A Study of the Genre of T. H. White's Arthurian Books a Thesis

A Study of the Genre of T. H. White's Arthurian Books A Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D from the University of Wales Susan Elizabeth Chapman June 1988 Summary T. H. White's Arthurian books have been consistently popular with the general public, but have received limited critical attention. It is possible that such critical neglect is caused by the books' failure to conform to the generic norms of the mainstream novel, the dominant form of prose fiction in the twentieth century. This thesis explores the way in which various genres combine in The. Once alai Future King.. Genre theory, as developed by Northrop Frye and Alastair Fowler, is the basis of the study. Neither theory is applied fully, but Frye's and Fowler's ideas about the function of genre as an interpretive tool underpin the study. The genre study proper begins with an examination of the generic repertoire of the mainstream novel. A study of The. Qnce gknj Future King in relation to this form reveals that it exhibits some of its features, notably characterization and narrative, but that it conspicuously lacks the kind of setting typical of the mainstream novel. A similar approach is followed with other subgenres of prose fiction: the historical novel; romance; fantasy; utopia. In each case Thy Once angj Future King is found to exhibit some key features, unique to that form, although without sufficient of its characteristics to be described fully in those terms. The function of the comic and tragic modes within The. Qnce änd Future King is also considered. White succeeds in combining the two to create a particular sense of idealism and loss. White combines in his Arthurian books some of the features of an unusually large number of genres. As a result they defy simple categorization but repay close and imaginative study. ii Contents Acknowledgements ...................................... v One Introduction 1 ................................ 7 Two The Theoretical Basis of the Genre Study .... Three The Unity White's Arthurian Books 23 of ....... Four Elements of the Novel in White's Arthurian Books: I Setting 51 ........................... Five Elements of the Novel in White's Arthurian Books: II Narrative and Characterization.... 89 Six Elements of the Historical Novel in White's Arthurian Books 136 ........................... Seven Elements of the Romance in White's Arthurian Books 200 ..................................... Eight Elements of Fantasy in White's Arthurian Books 249 ..................................... line Elements of Utopia in White's Arthurian Books 299 ..................................... Ten Comic and Tragic Modes in White's Arthurian Books 332 ..................................... Conclusion 385 Eleven ................................ 396 Bibliography ........................................ Acknowledgements Many people have supported and encouraged me in the preparation of this thesis. I should particularly like to thank the staff of the English Department and the Library at University College of North Vales, Bangor. I should also like to acknowledge the assistance of the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Centre, the University of Texas at Austin. I am grateful to Dr. Francois Gallix of l'Universite de Paris IV for his valuable assistance in obtaining copies of articles not generally available in this country. Finally my thanks are due to my supervisor Mr. Peter Field for his patience, encouragement, advice, and for forcing me to learn to use a word processor. V Chapter One Introduction Interest in the Arthurian legends has fluctuated over the centuries: sometimes the stories have occupied a pre-eminent position as quarries for all kinds of artistic production, but at others interest in Arthur has waned almost to nothing. At present stories about King Arthur seem to be at a high point of popularity: "whereas the first half öf this century produced less than fifty novels of Arthurian provenance, the last thirty years have produced more than twice that number. "' It is not surprising, therefore, that The, Once and Future- King. 2 is T. H. White's best known work. White himself would not have been surprised at this. He wrote: Dont forget that this is The. Matter Qf. Britain! Look at this short list, my lad: Nennius, Geoffrey, Malory, Purcell, Hughes, (Milton), Tennyson, T. H. White. You could treble it, but I am mentioning the important ones. This is a letter from a man they will be putting in the literary histories, ' Raymond H. Thompson, The_ Return From Avalon: A. Study Qi the. Arthurian Legend l ja. Modern Fiction, Contributions to the Study of Science Fiction and Fantasy, No. 14 (Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1985), p. 3. 2 T. H. White I Once Future Ki. g. (London: Collins, 1958), all further references to this work appear in-the text. 1 Pottes leicl: yes, willy-nilly. The subject does it. A man who wrote out the Norte d'Arthur in Morse Code would still have to be mentioned in literary histories, because it is the Norte d'Arthur. 