Unfortunately, my memories of Malory's work are tainted by my memories of the difficulties of reading the book. In college I was sentenced to reading small paperback editions with tiny, cramped print. It was never possible to settle into the task for more than a short time without feeling a headache coming on. As a result my impression of the book was that it was both interesting and impenetrable. It was with great relief that I went on to other classes and texts.

Lately, I found I needed a copy of `Le Morte D'Arthur" again, and in reviewing the available editions discovered this new edition, edited by John Matthews and illustrated by Anna-Marie Ferguson. When it arrived, I was amazed and delighted.

Academically the edition is much as one would expect. It is basically a reprint of a Medici Society version of the Caxton original. Matthews has corrected some spelling problems. He has also silently interpolated some snippets of the manuscript version (some 20 total) where these make the narrative clearer. It is unfortunate that he did not document these additions to prevent scholastic confusion, but he did not wish to break up the narrative with footnotes. I have found several of the changes and they all make the sense better. There is a forward by fantasy writer Michael Moorcock, a very informative and readable introduction by Matthews, and a short piece on the illustrations by Anna-Marie Ferguson.

It is the physical presentation of this edition that makes it extraordinary. The book is quite thick, very well bound with a heavily coated slip cover. The paper is well made and heavy enough to prevent the print through that can hinder readability in books with dense printing. The type font is glorious. Large and simple enough to be easily readable. This makes it possible to easily pick out the sense and structure without having to squint at every word. I found the text more readable than some of the efforts at modernization I have encountered.

Finally, the illustrations. These are plentiful, 62 in all, half of them in color. Ferguson has a fine detailed style with both watercolor brush and pen. They have pleasant dreamlike quality that arises from her masterly use of light. These are not mere illustrations, rather, the artist has made them invitations to consider the world of King Arthur. In summary, this is a welcome new addition to the Malory canon, and one well worth owning.


Even in modern prose, this remains tedious reading.   July 24, 2000
 55 out of 68 found this review helpful

The tales of King Arthur and of the knights of the Round Table are well-known and have been the subject of many books, poems (Tennyson), at least two musical works (Purcell's "King Arthur", and the famous Broadway musical, "Camelot"), and films ("Camelot", based on the musical, and "Excalibur"). The most famous English-language book version of these tales is this version by Sir Thomas Malory, yet this is not easily readable, even in modern prose. The modern English rendition by Keith Baines is excellent, for it allows those of us who do not have Ph.D's in English literature to get an idea of what the original was like, but the book itself is tedious in its very nature.

What you should expect with this book is a very good beginning and ending, and a "will it ever end ?" middle. Arthur himself cannot be called the central character, for he is virtually absent, except in the first tale of the book, which deals with his coming to power, and the last one, about his death. The rest of this book is concerned with jousting and tournaments, so much that in the end one gets bored with this never-ending succession of fights with knights whose names you'll only read once and which have no consequence on what is supposed to be the larger plot (such as the quest for the Holy Grail, or the famous Tristram and Iseult tale). Of course, the better-known knights of the Round Table, such as Launcelot, Tristram, and Percivale, are present, but only from time to time, and narration often shifts from one to the other for no reason.

What this book lacks most is continuity. Apart from the first and last tales, everything in between is not in chronological order, which gets confusing. In one tale one character is dead and another is well-known; in the next tale the first character is living and the second one is unknown (just take the example of King Pellinore and Sir Percivale). All tales were obviously separate ones, and the reader, at some point, will simply stop trying to understand how Malory ever came up with such an order for his tales. If Malory (or his original publishers) had any idea in mind when they chose this setup of the tales, it will appear unclear to most readers.

One of the few good points of this book is that, since it was written in the late Middle Ages, it avoids to a certain extent the over-romanticization of the Middle Ages, which is what later authors, such as Sir Walter Scott, did to such an extent that even today we cannot think of the Middle Ages without having in mind the picture-perfect version of it (which I will not delve into -- I'm sure you know what I have in mind). Even though chivalry as described in the book has some romantic elements attached to it, it is never fully exploited, and "Le Morte d'Arthur" certainly does not fit the requirements to be classified into the romantic genre (which was not fully described until the nineteenth century). This book therefore does not use romanticism as we now know it. But this good point may also be one of the book's weaknesses, because the topic is a legend, and not fact. Because this subject is not historically accurate (and some parts of the book are hilariously improbable), Malory could not use realism to replace romanticism, and I believe that if he had used more romanticism in his book it would only have made it better. In the end, Malory used neither style, and this makes his writing style very dry. His characters are mere fighting machines with no emotional depth, his narration is action, action, and action: no description, either of his own characters or of the scenery (a castle is a castle, nothing more). The scenes he depicts cannot be located, for the setting is never described. Malory, above all, was an awful storyteller. He could only describe his characters jousting and fighting, and since this had nothing to do with the larger plot, this only lengthens the book for no reason. (If you want a modern comparison, just think of a public orator who just tells personal anecdotes that are not related to his topic.)

