Here is a website that has a nice thorough description of that wonderful show, "King Arthur and The Knights of Justice." This is too awesome: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KingArthurAndTheKnightsOfJustice
It makes me think once again about why sports have (at least in a few cases) become a new way of demonstrating knightly behavior or adventures. The whole team aspect and competition is pretty apparent, but is there anything else that makes sports appealing? It sure does make it fun!
And here is the glorious intro. After watching this, I do not see how Arthur can ever NOT be relevant to modern ideas and preferences: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNjhbOH8m2U
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If only because Arthur and his crew are infinitely adaptable, right?
ReplyDeleteThe question of athletes vs. superheroes is an interesting one; depending on the superheroes, you get the team aspect and their hierarchy with both, and both are fallible. Athletes are more human, more-- attainable? But I don't know that we could consider the knights of the Round Table human in the sense that you or I or the contemporary reader could aspire to, you know, sleeping in the Marvelous Bed or crossing a Bridge of Swords.
I think maybe the major different that lends Arthurian knights more to super athletes than super heroes is the aspect of self-determination? Superheroes have their powers thrust upon them, generally, while athletes seek out their occupations with very clear goals: train, listen to the boss, train, win all the time.
Oh, Erin. Great point!
ReplyDeleteI think you are spot on in laying out the difference between super athletes and super heroes abilities. Athletes are very driven, and have to work to develop their talents. Super heroes have to work to control their talents, but that is very different. The super athlete is more likely to work cohesively in a team environment because they all are working towards a common goal and using similar means.
I can't break away from the blog even though class is over!!
ReplyDeleteAs someone who is disinterested in any and all sports, I still appreciate the sports tie-in with Arthuriana. It fits, in one way, because Arthur's knight's participate in sport via tournements and jousting. There's the celebrity aspect and the crowds cheering from the stands (reminds me of A Knight's Tale). Also, contemporary athletes wear identifying uniforms with colors and symbols to align them with their teams. These uniforms also exhibit numbers to identify individual players. Armor, with crests and colors, functions in a similar way. Football players especially -- wearing padding, guards, and helmets -- connect the medieval hero with the modern one; virtually anybody could be hiding beneath helm.
As Erin writes, knighthood and athleticism both require skill, training, perseverance, and teamwork. However, in some cases knights actually are "born" rather than "made." Galahad, for instance, doesn't stoop to compete in tournements or demonstrate his prowess. He is simply predestined to be the best and he is (I'm not going to touch on that free will stuff here. Also, in full disclosure, I hate Galahad). Perceval is also a natural born knight -- knighthood (at least the fighting aspects) is just in him despite his sheltered upbringing.
Finally, in response to Ashley's last comment, team work may be required of the knights, but judging from this semester's texts, many of our knights are not exactly "teamplayers." Solo quests and individual renown ("step back, I've got to do this on my own so that I can prove I am the coolest")are major building blocks of knightly identity.
Note this detail from the Wikipedia entry on the show:
ReplyDelete"It has been reported that Image Entertainment will be releasing the complete series as a boxed set in the US in March of 2010 and it will be available for pre-order from Amazon sometime in January."
So in case the need to relive your childhood cartoon-viewing proves too great to resist, there you go...
Megan, that is a really good point (and I can't stop posting either!!)! The knights often do not play well with others in stories we read. I think it was definitely a good decision by the authors to emphasize characters that deviate from the concept of a cohesive group, because who wants to read 100% perfection for more than 1 page?! I know I don't.
ReplyDeleteBut I do think some of the early texts were trying to demonstrate how flaws and mistakes led to knights becoming more a part of the group. However, Malory is a different story. He started out by showing readers that the team system was not going to work.
Bet no one is going to read this and if anyone does, then we should become life members! Megan, I too hate Galahad. Never thought I would say this. But, there!
ReplyDeleteYes, I think we discussed this in class that although the knights of the Round Table are a brotherhood or fellowship, they do go off on their own. It is definitely a case of "I," then all of us.
I too am still under the spell. I cannot get over the end of Malory's Arthur. It is tragic in many ways including Lancelot and Guinevere's loyalty to him. It really does seem they both loved Arthur but unfortunately were drawn to each other.