Back
Erin Lauten
Arthur's Apocalypse:
Desolation and isolation in a Camelot without its
Christ
Alfred,
Lord Tennyson's Idylls of the King covers the complete history of
King Arthur, beginning with his birth and rise to power in the first
tale, "The Coming of Arthur," and ending with his death, or passing,
and the disintegration of Camelot in the final tale, "The Passing of
Arthur." These stories of Arthur, when taken as a whole, are perhaps
one of the darkest representations of the Arthur cycle, which is
remarkable in light of the fact that Tennyson's Arthur is probably
second only to Malory's in terms of his influence on contemporary and
later writers and artists, as well as his contemporary and later
popularity. Arthur is portrayed in grand heroic fashion, but in the
end he is betrayed and dies--tragically and mysteriously, and without
a sense of finality. The scope of the passing of Tennyson's Arthur is
anything but narrow; its concerns and resonances reach as far back
from medieval times as Christ, and as far forward from medieval times
as Tennyson's own Victorian age.
The
first and final episodes of the Idylls make it clear that Arthur's
birth and reign represent an ascension to a moral order and a
divergence from barbarism, while his death presents the inevitable
return to moral destitution and confusion (Lacy 181). The final
episode proposes that the moral and spiritual glory of Camelot was
merely an aberration, perhaps even a brief dream--and no longer
possible now that Arthur is gone. These ideas are inextricably linked
to the form of Tennyson's poems; he manipulates language and
structure in order to accommodate and also execute his agenda. With
his orchestration of language and structure he also creates a
suitable narrative ambiance for the story to unfold in. But
Tennyson's purposes are achieved not merely through his manipulation
of the technical aspects of poetry; he forces us to see Arthur in his
terms by artfully connecting Arthur and Christ. In the end, we
understand Arthur's life as a phenomenon, his passing as a
crucifixion, and his possible return as an empty hope.
Tennyson's
Idylls, of which "The Coming" and "The Passing" are the first and
final episodes, were originally published in 1869, and they represent
the highest achievement of the Arthurian explosion that took place in
the nineteenth century. The resurgence owed itself to recent advances
in printing technology which were put to use when dozens of medieval
texts and historical accounts were uncovered. And thus Arthur
returned to Britain, only this time with a uniquely Victorian agenda.
Indeed, Arthur is constantly being invoked as a figure in some
writer's brilliantly contrived and artfully disguised socio-political
commentary, and Tennyson's Arthur is no exception.
The
Victorian era was dizzy with technological progress. Not everyone
conceived of this trend as progress, however, and Tennyson can
without a doubt be counted among the disenchanted. His work
represents, among other things, a dissatisfaction with his world
(176). In many ways, his Idylls serve to illuminate and disavow the
ugliness and injustice of his time--and to suggest that things were
much better back when Arthur was king. What Tennyson tells us,
however, is that the court at Camelot--with all of its promise and
magnificence--was merely an aberration, a wonderful but only brief
respite from the spiritual and moral void which quickly returned
after Arthur's passing. Tennyson's repudiation of the present becomes
especially pessimistic when he couples it with a somber
acknowledgment of the eventual impotence of the alternative that at
one point seemed to offer the most hope.
The
last poem in Tennyson's Arthur cycle begins with a framing device,
but a very unusual one:
That story which the bold
Sir Bedivere
First made and latest left of all
the knights, Told, when the man was no more than a
voice
In the white winter of his age, to
those
With whom he dwelt, new faces,
other minds. (p. 960; 1. 1-5)
The
story's narrative frame is merely a sentence fragment, whose
structural components are incomplete and heavily confounded. A story
is mentioned; its teller and original audience are identified; and
the time frame is established. Thus the sentence gives us
information, but it proceeds very fragmentedly and obliquely, and
then curiously ends. As the sentence progresses, it gets increasingly
complicated--and the "story" gets modified over and over again. In
turn, we get increasingly ready for the sentence to wind down and
complete itself. But this gradual winding down never happens, and the
built-up and almost anxious fragment is never completed. Instead, it
simply stops, and we are left bewildered, wondering, whether
consciously or not, "That story what The end result is that we feel
unsettled--and perhaps even duped.