Furthermore, anyone interested in the Middle Ages has nothing to gain from reading this book. It holds no historical interest (apart from a study of the English language, but then I would not go for this modern rendition) for the reason that its subject is not based on fact and its description of society in the early Middle Ages is simplistic. This book is certainly no "Canterbury Tales", in which a lot can be learned about what was life during the Middle Ages. So if you are mainly interested in history I'd skip "Le Morte d'Arthur" and I'd go for "The Canterbury Tales" instead.

In conclusion, "Le Morte d'Arthur" is worth reading only if you have the patience to go through it, for this book is overlong and repetitive. Keith Baines's rendition makes this task easier, and his appendix on the main characters is very helpful if you intend to skip parts (which you should not do because the whole is chronologically inaccurate).


Ian Myles Slater on: Caxton's Malory, Penguin and Others   August 6, 2004
 43 out of 43 found this review helpful

Since reviews of entirely different editions seem doomed to appear together: This is a review of the two-volume edition of Sir Thomas Malory's "Le Morte D'Arthur" published by Penguin Books, edited by Janet Cowan, with an Introduction by John Lawlor. Originally part of the Penguin English Library (1969), it was later (1986) included in the Penguin Classics, in both the older, smaller (mass-market) Penguin format and the current, somewhat larger format; they all appear to be identical in contents. However, I will discuss other versions, notably the Modern Library, the Wordsworth Classics, and the old Everyman's Library editions.

The Penguin edition is based primarily on the 1485 text printed by William Caxton. It is modernized in spelling, but not in grammar. Each volume has a glossary of proper names, and another of archaic words; the most difficult words are generally noted and translated at the foot of the page on which they appear. A small section of notes in each volume deal with some confusing passages, and identify places where Caxton's text has been emended -- usually from the "Winchester Manuscript," now in the British Library, discovered in a safe at Winchester College in 1934, after being mistakenly catalogued under the title of a 1634 printed edition. The manuscript differs from Caxton's text in thousands of places, mostly minor, but some very important.

(There is now another set of editions, based primarily on the longer Winchester text; unfortunately, modernizations of that version are either abridged, or, in my opinion, more or less open rewritings, or both, like Keith Baines' "rendition" -- not to mention John Steinbeck's unfinished "Acts of King Arthur ...," which is a retelling as a modern novel. Two complete old-spelling editions of this second, longer, version, are in paperback, the Oxford Standard Authors original-spelling edition, as "Malory: Complete Works," followed by a recent Norton Critical Edition, as "Le Morte D'Arthur," on somewhat different lines. I have reviewed them together, under the "Complete Works" title; both are worthwhile, for readers willing and able to deal with them.)

Among the readily available editions of the Caxton "Morte," the Penguin edition is my favorite; a judicious balance of modern, or regularized, spellings, clarifying punctuation, and short explanations, without distortion of the not-yet-quite-Modern English of the sentences. Although Lawlor's introduction is beginning to show its age (Malory's French and English sources are treated as evidence in a then-current critical debate), Janet Cowan's text remains exceptionally attractive. The two-volume format is easy to handle, but can be a bit of a nuisance; if you want the whole story, be sure to order both!

It was Caxton, the pioneer of English printing, who assigned the title "The Death of Arthur" to a work which begins with Arthur's conception and birth, for reasons which he rather laboriously explained in a final colophon. (For those of you who know enough French to see that the title should begin "La Mort" -- the spelling is, as elsewhere in the text, based on medieval *Norman* standards, and the Parisian certainty of Death's feminine gender did not dictate English scribal -- or printing-house -- practices in the fifteenth century.) Until the publication of the Winchester text in 1947, all editions of this famous late Middle English compilation of stories of King Arthur and his Knights had to be based, more or less (and often less) directly, on the 1485 printing by William Caxton, of which two copies have survived, one missing fifteen leaves.

Unhappily, most nineteenth-century printings (the first two both in 1816) were based on the very corrupt ("improved") 1634 Stansby printing, sometimes sporadically compared to the Caxton text, or were in some other way "corrected" for (mainly) Victorian readers. In 1817, the poet Robert Southey tried to rely on Caxton, but had to replace the missing pages in the copy he was using with those in one of the reprintings, in 1498 and 1528, by Caxton's apprentice and successor, the self-named Wynkyn "de Worde." (The first is the original "illustrated Malory," the second is the first intentionally "modernized" Malory, customers having apparently complained that a book written in the 1460s was sounding a bit old-fashioned.) In addition, Southey's publisher seems to have used Stansby as a printing-house copy, directly or through the competing reprintings of 1816. Uncertainty as to proper editorial principles, reflecting uncertainty as to Malory's literary worth, and concern over the "immoral" contents of a book thought likely to appeal to boys, continued through the nineteenth century. (And into our time, as well.)

