can shamelessly self-promote here :), I actually have a new book coming out next month--my first--that centers on Gwenevere's daughter. The title is Twilight of Avalon (published by Simon and Schuster), and it's a retelling of the Trystan and Isolde legend. My website is www.annaelliottbooks.com

[Margaret]

Congratulations, Anna. Twilight of Avalon sounds delicious.

[SarahWoodbury]

I've always really liked Avalon, by Stephen Lawhead. There is also a new Gwenhwyfar book written by Mercedes Lackey coming out October 9. Something to look forward to after reading Twilight of Avalon :)

[rex icelingas]

I loved the Jack Whyte Arthur series-ok there a guilty turn your brain off type of thing but very enjoyable,remember hes writing fantasy not History.He writes great action and gripping storylines,the love element often becomes akin to Erotica and seems out of place suddenly thrust in there.
He uses some awful names Syclla Titens (the adulteress)Equus(the Horsemaster)Big Powys(a stereotypical Welshman)Owain of the Caves(Owain Y Ogof?)
Dont think,Just enjoy

[chuck]

Hey Rex.....I really liked Jack Whyte's Camulod series.....To me it more fiction then fantasy.....I agree his odd philosophical, names and erotica rants...are puzzling at times....Agree his action and overall story is keeps one interested....Cornwell and Whyte are up there as recent favorites......I will read almost anything when it comes to Arthur Rex.....including Stewart, Bradshaw, Sutcliffe, Holland, Godwin, Lawhead,etc.....

[rex icelingas]

I forgot Derek of Ravenglass,what a great name for late Antiquity `Dark age Derek`,cant say ive ever come across an ancient manuscript with `Ap Derek` on the end of it!

Ive never read Whyte`s crusade series but he can write a good page turner
It was an interesting turn to Have Lancelot as a Frank,The Lance Thrower was almost a stand alone but fitted in superbly to the series,I wonder if he will do more of that kind

[Carla]

Oh, who could forget Derek of Ravenglass? I was working with a mild-mannered colleague called Derek at the time I read that book, and it cracked me up every time I read the name. The great thing is that it's a Germanic derived name (Dutch form of German Theoderic) so that makes it even more incongrouous for a Brittonic warlord. Mind, I seem to remember he had a British peasant woman called Inga in one of the other books, so I guess that's fair warning not to get pedantic about his names :-)

[chuck]

:cool:I forgot Derek of Ravenglass,what a great name for late Antiquity `Dark age Derek`,cant say ive ever come across an ancient manuscript with `Ap Derek` on the end of it!

Ive never read Whyte`s crusade series but he can write a good page turner
It was an interesting turn to Have Lancelot as a Frank,The Lance Thrower was almost a stand alone but fitted in superbly to the series,I wonder if he will do more of that kind

I'm a flaming fan of Whyte....His Templar Series is quite good....The subject matter is a favorite of mine....But I admit the writing about the Templars is not quite as riveting as his "Camulod Series"....Check out his web site....I'm not sure where he going next......

[SarahWoodbury]

So what is it about King Arthur, folks? Why do we keep coming back to him?

Because, while I've read so many Arthur books, and found many of them compelling, I don't often LIKE them, if you know what I mean. They're not necessarily fun. And from a historical perspective, it seems to me that Arthur, as usually written, comes off as either a flat character whom the author employs as a backdrop to explore the personalities of other characters (Merlin, Guinevere, Lancelot, Morgane), or as unheroic and human, tripped up in the end by the overwhelming burden of his imperfections. Arthur is either a pawn, buffeted by the winds of fate, or so flawed, one has to ask how he was remembered as a hero in the first place.

I can imagine the simple reason for this is that it is very hard to synchronize the different aspects of Arthur’s story into a complete whole because the essential, heroic element of Arthur’s story—his defeat of the Saxons for a generation—has been grafted, at both the beginning and the end, to a romantic tale told for reasons having more to do with the authors and the time in which they were living, than with Arthur. In so doing, his character is incomplete and inexplicable, one who reacts instead of acts, and who never has a say in his own destiny.