In
stark contrast to the flustered opening sentence of "The passing"
stands the untroubled opening sentence of The Coming of
Arthur":
Leodogran, the King of
Cameliard,
Had one fair daughter, and none
other child;
And she was fairest of all flesh
on earth [...] (679; 1-3)
This
opening not only has all of the necessary elements of a sentence, but
the elements are arrayed in the most conventional order: subject,
modifier, verb, object; new subject, verb, adjective. There is
nothing at all unsettling about this opening. In fad, it is so
conventional, and so conventionally ordered, that it is likely to
make us feel that everything is at rights and properly ordered, or at
least that things will soon be so.
The
discrepancy between the language in these two opening sentences--the
settling, ordered language that begins "The Coming" and the
unsettling, disordered language the introduces "The Passing"--is
indicative of the larger theme in Tennyson's Arthurian cycle. We can
at once see that the story of Arthur's coming is confident and full
of promise, and that the story of his passing is the failure of that
promise, the show of the ultimate inefficacy of Arthur's court--or at
least the show of its temporality. In any case, we are adequately
prepared, by the end of the first sentence, for what awaits us in
each story.
The
story quickly establishes a narrative voice which, according to the
opening fragment, is supposed to belong to "the bold Sir Bedivere"
(960; 1). But the narrative voice does not belong to Bedivere. This
throws us for a loop, since we are expecting to be guided through
this important, final episode in Arthur's life by someone who was a
principal player in the court at Camelot, who knew Arthur personally,
and who was there when he finally passed on. Not only are we misled
by the opening fragment's suggestion that Bedivere will be our
helmsman--which is jarring in itself--but we must now hear a story
which is at least three times removed from its source. This narrative
curve ball builds on the atmosphere that the story's opening fragment
sets up. The beginning of the story looks like a sentence, but it
does not turn out to be one; the narrator is supposed to be Bedivere,
but the narrative voice turns out to be someone else's. Indeed, the
warning is loud and clear: we should assume that things are not as
they first appear, and we must proceed through the narrative with due
caution.
The
narrative mood of "The Passing" can only be described as surreal or
dreamlike. We are told that Bedivere, who "slowly paced among the
slumbering host, / Heard in his tent the moanings of the King" (96Q
7-8). As the story goes on, it becomes clear that the narrative, like
Bedivere, is progressing in a peculiarly slow manner, as though it is
not happening in real time, but in the slowed-down slumbering lumber
associated with the dream state. The "moanings of the King" set a
particularly eerie tone for the rest of the story.
After
hearing Arthur's lament, the narrator mentions "that last weird
battle in the west" (961; 29) and thus warns us that the heroic
Arthur's last battle will be shrouded in mystery--that we will find
if incomprehensible and weird. Now the ghost of Gawain comes
wandering into Arthur's tent, and he offers Arthur a
warning:
[...] 'Hollow,
hollow all delight!
Hail, King! tomorrow thou shalt
pass away.
Farewell! there is an isle of rest
for thee. [...] (961; 33-35)
Clearly, Gawain is foretelling
Arthur's death, but beyond that he seems to be suggesting that all of
the delights and magnificence of Camelot have been an illusion.
Camelot and its promise have seemed and felt real, but in fact they
are hollow unrealities, and the whole thing is quickly coming to its
end.
The
arrival of Gawain's ghost does not strike us as an intrusion into the
narrative, because the atmosphere is hazy and dreamlike in the first
place.
But suddenly, Arthur
wakes:
'Who spake? A dream. O light
upon the wind,
Thine, Gawain, was the voice - are
these dim cries
Thine? or doth all that haunts the
waste and wile
Mourn, knowing it will go along
with me?' (961; 45-48)
and we realize that Gawain's ghost
was merely a figure in his dream, which itself is a figure within the
dreamy surreality of our narrative. These dreams,and these dreams
within dreams, offer us little to cling to. The suggestion in all of
this seems to be that Arthur's reign has merely been a dream, to
which we have all clung and from which we are all about to
awaken.
Throughout
the haze of the narrative, one thing is consistent and clear: that
the life and passing of Arthur are heavily symbolically linked to the
life and death of Christ. The notion of Arthur as a Christ figure
appears early in the narrative, when we accompany Sir Bedivere into
the tent, where Arthur is moaning:
'I found Him in the shining
of the stars,
I marked Him in the flowering of
His fields,
But in His ways with men I find
Him not.