3 White's work other than Jhn. Once am& Future King is relatively unknown. He wasAprolific writer: between 1929 andX 1959 he published twenty-five books, and four more were published posthumously. The remarkable feature of his work, however, is not quantity but variety: it includes poetry, novels, sporting diaries, essays, popular history, and a translation of a twelfth-century Latin bestiary. Naturally, the quality of his work varies, and the early novels, with the exception of Farewell Victoria, 4 are not worthy of close attention. In some respects, however, the variety of his work has contributed to the neglect that it has suffered. s Because he is not easily classifiable as a novelist, diarist, historian, or natural history writer, White has not been widely acknowledged as any of these, much less as all of them. In the years since his death White's work has received meagre critical attention. Only one full-length study has 3 Francois Gallix, Letters & Friend: The. Correspondence Iget3jeen J, White 2M& L ?. Potts (Gloucester: Alan Sutton, -H,_ 1984), p. 118. T. H. White, Farewell Victoria, (1930; rpt. Harmondswoth: Penguin, 1945). 5 Franqois Gallix, T. H. White: An. Annotated Bibliography (London: Garland, 1986), p. xix. 2 been published, r, although there have been four unpublished theses and a number of articles. The most interesting work published on White has been biographical. Sylvia Townsend Warner's T. H. White: Biography7 contains some valuable . criticism of his work. In a less analytic vein David Garnett's edition of his correspondence with White, Ih& White/Garnett Letters, e and Francois Gallix's collection, Letters t,.. Friend: The.. Correspondence between T" H" White anL L. J. Potts, both give insights into White's life and practice as a writer. The lack of critical attention paid even to White's major books is due, I would argue, to the difficulty critics face in classifying his work. Only his choice of subject clearly aligns him with other writers and his place in Arthurian literature is acknowledged. 9 Classification of a work is not the purpose of criticism; but it is a prerequisite of criticism, because the wrong criteria are likely to produce a mistaken evaluation. It seems likely that White's Arthurian books have been ignored because it is not clear to which literary categories they belong and therefore how they should be approached. The purpose of the present study is to examine White's books in relation to various genres of 6 John K. Crane, T. x. White, Twayne's English Authors " ; Series, No. 172 (New York: Twayne, 1974). Sylvia Townsend Warner, U 'Whit: A. Biography-, (London: Jonathan Cape and Chatto and Windus, 1967). 8 David Garnett, ed. The, White/Garnett Letters (London; Jonathan Cape, 1968). 9 Beverly Taylor and Elisabeth Brewer, Return at K1ß& British American Arthur; _ 1$44. Arthur: and, an Lit ra ire . nce (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1983), pp. 291-5. 3 extended prose fiction and to show how elements of each combine to create the unique quality of the works. The study will focus mainly on The. Once and, Future King, but will also refer to White's other Arthurian works. 'O The study begins with a brief examination of genre theory, concentrating mainly on the work of Northrop Frye and Alastair Fowler. Historically genre has been an important concept in criticism and its place there is discussed, together with the possibility of its misuse. The main features of Frye's and Fowler's theories, particularly their different ideas about genre and mode, are then briefly decribed and commented upon. The latter's view of genre as a fundamental tool of interpretation underpins the examination of White's work that follows. A study of a work in terms of various genres could suggest that the work itself is fragmented. This possibility is all the stronger in a work like Thy Once and. Future King, is which is composed of four books. Chapter Three therefore Kin& devoted to establishing the unity of Tha Once and EutL as a whole. Whilst it is undoubtedly a book of great variety, all the parts are held together by the common thread of Arthur's character, which develops, but does not change 1O For a full history of the various parts of White's Arthurian work see Gallix, Bibliograpphy, pp. 15-23,39-43,45- 47. All further references to the Arthurian books will appear in the text and be distinguished as follows: The. Once and Future fig. page reference only; Ihg Sword in the. Stone, The. Witch in the, Wood, and The_ 111-Made fight, denote those books as first published; "The Sword in the Stone", "The Queen of Air and Darkness", and "The Ill-Made Knight" indicate those stories as parts of The. Once and Future King.; "The Candle in the Wind" and The. Book aL Merlyn were published only in a single form.

Load more