The King Arthur Myth in Modern American Literature by Andrew E. Mathis (review)

Abstract

104A RTH U RI AN A Hartmann as a 'model and standard' (x) for later poets such as Wolfram and Gottfried, some of the recurring features of Hartmann's narrative works (e.g. the bipartite structure), and what is known about Hartmann's life. Each of the translated works (or group of works in the case of the lyrics) is preceded by a brief introduction. Given that they cover a lot of ground in a short space, and bearing in mind the intended general audience, these short introductions generally do a good job of preparing readers for Hartmann's works (though one might quibble with the vagueness ofthe manner in which 'courtly love' is invoked in the introductions to Hartmann's Lament and lyrics, or wish that the introduction ofthe lyrics had set forth in clearer terms that Hartmann's 'poems' were in fact musical performances, something that might be worth emphasizing for the general audience at which this translation is directed). A short, seven-page bibliography of critical literature, editions, and translations is included at the end of the volume. Frank Tobin has translated the Lament, Hartmann's lyric poetry, and Poor Heinrich, Kim Vivian Erec and Gregorius, and Richard H. Lawson Iwein, though they make clear in their joint introduction that they wish the whole book to be seen as a collaborative effort (xiii). On their approach to translation, the collaborators write: 'We have endeavored to capture some of the flavor of the medieval way of viewing and expressing things without resorting to obsolete and antiquated formulations foreign to our intended audience' (xiii). The result ofthis approach is a very readable rendering of the verse narratives and lyric poetry that has succeeded admirably in capturing the spirit of Hartmann's elegant Middle High German verses. will hasty University of Florida ANDRF.W E. MATHis, The KingArthurMyth in Modern American Literature. Jefferson, NC, and London: McFarland & Co., 2002. Pp. 158. isbn: 0-7864-1171-6. $32. The scope of this study is much narrower than the reference to Modern American Literature in the title would suggest. Not only does it exclude drama and poetry in favor ofprose fiction, but even within this form the choice is highly selective. For a start, it dismisses what can be found in 'the realm of the science fiction and fantasy aisle at the local bookstore,' deeming that they lie outside 'the American literary tradition' (5). It does, however, devote five pages to Hal Foster's Arthurian comic strip Prince Valiant, and six to American National Socialist leader William Dudley Pelley, whom it acknowledges to be 'a marginal figure in the history of literature, film, and politics' (77). It has no interest in historical fiction, but the detective fiction ofRaymond Chandler merits a whole chapter. Some novels in a contemporary setting are examined, but not Bernard Malamud's The Natural, while Walker Percys Lanceht and John Updike's Brazilzre discussed only during a briefdigression on the figure of the Black Knight. Mathis is not concerned with form, however. Rather he explores 'two streams' (5) in modern American fiction: the use of Arthurian myth 'to critique or address historical or contemporaneous events and figures,' which is 'part ofthe general trend of medievalism seen in the formation of fraternal orders among working people in REVIEWS105 the late nineteenth century' (2); and 'a more aesthetic tradition' (4) that discovers how unsuitable are the ideals of an earlier age for contemporary society. It is this dual focus that determines his choice of texts. As a result, he ignores novels placed in an Arthurian setting, unless they comment upon clearly recognizable contemporary figures and events, as does Mark Twain's Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Although he discusses the fiction ofJohn Steinbeck at length, he is less interested in The Acts ofKing Arthur than he is in his other novels, which are placed in a contemporary setting. In these, and in the fiction ofRaymond Chandler, John Gardner, and Donald Barthelme, he finds evidence that the ideals ofArthur's court are unsuited to modern American society. This approach has merit, and it reminds Arthurian scholars of contemporary events that may have influenced the authors, e.g., Matthew Arnold's...