King Arthur in history and legendJones, William Lewis
History
King Arthur in history and legend
Jones, William Lewis
Arthur, King; Arthurian romances -- History and criticism
At any rate, Tennyson frankly confesses that what he presents in his
‘Idylls’ is a
“tale
New-old, and shadowing Sense at war with Soul”;
and the new element in it is a didactic purpose suited to the moral
and sentimental temper of the Victorian era, and embodying what a
severe critic calls “the ethics of the rectory parlour.”[131] Tennyson
himself is responsible for revealing the “particular intention” which
equates the Arthur of the ‘Idylls’ with the Prince Consort; for he
dedicates the poems to his memory,
“since he held them dear,
Perchance as finding there unconsciously
Some image of himself.”
It is hardly likely, however, that Tennyson, when he first thought
of the Arthurian stories as a poetic theme, had any very definite
idea of putting them into the form of an allegory such as most of
his interpreters now discover in them; but that he, from the first,
intended a “modern meaning” is plain from the lines appended to the
_Morte D’Arthur_ at the time of its original publication,--
“To me, methought, who waited in a crowd,
There came a bark that, blowing forward, bore
King Arthur, like a modern gentleman
Of stateliest port; and all the people cried
‘Arthur is come again: he cannot die.’”
That the ‘Idylls,’ when finally completed and put into their present
order, had “an allegorical or perhaps a parabolic drift,” in them,
is certain, for the words quoted are Tennyson’s own.[132] Tennyson,
however, complains that critics had “taken his hobby and ridden it
too hard, and have explained some things too allegorically.” “The
general drift of the ‘Idylls,’” he continues, “is clear enough. ‘The
whole ... is the dream of man coming into practical life and ruined
by one sin. Birth is a mystery and death is a mystery, and in the
midst lies the tableland of life.’” Modern though this “drift” may
be, it is perennial and universal enough in its appeal to save the
‘Idylls’--notwithstanding the references to the “modern gentleman” and
the Prince Consort--from being a merely Victorian poem, or series of
poems. They do not, together, constitute an Arthuriad: they are not
meant to represent “the epic, some twelve books” with “faint Homeric
echoes” which Tennyson may have been meditating in his earlier years
when he published his _Morte D’Arthur_. “He produced no epic, only a
series of epic idyllia. He had a spiritual conception, ‘an allegory
in the distance,’ an allegory not to be insisted upon, though its
presence was to be felt. No longer, as in youth, did Tennyson intend
Merlin to symbolise ‘the sceptical understanding,’ or poor Guinevere
to stand for the Blessed Reformation, or the Table Round for Liberal
Institutions. Mercifully Tennyson never actually allegorised Arthur in
that fashion.”[133]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account