In a bunch of these books it is Merlin (and sometimes Morgane)who is the active character. It is he who sets the whole plot in motion, whose behavior acts at times like a ‘get out of jail free card’ for Arthur, who manipulates everybody else, but who is powerless to stop Arthur’s downfall in the end. It is through Merlin at the beginning of the story that Arthur becomes high king, and because of Merlin's abandonment at the end of the story that (in rapid succession), Arthur loses his wife, his best friend, his son, and his life.

If you set this story in the modern day, you have a guy who has every gift and privilege in the world (imagine a mogul of some kind, or a star athelete) and loses it all, never really knowing why. Is it the promise of his return and redemption? Is it the Greek tragedy and cautionary tale?

[SarahWoodbury]

Sorry to cut off the oxygen to this thread. I didn't mean to :)

[ErichBeller]

Reading your response, Sarah, I was reminded of what usually bothers me about most Arthurian adaptations - it seems a lot of them forget to make Arthur into the focus of the story and an interesting character in his own right. With everything going on around him it's easy to see why, as you so eloquently point out.

I first discovered the King Arthur legend when I was about 8 or 9 and saw the John Boorman's "Excalibur." It's got some typically Boormanish weirdness to it but as far as I'm concerned it still gets a lot of it right. For one thing, it's about sex, blood, and death, which as far as I'm concerned is the crux of the Arthurian story. Nigel Terry brought a really human yet superhuman quality to the character of Arthur and made him incredibly sympathetic, especially when he's talking to Guinevere in the convent at the end.

As for literature, I loved the Steinbeck version and Mallory, of course, but I've never been a big fan of a lot of the stuff that came later. Lawhead's "Merlin" is a great book in my opinion, I just think his stuff gets a little...boring...for lack of a better term.

For a couple of years now I've been writing a stage play about Arthur, but the thing's almost too huge. My own sensibilities won't let me leave anything out, starting the whole story off with Vortigern and Uther and Ambrosius and all of that, moving along at a snail's pace to the wars against the petty kings, the Romans, and finally the siege of Joyous Garde and the battle against Mordred. But the focus of my version has always been Arthur, who for me is the most interesting character. He starts off as a servant and a child and he's thrust into the role of Christlike savior and war god practically overnight. That's gotta mess with your head, especially when you consider that everyone suddenly wants what he has.

I also worked on a "family friendly" stage adaptation back in 2002 as the fight choreographer and a consultant (I also played Kay.) That was interesting, to say the least. I just remember telling the director about all of these things from different versions of the story and ideas I had to incorporate some of them into the production. He kept saying "That's the version I'd love to make. But we can't."

Ah well.

[SarahWoodbury]

A stage play about Arthur would be really hard to do in a short amount of time, which is why authors do trilogies, I guess. But that was what I was trying to get at--that 'King Arthur' doesn't tend to be about him at all.

That said, maybe because there are all these different elements in the story it can be all things to all people, and anyone can get out of it what they want/need.

[chuck]

A stage play about Arthur would be really hard to do in a short amount of time, which is why authors do trilogies, I guess. But that was what I was trying to get at--that 'King Arthur' doesn't tend to be about him at all.

That said, maybe because there are all these different elements in the story it can be all things to all people, and anyone can get out of it what they want/need.

One of my all time favorite books regarding Arthur is Rosemary Sutcliffe's "Sword at Sunset"....This great novel is Arthur centered....One of the first Arthurian novels to use the Romano/Celtic background....I have read most of the fiction/non fiction around Arthur and his companions....For me the Romano/Celtic connection is key....I think the Arthur tale is so oft told that authors over the years have added their own spins to entice the reader...And many times Arthur is the pawn....I have moved on a bit.. Arthur Rex subject matter is not so addictive to me as it once was....I will have always room for more "Arthur"....Maybe I'm a hopeless Romantic.....

