Does 'The Once and Future King' have a future?

[Malcolm]

Hi Everyone,

Fiona suggested I post something about my book and try and get a bit of a discussion going (difficult when it's not available until 2 November), but anyway here goes.

I’m an Australian-based (UK born) author whose debut novel, The Stone Crown, is coming out in the UK this November. It’s done quite well in Australia. The novel (young adult/adult cross-over) takes a fresh look at the Arthurian myth and the Matter of Britain, and is set in the Borders of Scotland. It has a paranormal slant (in fact I've described the book at author talks as 'paranormal social-realism') but it doesn't have the kind of horror slant that vampire and werewolf stories have - I guess it leans more towards a rent in the fabric of reality, a kind of haunting through time where the trapped spirits of Arthur's guard are called forth from where they've been sleeping for 1400 years. Been done before, like most thins, so I'm not claiming it's original.

I'm heavily into strong female leads. One of the main protagonists is a feisty Geordie lass. A lot of adult readers and a number of Australian authors have found it a good read; there have been some excellent reviews as well, with one reviewer saying, “Forget Camelot and chivalry ... this is an intriguing fantasy told with poetic intensity, and an innovative approach to the Arthur we all think we know."

My question, which harks to the topic header, is really has Arthur been done to death? Is it all over for him fictionally or can authors like myself resurrect him continually by reworking and embellishing a tried and tested tale? Go for it, folks.

If you want to check me out or read some short extracts from the book my website is: www.malcolmwalker.com.au If people are interested in the book (what with having to wait until early November) I'd be happy to post some more teasers or email them to people. But, like my dear old mum used to say, don't let's get ahead of ourselves here.

[Misty]

I think that things always have to be and can be reinvented for each generation. Things tend to get dated, and every generation's experiences can bring a new approach or understanding to something. Plus, if there's no one to bring it back into focus, it will fade and be lost.
So, short answer, why the hell not?

[Malcolm]

I'm wondering does each generation just take the current portrayal(s) as a given (not that there's too many givens around Arthur, which I suppose gives him his appeal to both readers and writers alike) or do they refer back to older texts. I know this is an imponderable but I'm just chucking it out there to see what people think. I understand reading is as much about entertainment as it is substance, which means I've got to get hold of a copy of Philip Reeve's Here Lies Arthur as I've heard that his portrayal is of a dark, brutish thug rather than the chivalrous king of the Romance cycle. I'm kind of with him on that one which probably drops me into BunWat's 'Hill Fort Arthur' category. I'm very interested in the notion of cultural touchstone's (nice term by the way) especially as over 600 sites in the UK alone claim a connection to Arthur and as Alan garner so amusingly points out about the area of England where he was brought up, Alderley Edge in Cheshire, and which has it's own sleeping Arthur legend, that the locals during WWII (he was a kid during the war) kept saying with their tongues firmly planted in their cheeks that if Arthur was coming back then that mightn't have been a bad moment to resurrect himself. Which - resurrection having be mentioned - makes one wonder how Arthur ties into Christian mythology. Gone of on a bit of a tangent here, sorry. But I'm very interested in why people keep this notion of his return going.

[Malcolm]

Whoops, me html skills are showing.

[[deleted user]]

Hi Malcolm... first of all good luck with the book.

I haven't read the Reeve book, but will take a look some day and I will have to find your book too! (when I whip TBR into shape... HA!) but I love love love The Once and Future King, which I read before I read The Mists of Avalon*, which I also love, and long after the Mary Stewart books... so long ago I can't remember the titles**... found it The Crystal Cave, etc.

I'm with Misty: I too think things have to be reinvented for each generation. Every book has its anacronisms, obviously, and what was normal for TH White's generation and then for Mary Stewart's generation is not necessarily normal for the present generation. At least in books you can avoid (or explain better) the blaring errors you find in films, like the indian girl's 1980s shag haircut in the American West of the 1800s (Dances with Wolves -- what's a hundred years among friends?), or the pendulum clock in Anthony and Cleopatra.

But every great hero get changed according to present whims... Robin Hood is now a benevolent guy dressed in green with a group of bumbling cohorts instead of being leader to a gang of cut throats.

I'm off on a tangent too, but the upshot I guess is that if the book is well written and the story is good anything can be reworked... it's the shoddy knockoff that I hate.

*has anyone read book 2? How is it?
**couldn't possibly be my age showing...

[Malcolm]

Hi Fiona,

I read the first two of the Crossley-Holland trilogy and enjoyed them - one of the reasons being that he set the books in the Welsh marches not far from where I used to live, so I new the country to which he referred. I never got around to the last one. In answer to your question about antipodean responses to Arthur I think it's a mixture of a hemispheric thing and a generational thing: youngsters here are probably less likely to know the Arthurian legends than their UK counterparts, or so I would imagine (even my editor at Walker Books Australia, who's in her late forties, wasn't as familiar with it as I expected) - although it's still very popular down under.

The two covers are so different. We've got a bit of a joke going around it because the Oz cover looks like a verdant chunk of Wales or something and the UK cover looks like a burnt out paddock in an Australian heatwave. Had some say in the Oz version but none in the UK one. I like them both.

[Malcolm]

Hi Heather,

Thanks for joining in the discussion. I cannot watch the TV program Merlin ... I think your one word sums it up - 'bleah'. Straight and to the point. Anyway, you can check out some excerpts of my re-imagining of Arthur if you want at my website: wwww.malcolmwalker.com.au
I'm always interested in what people think - good, bad or indifferent. All the best, Malcolm.

[Kelly]

I actually read my first Arthurian book this summer. Mists of Avalon by Zimmerman. I really enjoyed it. My 4th grade daughter just brought home a short story on King Arthur and I think it is great that she is reading the same thing I am. So yes, I think retelling the story is great. I will have to look up your book and put it on my tbr list. Good Luck!

[Malcolm]

Thank you, Kelly. The Mists of Avalon is one of my favourite modern renditions of Arthur. If you get hold of my book, please let me know what you think - good, bad or indifferent.