The three-volume edition (with extensive apparatus) by H. Oskar Sommers of 1889-1891 finally used the surviving copies of the 1485 edition as the sole authority. (I have not seen a reported reprinting of the full version, but the Sommers "Morte" text, without the introduction, notes, glossary, etc., is available in a hypertext format). It was presumably used by F.J. Simmons, who edited the ornate J.M. Dent edition of 1893-1894, illustrated by Aubrey Beardsley (reprinted a few years ago by Crown; Dover has issued an illustrations-only volume as well). Sommers' text was certainly used by Israel Gollancz for another Dent edition, the modernized four-volume Temple Classics version of 1897. This text appears to have been reset for a two-volume edition in 1906, in Dent's Everyman's Library series, with normalized (modern) spellings. There are some peculiarities in this version; for example, the spelling of names often changes between volumes one and two. For most purposes it was reliable enough, and was widely read during much of the twentieth century, appearing in the US in hardcover in Dutton reprints of the Everyman's Library, with a paperback edition in the 1970s. It seems to be out of print, but used copies show up regularly.

The Dent editions of the "Morte" had competition from other modernized texts, based on the Sommers edition, which included a revision by Sir Edward Strachey of his somewhat expurgated ("for boys") 1868 Globe edition for Macmillan. This version was replaced by a new Macmillan edition in 1903, edited by the distinguished bibliographer, and able editor of popular editions, A.W. Pollard. Pollard's text has been reprinted by a number of American publishers, and was at one time a Book Club offering, advertised as "unexpurgated" -- which it was, compared to some Victorian editions, and most especially to Sidney Lanier's "The Boy's King Arthur." The Pollard text is available on-line. It has been reprinted yet again, in the current Modern Library hardcover and paperback editions, with a fine new introduction, by Elizabeth J. Bryan, describing briefly the Arthurian Legend, and the problem of the two texts of the "Morte." The Pollard text also appears to underlie the Wordsworth Classics paperback, which has a helpful new Introduction, by Helen Cooper, and includes an index of characters (by Book and Chapter, not page number), but lacks notes. It is a relatively inexpensive, if not overwhelmingly attractive, alternative to the other editions.

Since the appearance of the Penguin "Morte," there have been two major technical publications of the Caxton text: a facsimile, edited by Paul Needham (1976), and a critical edition, edited by James Spisak (1983). I am not aware of a popular edition which has taken advantage of these resources.


The breadbasket of medieval legends   September 18, 2002
 33 out of 36 found this review helpful

LE MORTRE D'ARTHUR (The Death of Arthur) was written by Sir Thomas Malory while he was imprisoned for some number of years. It was one of the very first times that the Arthurian legend was penned in English. There were some older Latin fragments of the myth floating around, but it's thru Malory's account by which we know the stories most thoroughly. The most successful movie adaptation of the legend, EXCALIBUR, is based on elements taken from Malory's epic.

As I struggled through Chaucer while in college, I've not yet gotten up the courage to read the original middle-English version of this work (my apologies to all of the English professors out there). Therefore, it is good that Mr. Keith Baines was kind enough to translate the middle-English into a more accessible lexicon for me & people like me. Baines reveals the myths and legends in all their glory, and I can't help but believe that he expresses them in at least some measure of their middle-English power.

This is an ABSOLUTE must-read for all persons who have even a remote interest in the Arthurian fantasy. Although the book is abridged from the original, it nonetheless contains all of the most famous characters and episodes from the legend.

Within these pages, one will encounter Arthur, Gwynevere, Sir Launcelot, Sir Galahad, Sir Modred, Sir Bors, Sir Percivale, Merlin and all the rest. The purity of Galahad is contrasted with the sinful nature & temporary madness of Launcelot. The memorable allegory of Sir Percivale's duel with Satan, as well as so many other knightly adventures, are all recorded for us here.

This book is highly recommended to all fans of medieval times, medieval literature, the history of Great Britain and the idea of Chivalry. The codes of honor, the rules of fair play and the heroic ideals conceived by the knights of the middle-ages have followed us down thru the centuries and are still as relevant to the best of us today as they were 500-1500 years ago. The story ends with one of the most memorable Latin phrases in literary history:

HIC IACET ARTHURUS, REX QUONDAM REXQUE FUTURUS

[Here lies King Arthur, the once and future King]

Now for the details, open up the book!


Fie on thee that readeth not these tales!   November 8, 2000
 21 out of 22 found this review helpful

I don't read a lot. In fact, the only time I do read is when I am required to do so by a class. Such is the case with The Tales of King Arthur. But although I would never have read the book were it not for my fascinating English teacher, I must say that I have never read anything as intriguing as the Tales of King Arthur.

Getting used to the language isn't as difficult as some other reviewers are saying... At least it wasn't for me (and I'm an eighteen year-old high school student). You'll struggle through the first few pages but once you've got an ear for it the language comes natural (somewhat like reading Shakespeare - it takes time to adjust). I found nothing tedious about the book other than the somewhat unfocussed book of the Sangrail.

The characters are awesome, the language is awesome, the plots and emotions are awesome. If you read this from beginning to end you'll walk away with a sincere compassion for the characters and the inevitable death of the times.

I can't imagine bothering with a modernized version - the classic text is just so sweet.