[annis]

Posted by Sarah
That said, maybe because there are all these different elements in the story it can be all things to all people, and anyone can get out of it what they want/need.

I think you've nailed it there, - the answer to the enduring interest in Arthur is that there is something in the stories and legends which lends itself to as many different interpretations as there are authors and readers. There have been many articles looking at the psychodrama of Arthurian legends and imagery. The Arthurian cycle reaches us at an atavistic level reflected in many mythological and religious legends of the chosen one who suffers and is sacrificed willingly for the health and fertility of the land and the good of the people. The Celtic myth of the Summer King (or as Bernard Cornwell would have it the Winter King, seeing Arthur was by tradition born at the winter solstice, a time associated with rebirth), the Norse legend of Odinn hanging on Yggdrasil, the World Tree, and of course in Christianity, the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross.

However realistically the story of Arthur is portrayed, the mythology of sacrifice and renewal is an unspoken given at a deeper level. Some of the fantasy interpreataions of course make the most of it., like Guy Gavriel Kay’s “Fionavar Tapestry” and Robert Holding’s “Mythago Cycle”. Btw, I see that Robert Holding’s series has a new title due out later this year, called “Avilion”

[Ludmilla]

Posted by Sarah


The Arthurian cycle reaches us at an atavistic level reflected in many mythological and religious legends of the chosen one who suffers and is sacrificed willingly for the health and fertility of the land and the good of the people....

However realistically the story of Arthur is portrayed, the mythology of sacrifice and renewal is an unspoken given at a deeper level. Some of the fantasy interpreataions of course make the most of it., like Guy Gavriel Kay’s “Fionavar Tapestry” and Robert Holding’s “Mythago Cycle”. Btw, I see that Robert Holding’s series has a new title due out later this year, called “Avilion”

I've really enjoyed the Mythago Cycle so far (I've read three of them, and intend to hunt down the others). They operate on that atavistic level you mention above, but are something more than just Arthurian. I haven't found that many fantasy authors who really delve into primitive mythology and the permutations of myth the way that Holdstock does in his Mythago Wood cycle. Am looking forward to his new one. Originally, I thought Avilion was going to come out this spring, but looks like the date got pushed out to this summer in the UK (not sure when it will come out in the US).

[annis]

Oops- sorry, I see that I had a mental blip there and gave Robert Holdstock the wrong name- put it down to ageing brain cells! Yes, I find the way Holdstock plays with the deeper levels of mythology quite fascinating- the Arthurian influence, is as you say, just one aspect.

"Avilion" is scheduled for release in the UK sometime in July, as far as I can see.

Btw, talking of novels which delve into mythology, have you ever read Naomi Mitchison's novel, "The Corn King and the Spring Queen"?

[Ludmilla]

I haven't read that one, Annis, but it looks right up my alley. I generally love books like that.

[Scrapcat]

I have just finished Helen Hollick's PENDRAGON, and I recommend it to anyone who liked Sutcliff's SWORD AT SUNSET. It is another "5th century warlord" type of book. The names are the same but the events are somewhat different. This book, the first of a trilogy, ends with Arthur becoming High King.

[JMJacobsen]

I just finished Anna's Twilight of Avalon and......wow. Kudos to Anna. What I loved most? Isolde was placed in the confines of her time period and gender. No glamorization here. Thank you for that, Anna. It was refreshing, real and completely compelling. I couldn't put it down for two days and don't know if I can wait till next spring for the next installment.

Michele

ps....(full review is on my website, for anyone who wants a more complete look at the novel)

[Divia]

I am 170 pages in and loving it so far! :)

[Anna Elliott]

Well, thank you so much! You've made my day! Isolde has been with me every day through nearly 3 years and 2 pregnancies (and that's just so far!) so I absolutely love hearing that readers are connecting with her, too! :)

[Misfit]

I'm looking forward to getting my hands on this one as well, and Michele just whetted my appetite.

