/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7071675]

I've just realized that I've never read any of the proper Arthurian canon before, just the compilations and retellings for kids and young adults.

I'm going to do my best to read The Death of King Arthur and Ivanhoe and whatever else I can find, but does /lit/ know what a good order to read is?

[Anonymous No.7071814]

go in whatever order strikes you at the time.

Read Malory, Steinbeck, Sir Gawain and especially TH White. Extra credit if you throw in Sutcliff, Tennyson, The Dark is Rising and the latest Ishiguro.

For a nerd: anything pre-romantic you can find, and Tolkien's unfinished poem (just published); I haven't read Nikolai Tolstoy's Merlin book, but I'm told it's bananas.

For fun: Mary Stewart, Jane Yolen, Mark Twain; Guy Kay if you're into that sort of thing. Neil Gaiman's comic The Books of Magic has some fun merlin shit. I'm also nostalgic about the usborne illustrated arthur saga, but I haven't revisited it since the fifth grade.

Skip: Marion Zimmer Bradley (all her weirdo sex becomes less interesting when you realize that she violently raped like 50 kids)

to anybody that has read any crazy scholarly works: drop dem names please

[Anonymous No.7071839]

>>7071675
As far as I'm concerned, Morte D'Arthur -> The Sword in the Stone (original text) -> Sir Gawain & The Green Knight -> The Once and Future King is pretty much the canon, and a fine order to go in. I included the Steinbeck in the essential portion just because he's Steinbeck.

If you're drunk, a child, or English, you can just watch Monty Python & the Holy Grail a million times because that's good too.

[Anonymous No.7071845]

>>7071675
>not reading Malory in the 4th grade
Holy shit I'm glad I didn't go to public school.

[Anonymous No.7071928]

>>7071814
>>7071839

Thanks guys.

>>7071845

Now you get to feel superior to people on the book board of a Laotian typography seminar. Truly your life is great.

[Anonymous No.7071949]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Defender_of_Camelot_(short_story)

Zelazny is underrated around here

[Anonymous No.7071974]

>>7071845
i doubt you read malory in the fourth grade. and if you did, it was surely a simplified translation of it into modern english.

[Anonymous No.7071995]

>>7071928
In addition to feeling superior to you, I had a peaceful childhood that included some wonderful literature which I enjoyed greatly.

>>7071974
>Nobody on 4chan can have received a better elementary education than me.
Come on, despite what I said above, my parents rode me pretty hard to study some of the stuff I did and it wasn't all fun and games but I'm glad it happened.

[Anonymous No.7072045]

>>7071675
When I was reading a bunch of Arthurian literature, I tried to go fairly chronologically through most of the works. Here's what I would suggest:

Start with History of the Kings of Britain by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Its the first real Arthurian story (the other stuff is just bits and pieces from Welsh literature). Geoffrey is basically the guy who reinterpreted Arthur and turned him into a symbol of knighthood, rather than just some obscure British warlord. Also the next set of writers are all writing based on his account.

Next, read the Alliterative Morte Arthure and Gawain and the Green Knight, in whichever order you want. Morte Arthure is a poem about the very end of Arthur's reign and his "death," while Gawain is about the ideal of chivalry in the period.

Both of those flow into Malory, and you should read Le Morte d'Arthur.

From there, I think the other anons have covered it pretty well. I would suggest reading Idylls of the King, A Connecticut Yankee, and then finishing with The Once and Future King, although the order after you finish Malory is much less important, since you will have all the basic stories down by that point.

[Anonymous No.7072056]

>>7072045
not OP, but you're magic. thanks

[Anonymous No.7072072]

>>7072056
Also, if you're interested in Arthurian books which no one reads anymore but which I quite like, you should check out In Parenthesis by David Jones and Porius by John Cowper Powys. Porius is this massive novel about a week at the very end of the 5th century, while In Parenthesis is a poem/prose hybrid of Arthuriana and World War I. They're both spectacular in their own ways, and its unfortunate that nobody reads them anymore, but you can help change that.

[Anonymous No.7072096]

>>7072072
I bookmarked both for a future library trip.

[Anonymous No.7072139]

>>7072096
Awesome. Although I will say, while Porius doesn't need much background info, In Parenthesis does. And I know /lit/ likes to go on and on about where you have to start to actually understand something, but you really do need to read Geoffrey and Malory and Nennius's Historia Britonum and Gildas's De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (those last two are both very early works that concern Arthur) in order to get In Parenthesis. That being said, the Nennius and Gildas are both very short, so its not a lot of background reading. Also if you can stand to read some Welsh Triads, those would probably help too.

[Anonymous No.7072144]

>>7072139

Op here, you guys are coming in clutch right now.

[Anonymous No.7072236]

The whole Catholic dogma thing ruins Arthurian legend for me.

England has much better myths, legends, and folklore than that silly European popish Fish Friday dung.

[Anonymous No.7072248]

>>7072236
This
Filthy, dumb, papist scum.

[Anonymous No.7072253]

>>7071675
People seem to be ignoring non-English Arthurian Myths that are also worthwhile like Chretien De Troyes' Arthurian Romances, Von Eschenbach's Parzival and Tristan and Iseult.

[Anonymous No.7072256]

>>7072248

Sorry, can't hear you over being the most powerful organization on the planet.

[Anonymous No.7072280]

>>7071949

> Lord of Light
> not god tier sci fi in every universe

[Anonymous No.7072286]

>>7072256
dumb goy