Warning: Rant Ahead.

                As the title states, this is a rant and will most likely contain R rated language, sloppy grammar, and will not be suitable for those under the age of eighteen.

            Now that I've warned everyone, I can begin. 

            Here is my question. Why, in most of the texts that we have read in this class, is everyone just okay with this affair that Gwen and Lance have going on? I am aware that it has been addressed many, many times, in both class and in various blogs. However, I just cannot come to terms with a few things about it. Perhaps my biggest issue is not with Gwen and Lance, but with Arthur himself. Nobody in his or her right mind is ever okay with being cheated on. Never in my life have I met a person who was cheated on by their significant other and was just okay with it. THAT IS JUST NOT HOW IT WORKS. I realize that when reading these stories that we cannot always apply common sense to them, but come on, really? Are we honestly supposed to just believe that the great King Arthur, the most loved and respected king that ever was, just shrugged off the love of his life cheating on him with his *supposedly* most loyal and trusted knight?  Right. That makes total sense. my biggest issue concerns Arthur himself and the way he deals with this traitorous affair, don't think that I have forgotten about the two traitors in question. I'll start with Lady Gwen. In my head, I see her as weak, pitiful, easily swayed by the opinions of others, and immature. In fact, she reminds me a bit of Eve in the Garden of Eden, when she is tempted by the apple. I think that she sets a bad example for her people as well. If the Queen cannot stay loyal to her king, how does anyone expect any other kind of loyalty (both to the kingdom, Arthur, or spouses)? The way that I see her reacting to Arthur finding out about her affair is kind of like this:

        

            Now, moving on to the famous Lancelot. As I said earlier on, if Lance is supposed to Camelot’s golden boy and Arthurs most trusted knight, how could he have ever thought that sleeping with Gwen, the Queen, was a good idea? Certainly we all have experienced different sorts of temptation and lived to tell the tale of how we denied it. Are all men as weak as Lancelot, or is the bravest knight in all the land merely especially susceptible to Gwen’s' charms?  The world may never know. Another reason that I cannot stand Lancelot anymore (before this class I was a firm believer that one day my knight in shining armor would one day come galloping up to me on a powerful steed. However, now I am a bit wiser and more savvy, I know that if he actually does do that, it is probably not his first or his last time doing it), is that he never shows any signs of guilt or remorse. Though it probably wouldn't help the situation, at the very least he could gain a few points back.

            And so, here ends my rant. I will ask this: Am I just a ranting lunatic who is fixated on this issue, or does anyone else feel the same way? 

Avalon High

           Reading Meg Cabot's Avalon High sent me into a complete and utterly déja vu moment. This moment in particular sent me right back to middle school, where I must admit I spent so much time in the school library that all the librarians came to know me on a first name basis. As poisonous as this was to my reputation, I found that I just didn't care. It was probably this moment that I should have realized that I was destined to be an English major. This was one of the first books I had read about any Arthurian legend, so you can imagine how confused I was until I did a little bit of research.

            What I liked best about this book in middle school was the ending. Not because it meant that the book was finally over, but because it fueled my want for a 'Happily Ever After'.  Ever since I was little, and I am sure that I am not alone in this, I have been a hopeless romantic looking for the elusive 'One'. Cabot fulfilled all of my romantic hope that Elle and Will would end up together, no matter what the evil Marco did. To bad it never came with a disclaimer reading: "WARNING: This does not actually happen in real life".  Anyway, what I honestly liked best about the book after I read again for class was that portions of Tennyson's poem were put on the beginning of each chapter (that way, at least, there is an inkling of intelligence in the 'book').  

            One thing that really rubbed me the wrong way about the book was how much Elle stereotyped people. For example: When Elle assumes things about people based on how they look. Just because a person has tattoos doesn't mean that they do drugs. I myself am a prime example of this. I do have a tattoo, and I somehow manage to not do drugs. It can be done.