[MedievalBookworm]

Anna, your book is on my wishlist. I'm planning on buying it when I get back to the US in July. I'm so looking forward to it, I love good Arthurian literature, and a few of my friends have reviewed it very highly! =)

[Anna Elliott]

Anna, your book is on my wishlist. I'm planning on buying it when I get back to the US in July. I'm so looking forward to it, I love good Arthurian literature, and a few of my friends have reviewed it very highly! =)

Thanks, Meghan! It's funny your turning up here because a woman at my last book signing had a daughter studying history at university in England who was passionate about historical fiction--and I thought it might be you since I'd often seen your site. But no, since the woman's daughter didn't run a blog. It's great to meet you like this, though!

[MedievalBookworm]

I'm not too surprised by that! There are several Americans over here who just love history and thought studying in the midst of it would be perfect. Unfortunately there aren't too many book signings where my parents live because my mom would love them!

[This charming manc]

I have alway been a big fan of Bernard Cornwell , and steven lawheads arthur books, but the x men films got my interest in once and future king is, it adult or childrens read and how do people rate it ?

[annis]

I've just discovered a new Arthurian trilogy by M.K. Hume. I've got the first book at home, but haven't had a chance to read it yet. It's called "Dragon's Child". (http://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Arthur-M-K-Hume/dp/0755356438)

[Carla]

I have alway been a big fan of Bernard Cornwell , and steven lawheads arthur books, but the x men films got my interest in once and future king is, it adult or childrens read and how do people rate it ?

The Once and Future King, by TH White? Adult, and it's among my favourite versions of the Arthur legends. A few thoughts on it (not a full review) here: http://www.carlanayland.org/reviews/once_future_king.htm

I should add that not everyone likes it; I do, but you may not share my taste. Some people find it excessively whimsical.

[sweetpotatoboy]

The Once and Future King, by TH White? Adult, and it's among my favourite versions of the Arthur legends. A few thoughts on it (not a full review) here: http://www.carlanayland.org/reviews/once_future_king.htm

I should add that not everyone likes it; I do, but you may not share my taste. Some people find it excessively whimsical.

I'm one of those. I forced myself through it and the sequels. As an Arthurian nut, I felt I had to have read them. I thought they were all over the place in terms of style, genre and approach. The first book seemed largely aimed at children but not fully, the rest were more serious but very, very strange.

[Tanzanite]

I've just discovered a new Arthurian trilogy by M.K. Hume. I've got the first book at home, but haven't had a chance to read it yet. It's called "Dragon's Child". (http://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Arthur-M-K-Hume/dp/0755356438)

The second book (Warrior of the West) is being released October 1st - it showed up on my Amazon recommendations the other day.

[enelya]

I read the first one a while ago, and from what I can remember about it it was quite ok. I just do not really like the very Roman setting of the first part, but the characters are quite well developed. Part two is waiting on my to read pile, but since that keeps growing I don't know when I will get around to reading ot

[sweetpotatoboy]

An article in The Times today about a new YA Athurian book and examining the genre:
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article7143288.ece

[annis]

Sounds like an interesting version of the Arthurian legend, SPB, and it's natural for folk-myths to be reinterpreted so that they are relevant to the period they're written in.

[SarahWoodbury]

I find this quote from the article astonishing:

"The rising children’s author Philip Womack thinks that the myth of Arthur taps into the political aspect as well. “As inhabitants of these islands, we don’t have many myths that bring us together, but King Arthur is one,” he says. “I think that we will always seek him as a saviour, whatever situation we’re in, because that’s human nature. The reason the Arthur myths are currently so popular is that they reflect our age brilliantly.”

