When I was a teenager, I was enthralled with the writings of Victorian romance authors. Victoria Holt, Dauphne DuMaurier, and Mary Stewart, to name a precious few. Upon discovering the world of Camelot in Stewart's Merlin trilogies (beginning with the Crystal Cave), I fell headlong into love with all things Arthurian. I had seen the Disney sugar-coated animated film of the "Sword and the Stone", but the mystery that Stewart wove with her novels initiated me into the magic of wizards and pagan rituals.
I re-read the trilogy and even ventured a try at "Le Morte Darthur" by Sir Thomas Malory. I studied the druid history and lore. More reading included "The Once and Future King", "The Forever King", "The Forrest House", "Mists of Avalon", and others.
Hollywood has been a disappointment in the telling of this mystical tale. "Excalibur" probably came as close as any I have seen to capturing my imagination. "Mists of Avalon" was not bad. So, it is with trepidation that I will view the newest cinematic version of my hero: "King Arthur"
Wonder why it is that Americans are much more fascinated by the legend of Arthur than our British cousins? Do we secretly envy the rich history of the British Isles, or the monarchies?
If Merlin could grant me a wish, it would be to visit Glastonbury, the Isle of Avalon, the ruins of Tintagel, and Stonehenge; a wish to spend unlimited time studying this period of Britain's history, roaming the countryside and ancient battlements. Perhaps I could write another chapter in the life of Arthur, and his chivalrous knights.
Now, if I could only find the keys to your Time Machine, Mr. Wells.
No comments:
Post a Comment