            Though there are only a few things in common throughout the many, many texts on Arthurian legend, the single thing that I consistently abhor is the affair between Gwen and Lance. It is hard for me to describe in polite words how I truly feel about the entire thing, and had I been Arthur, I would have beheaded them both and put their heads on stakes at the gates of Camelot... I guess it's a good thing that I was never destined to have an ancient kings past intertwined with my modern day life. 

(2/5)

Knight Life

I actually found myself weirdly liking this book. I know we didn't read all of it (we so don't have the time for that)  but I think we managed to get a general feel for the book.
It's a totally ridiculous setting for a King Arthur story but it also seemed to work. While I think it's bizarre (even with today's explanation) that Arthur would not run for an office in his own damn country, I guess New York is as good a place as any for a man with no believable history to start over. And then immediately run for office. Plot holes. So many plot holes.

I think the biggest problem I have with this story is probably Gwen. I can accept Arthur's nonsensical run for office and the fact that he knows nothing about politics or society. I can accept a reverse aging Merlin and scaly demon people. I'm just so fed up with lame, bitchy, treasonous renditions of Gwen.
.                                                           
This is my Gwen. I'll admit it. I think she's one of the best renditions of Gwen ever to be presented. As such I have trouble accepting other versions at times. I understand that the Gwen/Lance love story will always be a thing, although the lack of it in Merlin and therefore the lack of it in Angel Coulby's portrayal may play a part of why I love her so much. This Gwen is brave, smart, beautiful, and loyal. She makes mistakes but she's humble and is always willing to figure her shit out. The Gwen in this book (who unfortunately has been given Angel Coulby's face by my mind) is mediocre at best. And then, seemingly out of no where (who knows what happens in the missing pages) she betrays Arthur for Morgaine of all people? Where did that come from? (I suppose it probably has something to do with Lance but we know nothing about him).

Book Gwen, "Gwen Queen" as if that isn't the most obvious name ever seems like she was dropped into the campaign and is basically a coffee fetcher. Which is so totally uninspiring. She gets one good speech about politics and it's ruined by her tendency to talk "like one of the guys". She's a woman who is clearly being written by a man and it's boring and not very believable.

Sassy nine year old Merlin (who's presence no one seems to question?) is more believable in this campaign than Gwen is. Which, while hilarious, is frankly unfair.

Why is no one questioning the presence of this on the campaign? 
Furthermore, why is no one questioning it when he suddenly disappears!
The book makes me laugh, especially the whole bagel thing (and one other section that I'm totally forgetting) but it also is ridiculous and filled with plot holes and totally uninspiring female characters. So that's my thoughts. Sorry for the two posts in one day thing. That's obnoxious of me.

Knight LIfe: Yet Another Gwen

I’m curious what other people think of Knight Life’s Gwen.  Of all of our readings this semester, Peter David’s Gwen is my least favorite version of her.  David’s Gwen is a sneaky, not too bright, liar. "Adultery Gwen" is not nearly as annoying as duplicitous, in league with the enemy, Gwen.   Gwen’s dialog  makes her sound a little dim with “you guys” and “y’knows.”  Morgana dupes Gwen into being a distraction and knowing participant in yet another act of betrayal.

“Aging backwards” Merlin is okay but scaly monsters magically disguised as waiters?  This book reminds me of a Kinky Friedman novel.  Or better yet, Art Penn running for mayor is sort of like the real life Kinky Friedman running for governor of Texas in 2006. Now, Friedman is running for the Agriculture Commissioner of Texas. If you add together Will Rogers, Raymond Chandler, pot smoking, cigars, an acoustic guitar, and a shot of tequila  you'd get something that sounds and looks like Kinky Friedman.  Friedman is a novelist, a musician (Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboys), and a politician.  Kinky Friedman has a  line of merchandise and is a master of self-promotion.  Many of Friedman's You Tube clips contain offensive language.