 |
| Lancelot from Arthur (2004) |
In creating the Morte, Malory drew on several sources,
including various parts of the Vulgate and Post-Vulgate cycles, the Prose Tristan, and the Alliterative Morte Arthure and the Stanzaic Morte Arthur; but he was not a slavish
translator. He reshaped his originals, omitted much that was not relevant to
his purpose and even created new sections to advance his themes. One of the
ways that Malory reworked earlier texts was by bringing Lancelot into
prominence and making him the central character, more important even than
Arthur in the overall scheme of the book.
One of the things that makes
Lancelot such a significant and interesting character is that, in his attempt
to live up to his reputation as the best of knights, he strives for perfection
in all of the codes that a knight should be subject to. He is more chivalric
and courtly than any other knight; he seeks adventure, champions women and the
oppressed, acts in a courtly manner and serves his king at home and abroad to a
degree unachieved by anyone else. He is the truest of all lovers never even
considering another woman. And he strives to perfect himself spiritually as he
seeks the Holy Grail. Of course he fails to be perfect in all these areas –
partly because they place conflicting demands on him. By being a true lover to
Guinevere he fails in the quest for the Grail and he is less than loyal to his
king. But the attempt to adhere to the conflicting codes is what gives Lancelot
his grandeur; and the very fact of those conflicts is what makes him the sort
of character with whom readers for centuries have been able to identify, even
as they recognise his failings – or perhaps because they recognise his failings
– in the great enterprise he has undertaken. Lancelot’s prominence does not
negate the centrality of Arthur or the roles of the vast cast of other
fascinating characters in the Morte.
Indeed, it is the wealth of characters and tales in the book that has made it
such a treasure trove for future artists. But Lancelot’s character and conflict
are central unifying elements in the book; and he is the one against whom all
the others are measured. [Lupack, Guide
to Arthurian Literature and Legend, 2007, pp.134-135]
 |
| Lancelot and Guinevere |
Blog question: Do you identify with Malory’s Lancelot? If so, why? And,
if not, why not?
I think that failing to be perfect in all aspects of one's life because they place conflicting demands on oneself is something that almost everyone can identify with. Most modern career focused female can attest to how difficult it is to juggle domestic and public work. It is impossible to be perfect in all domains.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, while I'm not a chivalrous knight saving damsels in distress and defending my king's castle, I can relate to the pressures Lancelot was under.
Even though I like Lancelot as a character, who strives to perfection in all of the codes, and as a true lover to Guinevere, personally, I wouldn’t identify myself with Lancelot. Firstly, he is a male. Secondly, he is portrayed as an ideal, and even his failings seem to be ideal, he is so righteous and honourable. Yes, we all have good and bad inside of us as Lancelot, but in this story it looks factitious. I don’t believe him. Thirdly, to me he rather represents a manual of what is good, what is bad or what should we do and what we shouldn’t, all with no “vital spark". And, more importantly, all the good and bad are the good and bad that specifically relate to Middle Ages. Don’t think so that being disloyal to the State or the “King” in the 21st century would be a crime or violation of the honour’s code. I might admire him, particularly, admire his love for Guinevere, but I definitely wouldn’t identity myself with a “character” that might be just a self-character of Thomas Malory as what John Steinbeck suggested.
ReplyDeleteMaria S. (22504079).
I think I can identify with Lancelot, and not only because we both seem to be extremely close to perfection.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the Lancelot's life and death are defined by an upholding of certain principles by which his life was lived. Despite the fact that sometimes these principles contradicted each other or made life significantly more difficult for him he seemed devoted to his ethos. On the surface I feel like that is the basic manner in which i live my own life. Despite our goals and values being different i can identify with the concept of upholding a value no matter the cost for the sake of being true to yourself. It is impossible to always do the right thing or for all your actions to be unanimously accepted but it is possible to be true and honest to yourself and that seems to be the way in which Lancelot lived, admirably.
While I can at least partialy identify with Lancelot's moral code I find that with him being placed as at least partially an ideal he is not a sympathetic nor a conectable character. To me he becomes more an embodiment of the concept rather then a actual character. As such I can't really connect with him, and I find the ideas behind the charcter to be at times annoying as it attempts to make him a tragic figure due to his love through the use of heavy christian alagory. As such it is more due to how the story is told that I can't sympathise with him or his predicament. Finding his clashing morals annoying as they appear through the overlaying of christian rhetoric at the time with the older ideals present.
ReplyDeleteI think that the purpose of Malory's characters was that they personified aspects of all of us within them. However, I don't think they were made to encapsulate each person in their entirety. I think we are meant to identify with aspects rather than the whole. So therefore, I do identify with Malory's Lancelot to some extent, in his failings mostly, as opposed to the perfect Galahad. However, I also find Lancelot distanced because of his gender and his participation in adultery.
ReplyDelete