Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I have the same aesthetic aversions that you do, I think. There is no girlbossing, women are portrayed as either passive victims, clever manipulators of the egos of men, or wild eyed semi-feral holy women, all of which are (to me) very plausible and period accurate.
The author justifies his revisions by putting the story in the mouth of a narrator with a very specific POV. The narrator is a pagan, a warrior, and a commoner who by chance learns how to read a bit when young and who is at the right place at the right time to witness or participate in many of the greatest eventa of Arthurian legend. One of his best friends, a noble born Christian cavalryman ("knight") would have told the same story but with different emphases and interpretations, and it would sound much more familiar to fans of "Le Mort D'Arthur."
I get the sense that the author is both a fan of Arthurian legend and of 5th century British history and has done his best to reconcile the two without doing a disservice to either. It's gritty and real, but it's not "grimdark." And there is no projection of 20th century morality back in time.
I'm not a huge Arthuriana buff. He does change some characters I think, but in a way that leaves the door open for the later "canonical" interpretations of them to still make sense. Arthur, for example, has the air of confidence, nobility, and invincibility you've come to expect when leading men or speaking publicly. But in private, when confiding to the main character, he reveals that he is sometimes wracked with doubt or grief or barely-controlled anger. I think it's pretty clever. Instead of tearing down or subverting the Arthur you expect, or making him into the bad guy, the author shows the psychological toll that singlehandedly bearing the destiny of Britain on his shoulders takes on him.
More options
Context Copy link