The legend of King Arthur has intrigued generations for over a thousand years. Over these years, this tapestry has been handed down through the hands of many gifted storytellers. Bits and pieces were taken out and replaced by new strands woven in to fabricate a slight variation of the original that’s suitable for the audience or perhaps the storyteller himself. These modifications are evident in the 1981 film of Excalibur and Thomas Malory’s “Le Morte d’Arthur” published in 1485. The film incorporates magical acts while religious allusions are portrayed in the text. There are several characters that appeared in one but not the other. The two versions have the same essential elements, but with some alterations. The main changes in the story plot are the events leading to the battle and the battle itself. The two versions have the same essential elements, but with some alterations.
“Le Morte d’Arthur” has many religious aspects that are not shown in Excalibur. The film tries to portray the tale as an allegory of the cycle of birth, life, and decay. There are three main allus...
The Arthurian cycle shows a sporadic awareness of the impossibility of mere humans fulfilling all the ideals that Arthur and his court represent. The story of Lancelot and Guenevere, Merlin's imprisonment by Nimu‘, and numerous other instances testify to the recognition of this tension between the real and the unrealistic.
The story of King Arthur is widely known, either his beginnings told in The Sword in the Stone or how he led the Knights of the Round Table. While there are many version of his story T. H. White’s written version and Disney’s animated version of The Sword in the Stone are two of the most recognized versions. Most movies have the ability to embody the original intent of the book they were based upon. Disney’s movie version of T. H. White’s rendition of The Sword in the Stone, however, while portraying the correct story, does not truly convey enough elements of White’s version to be effective in telling the original story. The characterization and Merlyn’s ‘lessons’ within the movie inhibit the film from being an effective portrayal of the book.
Marie De France’s Lanval is a remarkable short narrative that engages the reader into a world filled with unrealistic elements, but enhances on the true meaning of romance, chivalry and nature during the years that King Arthur reigned. “Sir Gawain and The Green Knight” unfortunately does not have an author that can be recognized but this epic poem demonstrates the ghastly adventure of a knight who decides to defend the honor of young King Arthur against a supernatural being in this malicious game of cat and mouse. Both of these pieces of literature have enchanting characteristics that define them as a masterpiece of their era and that’s why they both are easily compared and contrasted. In addition, both Lanval and “Sir Gawain and The Green Knight” can be classified as similar through their themes, style and plots, although they are different through their language and diction. Even though both of these literatures can be viewed as similar as well as contrasting, in the end, each of these tales have illuminated the realm of fantasy throughout the court of King Arthur.
Who was King Arthur? Most people would tell of a great King; a devoted circle of heroic knights; mighty castles and mightier deeds; a time of chivalry and courtly love; of Lancelot and Guinevere; of triumph and death. Historians and archaeologists, especially Leslie Alcock, point to shadowy evidence of a man who is not a king, but a commander of an army, who lived during the late fifth to early sixth century who may perhaps be the basis for Arthur. By looking at the context in which the stories of King Arthur survived, and the evidence pertaining to his castle Camelot and the Battle of Badon Hill, we can begin to see that Arthur is probably not a king as the legend holds.
The three heroes discussed here, Beowulf, Sir Gawain and King Arthur, are heroes for different reasons. Beowulf, our earliest hero, is brave but his motivation is different than then other two. To Sir Gawain personal honor and valor is what is important. King Arthur, Sir Gawain's uncle, is naturally the quintessential king of the medieval period. Though all men to a certain extent share the same qualities, some are more pronounced than in the others. It is important to see how these qualities are central to their respective stories and how it helps (or hinders) them in their journeys.
Malory, Thomas. King Arthur and His Knights: Selected Tales by Sir Thomas Malory, ed. Eugene Vinaver (London: Oxford UP, 1975) 124-25.
One of the main topics discussed in lesson one is the fact that heroes over time and overseas all heroes have something in common; which is true in the case of King Arthur and Beowulf. It is obvious that they are similar in the fact that they are both heroes, but what makes them an idol of their time and in their culture are poles apart. There are many things that are different about Beowulf and King Arthur, but the ones that stand out the most are what kind of hero they are and what actions they did to make them heroic. Both heroes possess qualities that others do not have, but it is what they do with those abilities that prompts someone to write a story about them and idolize them in time.
T. H. White's The Once and Future King is one of the most complete and unique portrayals of the immortal legend of King Arthur. Though it has been in print for less than half a century, it has already been declared a classic by many, and is often referred to as the "bible" of Arthurian legend. White recreates the epic saga of King Arthur, from his childhood education and experiences until his very death, in a truly insightful and new way. This is not, however, the first complete novel of Arthur's life. In the fifteenth century, Sir Thomas Malory wrote Morte d'Arthur, the first complete tale of Arthur's life. Since then, a countless number of books have been written on the subject, yet none can compare to The Once and Future King. It has easily become the most popular of all the Arthurian novels as it is loved by both children and adults. Though similar in many ways to other works of the same subject, such as Malory's, White gives new details, meanings, and insightful modernization to the story, giving it an earthy quality, which the reader can identify with. White's rendering of the Arthurian legend differs from the traditional versions in that he includes contemporary knowledge and concepts, adds new stories and characters to the legend, and provides new perspectives by probing deeper into the existing tales.
King Arthur’s story about how he pulled the sword out of the stone has changed over time because the people telling the story make changes to it to satisfy the reader. Arthurian legends are much different now, than when they were told earlier in time. Many stories told earlier in time are not told today, but the ones that are told today are much different than the original. Earlier in time there was more religion involved and would have more blood and gore, but because the audience has changed, the story has changed as well.
Sir Gawain is, undoubtably, the most varied of the Arthurian characters: from his first minor appearance as Gwalchmei in the Welsh tales to his usually side-line participation in the modern retelling of the tales, no other character has gone from such exalted heights (being regarded as a paragon of virtue) to such dismal depths (being reduced to a borderline rapist, murderer, and uncouth bore), as he. This degree of metamorphosis in character, however, has allowed for a staggering number of different approaches and studies in Gawain.
The Court of King Arthur in the Tales of Lanval and Sir Gawain the Green Knight
Malory, Thomas, and Keith Baines.Malory's Le morte d'Arthur: King Arthur and the legends of the Round Table. 1962. Reprint, New York: New American Library, 2010.
Johannes portrays to Arthur that he should be in fear of him, offering the idea that he believed he held power over this individual, in this case, to take the innocent man’s life. The judge involved in the case d...
Merlin is a character from the original Arthurian Legends, he is a powerful man that does not age, and has no earthly father. Merlin helps the succession of kings, and is associated with King Arthur, but throughout history authors have changed many things about Merlin’s character. The amount of power that Merlin has is changed throughout the retellings of his legend in order to show that Merlin is the most powerful man on the planet.
King Arthur, was he man of truth or myth? King Arthur was a real person, not just a fictional character. While many believe that King Arthur was a non-fictional character, others feel that he was a fictional character. This was because there is no written record of a King Arthur in any area where he was reportedly born or deceased. King Arthur was real because there many people recall King Arthur or who have known personal stories of him, his family, and the wars he so bravely participated in. There are many people who recall King Arthur or know someone he was based off of. King Arthur was not real because it was not recorded in history that there was ever a “King Arthur.”