I waged His wars, and now I pass
and die. (960; 9-12)
Arthur's suggestion that he has been
waging God's wars is reminiscent of the notion of Christ as God's
earthly messenger. He seems to be saying that his reign has been in
service to God; that like Christ, he pursues not what he wants but
what God wants (Matthew 26.39). When Arthur says, "For I, being
simple, thought to work His will" (960; 22) it resonates both
conceptually and linguistically with Christ's statement to God that,
whatever it takes, His "will be done" (Matthew 26.42).
The last line in Arthur's lament is
the most conspicuous reference to Christ in all of Tennyson's
Idylls:
My God, thou hast forgotten
me in my death;
Nay - God my Christ - I pass but
shall not die.' (960; 27-28)
These words are meant to remind us of
Christ's final words on the cross before his crucifixion: "My God, my
God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27.46). And Arthur's
suggestion that he will. return-T pass but shall not di"-is merely an
echo of Christ' statement that he "will rise again" (Matthew
27.63).
These
resonances give us the distinct impression that Arthur is on the
verge o~ his own crucifixion. Note with what willingness and
resignation Arthur goes into his final battle:
Far other is this battle in
the west
Whereto we move, than when we
strove in youth, [...]
Yet let us hence, and find or feel
a way
Through this blind haze
[...] (962; 66-67, 75-76)
Evidently,
Arthur understands that he must proceed into the battle against
Modred, despite unfavorable circumstances--his exhaustion and
confusion, and poor visibility--and even though it has been
prophesied that he will die. Arthur's willing participation in what
he knows is his final battle is a parallel to the willingness with
which Christ participates in the activities leading directly to his
own death. One of the most striking examples of this occurs when
Judas is about to turn Christ in; Christ simply tells Judas to "do
what you are here to do" (Matthew 26.50). Clearly, neither Christ nor
Arthur offers any real resistance to his own death.
Indeed,
it is a betrayal that leads to the deaths both of Arthur and of
Christ. Arthur: is betrayed by Modred--in whose care he left his
kingdom while he was off fighting Lancelot--and by his own wife,
Guinevere:
And all whereon I leaned in
wife and friend
Is traitor to my peace, and all my
realm
Reels back into the beast and is
no more. (960; 24-26)
It is
interesting to note that the position of the words "and all my realm"
at the end of the second line is an implicit suggestion that we
relate them not only to the verb clause that follows: "and all my
realm / Reels back into the beast and is no more" but also to the
phrase that leads ~;p to them: "And all whereon I leaned in wife and
friend / Is traitor to my peace, and all my realm" (960; 25-26,
24-25). Thus we get the impression that the betrayal of Arthur is not
merely the betrayal of his peace, but of the peace of his entire
kingdom--and by implication, the Arthurian institution and everything
it represents.
Sir
Bedivere, attempting to convince Arthur to "go forth and conquer as
of old," mentions the followers of Arthur who have betrayed him and
joined Modred's forces:
I hear the steps of Modred
in the west,
And with him many of thy people,
and knights
Once thine, whom thou hast loved,
but grosser grown
Than heathen, spitting at their
vows and thee. (962; 59-62)
The
metaphoric image of "spitting" that describes the traitors' attitude
toward Arthur reminds us of what happens when Christ appears before
Caiaphas the priest: "Then the high priest [...] said 'What
is your verdict They answered, 'He deserves death.' Then they spat in
his face and struck him [...]" (Matthew 26.65-67).
The
particular connections that Tennyson draws between Arthur and Christ
are overwhelmingly suggestive of one thing: that saviors are truly
out of their element on earth, in any place and at any time. From
Tennyson's text, we get the sense that Arthur was delivered to
Britain because its people were wayward, corrupt, and desperately in
need of direction and order. Arthur was their guide, and his court at
Camelot funtioned as a miniature perfect world, morally sound and
spiritually ascendant. The Arthurian institution was a success; the
Britons were receptive to the chivalric codes, the courtly ideals,
and the hierarchy. But the institution did not last long, because it
could not last long. Heroes, saints, and saviors cannot be sustained
by an environment which is naturally opposed to them. And a noble
institution is bound to disintegrate in a world which is
institutionally corrupt.
