britlitgroupblog

[britlitgroupblog]

Conclusion

In conclusion, while Trump may have a few characteristics of an Arthurian leader, there are key differences as well. The military strength is the most glaring similarity. As the leader of the most powerful military on Earth, Trump certainly meets this criteria.

As for chivalry, while Trump may have committed four years of his life to serve his country, it does not seem that he has committed to protecting women. Some of his various comments about women that were unearthed during the election show that some of his views on women are less than chivalrous. The typical chivalrous knight is one who puts his life in danger if that’s what it takes to save the damsel in distress. While this cliche may not paint women as the smart and capable people that they are, Trumps public comments on women seem a far cry from someone that would risk it all to save a women who needs help.

On religion, it could be argued that Trumps anti-Muslim policies mirror a crusade. His attempted ban on travel as well as the recent bombing in the Middle East can both be compared to Medieval Crusades. His staunch opinions on Muslims reveal a medieval mindset that may be the most Arthurian thing about his rule.

While being the president is certainly comparable in power to the King of Medieval England, the personal ideas and attributes of Trump vary from the code of honor expressed in Arthur’s tale. While his military might and activity in the Middle East is analogous to the medieval crusades, the characteristics of personality reveal someone who is not an Arthurian leader. He does not stick up for women and his religion manifests itself in anti-Muslim agendas instead of public works that could help the poor and helpless. Overall, it is hard to say yes or no to the question “Is Trump an Arthurian ruler?”. He may have some of the traits that also described Arthur, but some components are clearly missing.

[britlitgroupblog]

The Ability to Inspire

Despite what many people feel about Trump, it is hard to deny he can captivate an audience. Similar to how Arthur inspired his troops and the knights of the round table, Trump was able to inspire millions of Americans. Most people didn’t think he had a chance to win, however because his oratory connected with so many people he was able to pull off a surprising victory. According to Arthurian legend, a good leader must be able to instill courage and excitement in his subjects. While many people may feel just the opposite about Trump it is hard to deny the fervor of some of his supporters. Even if he only managed to inspire some of the country and not its entirety it still shows that abilities like public speaking and capturing the hearts and minds of people matter just as much today as they did hundreds of years ago.

[britlitgroupblog]

Trouble in the Middle East

Arthur’s rule was defined by his search for the Holy Grail. The enchanted goblet used by Jesus himself was supposedly filled with an endless supply of food. However, as Arthur was unable to ever find the Grail, his rule began to stagnate with such unachievable goals. I compare this to Trump’s policies in the Middle East. To try and instill peace in this region is something that goes beyond the power of the president. If Trump insists on continued bombing and military action in this region, then he will be as Arthur was after years of searching for the grail: tired, older, and no closer to his goal than when he began. It’s important for rulers to  set realistic goals so they can be met and progress can be made. Trump, like Arthur, is quick to make a grand statement or gesture but then when actually enforcing his goal the actual results can vary far from his intention.

[britlitgroupblog]

Prompt

How does the Arthurian narrative characterize a ruler/leader? Apply such a narrative to the U.S.’ current leader - President Trump. How does he stand up? Why is this comparison important to you?

Best characterized in the myth surrounding King Arthur, the Arthurian narrative extrapolates on the characteristics of both “good” and “bad” leaders. The Arthurian Characterization is based on romanticized concepts of chivalry and religious piety, and as such inherently biased towards male leaders. This characterization of a leader still influences our political leaders today who may attempt to exemplify the same characteristics found in literary texts like The Once and Future King by T.H. White and Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott. By examining this Arthurian characterization one can recognize modern day parallels and better understand the cultural and literary history that serves as a foundation for much of our current political discourse. 

[britlitgroupblog]

Characteristics of an Arthurian Leader

Arthurian leaders are characterized by their military strength (masculinity), chivalry, religious piety, and willingness to protect the weak. The transformation of the young Wart into the legendary King Arthur in T.H. White’s The Once and Future King best defines an arthurian leader, though other earlier literary works such as Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott, Cymbeline by William Shakespeare add to this discourse and influence modern interpretations. 

[britlitgroupblog]

Arthurian Romance

A common theme we see throughout the books is romance. Women play a centrally important role in Arthurian literature. Not only do they influence the heroes of such stories in many ways, they even exert a strong influence on the events in the story and thus on the storyline itself.

