In which I think far too much about imaginary characters

[amari_z]

I appear to be currently incapable of writing anything about Arthur from Arthur's perspective. I think I just don't have a handle on him. Mostly, he frustrates me. I realize that he’s supposed to be admirable and principled and ethical and all that, but he just reminds me of people I don't like, despite the fact that he's played by Clive Owen and so is much prettier than them (even the women). I just can't get over what comes across as his smug or pompous self-righteousness, even though we are also shown that the character apparently experiences doubts, and actually may have a spiritual/identity crisis. He should be interesting, but I think I'm stymied by the speechifying. It's not simply that I don't like him. I don't like Guinevere, but I can get my mind around her. To me, she's determined and has an agenda and is not afraid of what it might take to fulfill it. Whether or not she actually is in love with Arthur is not necessary for me to decide, since I don't think it would change her actions either way.

Lancelot, clearly he's the one it's all about for me. It's not surprising, since I've always liked the character. What's not to like? Even in Malory, he's the best character--he goes utterly mad twice (or three times?) and runs around naked and raving in the forest for months; he cuts a man in half in a fight when he has one hand literally tied behind his back; he rides in a cart when he’s off to rescue the in distress Guinevere. How can you not love him? Even though he is pinning after insipid Guinevere (not the movie version), that just makes him run amuck and do things like steal other knights’ amour so he can trick people into fighting with him since they think he's someone else. The movie just gave my interest a new dimension--a Lancelot who's sarcastic, irreverent, and doesn't even like Guinevere (in my mind). How can I resist wanting to tell stories about him?

That's all well and good, but I guess it really comes down to what reaction you understand. I can understand bitterness and sarcasm and cynicism, but I'm less good with idealism, especially when the ideals are not compelling. Arthur's idealism falls completely flat to me, perhaps because it so laughably lacking in the historical context (I know, I know, what historical context--Roman army in Britain in c. 450?) and even if someone was to convince me that a man of that time and place would spout such philosophies, he is just so naive and blind to what's going on around him. I'm not sold. Only a stupid character of his supposed experience would have maintained those opinions as anything but dream ideals, and I don't think he's actually supposed to be stupid. If I do manage to write him, it will probably be something that is not very flattering, so I can get it out of my system before possibly trying to go on to buy into him as a heroic character. Or maybe not.