The character of King Arthur is unique in literature. Most characters are known through their actions and words as described by the author of a story. Arthur, however, is a conglomerate of characters described by many different authors over a fifteen hundred year span. There is no single depiction of him, and one cannot trace his origin to a single author for the "definitive" description.
Cover of Spanish translation of Chaucer, Cover of Faber reprint edition of Chaucer, Introduction If I were writing this in French, as I should be if Chaucer had not chosen to write in English, I might be able to head this preliminary note with something like Avis au lecteur; which, with a French fine shade, would suggest without exaggeration the note of warning.
As it is, I feel tempted to write, 'Beware! For I do really desire to warn the reader, or the critic, of some possible mistakes in or about this book: It were perhaps too sanguine a simplicity to say that this book is intended to be popular; but at least it is intended to be simple.
It describes only the effect of a particular poet on a particular person; but it also expresses a personal conviction that the poet could be an extremely popular poet; that is, could produce the same effect on many other normal or unpretentious persons.
|The Once And Future King||Literature represents much of the very best of humanity's writings, and it is not by any accident that, after bestsellers and sensationalized books have faded from memory, literature continues to thrive and remain intensely relevant to contemporary human conditions. Literature's stories and texts survive the fires of time.|
|Chivalry - Wikipedia||In this commercial for Trojan condoms which was banned for good reason, it seems a young woman tests her boyfriend by convincing her sister to try seducing him.|
|Secret Test of Character - TV Tropes||Thus, chivalry has hierarchical meanings from simply a heavily armed horseman to a code of conduct.|
|G.K. Chesterton||Arthur, who is son of King Uther Pendragon but was raised by another family, takes his rightful place as king when, as a boy, he is able to pull the sword called Excalibur from the stone.|
|A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by Mark Twain||King Arthur is without question the greatest and most heroic figure in English mythology, and a vast medieval cycle of legend and semi-history is built around him.|
It makes no claim to specialism of any sort in the field of Chaucerian scholarship. It is written for people who know even less about Chaucer than I do. It does not in any of the disputed details, dictate to those who know much more about Chaucer than I do. It is primarily concerned with the fact that Chaucer was a poet.
Or, in other words, that it is possible to know him, without knowing anything about him. A distinguished French critic said of my sketch of an English novelist that it might well bear the simple title, 'The Praise of Dickens'; and I should be quite content if this tribute only bore the title of 'The Praise of Chaucer'.
The whole point, so far as I am concerned, is that it is as easy for an ordinary Englishman to enjoy Chaucer as to enjoy Dickens.
Dickensians always quote Dickens; from which it follows that they often misquote Dickens.
Having long depended on memory, I might be quite capable of misquotation; but I fear I have fallen into something that may seem even more shocking: I do incline to think that it is necessary to take some such liberties, when first bringing Chaucer to the attention of fresh and casual readers.
However that may be, all this part of the explanation is relatively easy; and the intention of the book is tolerably obvious. Unfortunately this plan of simplification and popularity is interrupted by two problems, which can hardly be prevented from presenting a greater complexity.
In the second chapter, I plunged rather rashly into the wider historical elements of Chaucer's age; and soon found myself among deep tides that might well have carried me far out of my course.
And yet I cannot altogether regret the course that I actually followed; for there grew upon me, while writing this chapter, a very vivid realization which the chapter itself does not very clearly explain. I fear that the reader will only pause to wonder, with not unjust irritation, why I sometimes seem to be writing about modern politics instead of about medieval history.
I can only say that the actual experience, of trying to tell such truths as I know about the matter, left me with an overwhelming conviction that it is because we miss the point of the medieval history that we make a mess of the modern politics. I felt suddenly the fierce and glaring relevancy of all the walking social symbols of the Chaucerian scene to the dissolving views of our own social doubts and speculations to-day.
There came upon me a conviction I can hardly explain, in these few lines, that the great Types, the heroic or humorous figures that make the pageant of past literature, are now fading into something formless; because we do not understand the old civilized order which gave them form, and can hardly even construct any alternative form.
The presence of the Guilds or the grades of Chivalry, the presence of the particular details of that day, are not of course necessary to all human beings.JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.
The character is undertaking a challenge of courage, strength or skill for some important prize. However, at a critical moment, The Hero is confronted with doing something that is morally tranceformingnlp.come being warned about a forfeit if the reprehensible act is not done, the hero reluctantly stands by the decision and accepts that the challenge is lost, expecting no credit for the deed.
Chivalry was developed in the north of France around the midth century but adopted its structure in a European context. New social status, new military techniques, and new literary topics adhered to a new character known as the knight and his ethos called chivalry.
A regulation in the Chivalric Codes includes taking an oath of loyalty to the overlord and perceiving the rules of warfare.
A somewhat tragic figure, Arthur is the rightful heir to the throne in most versions of the mythos, who brings order to the land by defeating his rivals and other threats — and then tries his best to be a good ruler, assembling the Knights of the Round Table to serve as paragons of chivalry.
His rule is ultimately undone by the plots and shortcomings of his own followers and family. King Arthur was a legendary British leader who, according to medieval histories and romances, led the defence of Britain against Saxon invaders in the late 5th and early 6th centuries.
The details of Arthur's story are mainly composed of folklore and literary invention, and his historical existence is debated and disputed by modern historians.
The sparse historical background of Arthur is. Sir Thomas Mallory was a great one to write the adventures of King Arthur and his knights - a knight himself, he led a life of intrigue and adventure, albeit not one that always lived up to the ideas of chivalry he penned at the heart of the Arthurian legends.