It's astonishing because this is EXACTLY WHAT GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH INTENDED! How amazing is that? Working for Robert of Gloucester (who was the chief support for his sister Maud, against King Stephen), he wrote his History of the Kings of Britain 900 years ago precisely to create a myth for the English people (as opposed to the Welsh, to whom Arthur had belonged up to that point) that justified the Norman takeover of Britain, traced their lineage back to classical times, and tied everything up in a neat bow culturally. Wow.

[Doug]

I'll echo what a few others have said and cast my votes for Bernard Cornwell's Warlord and Jack Whyte's Camulod series. Thought they were both tremendous, though if I had to pick one, I'm partial to Whyte's, perhaps in part due to length -- I love long series!

While not strictly Arthurian, "The Altar of the Legion" by Farnham Bishop and Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur is in the same vein -- set in England following the withdrawal of the Roman legions and covering events that arguably give rise to the Arthurian legends. But there's no Arthur in it. Originally serialized in Adventure magazine in 1925, it was printed in hardcover in 1925 and is long out of print, but copies can be found pretty easily on the used book sites.

[annis]

Posted by Doug
While not strictly Arthurian, "The Altar of the Legion" by Farnham Bishop and Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur is in the same vein

Is the altar in question Mithraic, or is it a metaphorical image?

[Doug]

No, it's not Mithraic, as the Romans are portrayed as Christian. Definitely metaphoric.

As an aside, Brodeur did do a scholarly monograph on Arthur, "Arthur, Dux Bellorum", published by University of Berkeley (where he was a professor), which is somewhat difficult to find and pretty dry. Not action packed fiction by any means!

[Ashley]

Yay, Arthurian thread. :D

I would second (and third, fourth, etc) the comments about Bernard Cornwell and Helen Hollick. And Rosemary Sutcliff (god, that was so wonderful), and TH White (yes, whimsical but I love his version of Lancelot) and Parke Godwin.

What is it about Arthur? I was raised on Steinbeck (which I still love) and I have to admit I lost the passion when I grew up for things more fantasy driven. But 2004 brought Clive Owen's terrible and wonderful King Arthur and I fell in love all over again. I searched out any kind of "realistic" Arthur books I could find, (that's how I found Helen and Rosemary) and so far I have devoured as much as I could in the genre, also starting my own novel featuring Lancelot and writing fanfiction for ages based on the movie (I wrote my own modern day spin on it, making Arthur into a cop and Lancelot into the son of a mobster, Guinevere his sister, and dealt with the tragedy of their relationship. It morphed from a one shot piece into a 300+ page "novel" lord help me :p).

I still love the myth idea - although I have become a bigger fan of the "realistic" stuff versus the fantasy. I will read almost any version, though.

Guy Gavriel Kay also springs to mind; what a different, tragic and well written way to tell the story (I love his Arthur and Lancelot so much).

And yet why am I still obsessed? When I started writing fanfiction it was in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer universe (laughs) which I still like a lot...but I've written and read in Arthur now for almost seven years. Is it the timelessness of it? The romance? The idea of a fallible, lovable yet by god do I want to punch him sometimes hero - he is self righteous, hurtful, selfish and a fool who does what he wants despite the consequences for others sometimes. And yet he engenders loyalty and love from not one or two but many hundreds of people his entire life.

And then there's the idea that Ms. Hollick spoke of in one of her books - why would any king allow himself to be cuckolded the way he was in the myth?

My idea of that whole triangle...Lancelot is in love with both Arthur and Guinevere, and because he's human and also flawed...he cannot choose and the story ends the only way it can, in tragedy.

There's a woman, a Canadian singer, who does albums based on the story called Heather Dale. She has a song called May Queen and one called Exile that just break my heart, but also represent the triangle perfectly.

Yeah, I ramble. ;)

What do you guys think? What do you love/hate about Arthur? Did you see the movie - let me know what you thought as it's my greatest passion. *laughs*

Thanks for letting me ramble.

ETA: forgot to mention Peter David's modern day Arthur stuff. Lots of fun.