A Bibliography of Modern Arthuriana (1500-2000) ed. by Ann F. Howey and Stephen R. Reimer (review)

Abstract

96ARTHURIANA Roman War' to end instead with the long-deferred consequences ofthe LauncelotGwenyvere threat. And Crofts surely is correct to stress that Malory wants 'Arthur to have been cognizant of the ongoing betrayal.' Crofts further maintains that Arthur and Malory are concerned with English and Arthurian knighthood; this is revealed in part through a particularly fine account ofthe Battle ofSalisbury Plain. In light of this it is regrettable that the Index gives no listing for the various Malorian episodes or characters discussed by Crofts. Also, some ofthe notes contain recent publications not found in the bibliography. Nevertheless, Crofts writes clearly, and he is well read and up-to-date. The discussion ofthe manuscript in ChapterThree is particularly cogent, and the accompanying color plates are marvelous. Publication ofMalory s ContemporaryAudience was abetted by the Vinaver Trust: on the whole, Crofts is a worthy recipient ofVinaver's aegis. K. S. WHETTER Acadia University ANN F. HOWEY and Stephen R Reimer, compilers, A Bibliography ofModern Arthuriana fijoo—2000). Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2006. Pp. xxix, 774. isbn: 1843840688. $190. £125. Hot on the heels of TheArthurianAnnals by Dan Nastali and Philip Boardman (see Arthuriana 15.2 [2005]: 77-78) comes a second compilation ofArthuriana, further evidence, if any were needed, of the continued vigor ofArthurian tradition and of the many ways in which ir has been adapted over the centuries. Like theAnnah, the Bibliographydeals with the work ofEnglish-language authors and artists. After an Introduction outlining the criteria for the selection ofmaterial and a list of Sources Used in Compiling the Bibliography, the bibliography itself is divided into six sections: Literature (the largest); Comic Books and Graphic Novels; Film, Television, and Radio; Music; Games; Fine Art and Graphic Design. These are followed by a General Index and an index of Arthurian Characters and Themes. Within each section, the material is listed alphabetically by author's last name (or by title if anonymous), totalling 4542 entries. Each entry lists the first appearance in print or in book form and 'major reprints,' though this is usually confined to revised editions or to inclusion, in part or whole, in a separate collection or anthology. Alphabetical organization dictates that books in a series are listed out ofchronological order. The annotations focus upon the use ofArthurian tradition, and their length reflects the need to explain its significance. This means that works in which the Arthurian story is centtal (but straightforward) often receive less space than those in which it is marginal (but complicated). Thus Donald Barthelme's TheKingis briefly summarized as ? novel, in which Arthur and his court are active in England during World War ?G (21), whereas the annotation for Brooks Hansen's The Chess Garden extends to eleven lines before concluding that 'there seems to be an Arthurian connection,... though it is a rather tenuous one' (167). This emphasis is valuable to the scholar wondering whether the few Arthurian references make it worth while reading a long book: the twenty-one lines devoted to A.S. Byatt's Possession, for example, helpfully reviews97 trace the various Arthurian references and thematic parallels. Occasionally, familiar works, like Catherine Christian's 7Ai Sword and the Flame ('primarily a historical reconstruction of Malory's tales, narrated by Bedivere,' 72) and Godfrey Turton's The Emperor Arthur ('"Historical" novel, presenting Arthur as "dux bellorum,"' 436), are paid scant attention. Conversely, those that have been overlooked by other researchers are given generous space: the annotation for Nicholas Gray's Sir Gawain andthe GreenKnight:A Play, which mingles traditional and original material, occupies twenty-seven lines. Where the compilers have not examined awork in the Literature section, as is the case of Edward Frankland's The Bear ofBritain, they provide only a very briefannotation or none at all; in other sections, they often list the secondary source for information on works not seen. Inevitably, a few items have been missed or excluded. One wonders why the 1991 edition of The NewArthurian Encyclopedia appears among rhe Sources Used, rather than the Updated 1996 edition which includes a supplement ofmaterial published from 1990-95; and why the next supplement (2001) is not mentioned, particularly since both compilers contributed to it. In these theywould have...