In
spite of this, Tennyson does not seem to be suggesting that people
are malicious. Clearly, people are constantly making bad decisions,
but there are always extenuating circumstances. Judas' decision to
inform against Christ is compelled by many factors; among them is a
kind of pride, resulting perhaps from his jealousy of Christ, or his
inclination to undo someone more powerful than himself. Another
factor in Tudas' betrayal of Christ is purely monetary:
Then one of the twelve, who was
called Judas Iscariot, went to the priests and said, "What will you
give me if I betray him to you?" They paid him thirty pieces of
silver. And from that moment he began to look for an opportunity to
betray him. (Matthew 26.14-16)
Whatever else is motivating Judas ~o
betray Christ, it is clear that the offer of silver is what finally
enables him to go through with it; for it is "from that moment" that
he fully implicates himself in the execution of the deed.
Modred's
betrayal of Arthur is similarly compelled--he is jealous of Arthur's
power, and he covets what Arthur has: the beautiful Queen, and reign
over Camelot. Thus Modred, like Judas, becomes a traitor because of
his pride. It is easy to see how Modred's betrayal is also motivated
by his material desires. Like Judas, who stands to gain thirty pieces
of silver for his betrayal of Christ, Modred stands to gain an entire
kingdom and all of its material wealth for his betrayal of
Arthur.
When
we attempt to make sense of Judas' betrayal of Christ, we necessarily
conceptualize it, as we have done above, as the outcome of a
conscious thought process. But it is important to remember that
Judas' betrayal is ultimately motivated by God's decision to involve
him in the fulfillment of His plan. Judas really has no choice in
this matter; Christ recognizes that "all of this has taken place, so
that the scriptures of the prophets may be fulfilled" (Matthew
26.56). A distinct notion of fate underlies all of the events
surrounding the life and death of Christ, and a strange exculpation
is conferred upon everyone involved--including those whose actions
seem to be the most morally reprehensible of all.
Tennyson
appears to be suggesting that we should, instead of condemning
Modred, understand that he is merely human: susceptible to temptation
and a victim of his own nature. In short, he is fallible, and his
fallibility is his fate. Tennyson gives us the impression that the
compelling factors in all human sins are completely external to the
individual, and that the individual committing the sin is merely
playing out his or her role. Like Tudas' betrayal of Christ, Modred's
betrayal of Arthur is inescapable.
Tennyson's
manipulation of language and imagery in "The Coming of Arthur" and
"The Passing of Arthur" serve to depict Arthur's reign as a
phenomenon. His birth and rise to power signal the birth and rise of
morality for the Britons, and his passing signals the death of that
morality. But the death of morality is not merely an accident;
Tennyson suggests that its death is inevitable. In the end, Bedivere
climbs "the highest he could climb" (972; 463) and watches as the
boat bearing the ambiguously mortally wounded King Arthur disappears
in the distance. The narrator ends the story, and Tennyson's
Arthurian cycle, with the observation that "the new sun rose bringing
the new year" (973; 469). On the surface, the image appears to imply
that everything is going to be all right, but in fact the sun seems
to have a disturbingly sardonic role: to illuminate what is no longer
there, to illuminate the new desolation. As the ideal Arthur, and his
Arthurian ideals, "vanish into light" (1. 468), all of those
remaining must face the their lives without a moral and spiritual
guide. The "new year" may bring with it a new savior, and he may,
like Arthur and Christ, impact many people's lives. But the world in
which we live is too imperfect to sustain an ideal, and we
ultimately--and historically--end up persecuting, betraying, and then
killing our saviors. At the end of The Passing," everything reverts
to the way it was before; Arthur leaves the world, in which he was so
glaringly out of place: " 'From the great deep to the great deep he
goes' " (972; 445) and Arthur's realm "reels back into the beast, and
is no more" (960; 26-27).
Works Cited
Lacy, Norris, and Geoffrey Ashe. The
Arthurian Handbook. New York: Garland Publishing Company,
1988.
Ricks, Christopher. Tennyson: A
Selected Edition. Singapore: Longman Singapore Publishers,
1969.
Back