King Arthur, for example, is presented as a weak man, unable to control his wife, and therefore a weak ruler. Guinevere is portrayed an an unfaithful wife and the primary cause of the fall of King Arthur and the Round Table.

In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the Green Knight has challenged a noble knight to a seemingly impossible task, in the pursuit of which he meets fierce beasts and the temptation of a beautiful woman. Bertilak’s wife attempts to seduce Gawain on a daily basis during his stay at the castle. Of course, the young knight, in this case Gawain, displays courage, skill and chivalric courtesy in handling this seduction, and overcoming his foe.

“There was a real interest in what love could do to people, particularly at its outer limits. And the legacy of courtly love was to make the whole arena of romance the domain of women, not that this had any real impact on their rights or their social situation, but it gave them a permitted realm of power and imaginative adventure” (https://litlove.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/arthurian-romance/)

In Cymbeline, the queen is portrayed as a villainous woman who will stop at nothing to see her son king of Britain. She used her beauty to control Cymbeline, a man she never even loved. It wasn’t until she was on her deathbed that she admitted her plan to murder Cymbeline and give the crown to her son. Cymbeline, however, was naïve and didn’t see the evil in his wife. After all, he says, “Who is’t can read a woman?” (5.5.58). After the queen dies, it leaves the king free of her evil influence. As a result, the relationship between the Romans and Britons ended on a positive note.

A part of being a successful ruler/knight means mastering the continuous struggle between the duty of the spiritual world and pleasures of the sensuous world. The women in the storylines tend to cloud the judgement of those around them which effects the outcomes of the stories.

[britlitgroupblog]

Military Strength

Arthurian leaders are characterized by their military sucess. King Arthur, though developing a more pacifistic ideology later in his life, is successful in his conquests of England and unites the land through force. Not only is he renowned for his military success but the knight’s supporting him are additionally famous for their individual strength. Lancelot is titled the “Best Knight in the World”(The Once and Future King, Book III, Chapter 3) and remains almost undefeated throughout his life. Sir Gawain and The Green Knight depicts Arthur’s court with many reference to its fame and strength.

Arthur the greatest of Britain’s kings, holds the Christmas festival at Camelot, surrounded by the celebrated knights of the Round Table, noble lords, the most renowned under heaven, and ladies the loveliest (Sir Gawain and The Green Knight)

By choosing Arthur’s court to challenge, the Green Knight implies that the court and it’s knight are worthy of being challenge. Typically one challenges a champion and not a loser and as such is could be seen that Arthur’s court is the house of the champions--those most successful in tournaments and most renowned for their chivalry.  

Arthur before the high dais salutes the Green Knight, bids him welcome, and entreats him to stay awhile at his Court. The knight says that his errand is not to abide in any dwelling, but to seek the most valiant of heros of the Round Table that he may put his courage to the proof, and thus satisfy himself as to the fame of Arthur’s court (Sir Gawain and The Green Knight)

Le Noir Faineant, guises of King Richard the I, in Ivanhoe is also known for his physical strength. In the he tale comes to the rescue of Wilfred of Ivanhoe and wins the tournament against Font-de-Boeuf for Ivanhoe when he is unfairly attacked. “He wrenched from the hand of the bulky Saxon the battle-axe which he wielded, and, like one familiar with the use of the weapon, bestowed him such a blow upon the crest, that Athelstane also lay senseless on the field”(Ivanhoe, Chapter 13). King Richard is not only successful in himself, but similar to King Arthur, he is supported by the “strongest” men.

Locksley, as version or Robin Hood, is also un-bested at the bow by such a large margin he seems inhuman in comparison to his opponent. Prince John praises his feats and asks him to be his vessel “For never did so strong a hand bend a bow, or so true an eye direct a shaft” Locksley responds saying “I have vowed, that if I take service, it should be with your royal brother King Richard”(Ivanhoe, Chapter 13). Likewise, Ivanhoe, the champion of the tournament is a known friend and supporter of King Richard the I, defying his father’s wishes and following him to fight in the Crusades.

Duke Theseus in The Knight’s Tale by Geoffrey Chaucer, is again famed for his conquests.

Whilom, as olde stories teller us,

There was a duke that highte Theseus.

Of Athens he was a great lord and governor,

And in his time such a conqueror

That great was there none under the

Sun (The Knight’s Tale, Chaucer).

The successful conquests in Duke Theseus life are the events that lead to his success and happiness. In his conquest of the Feminie he won his wife, Queen Hippolyta, and in his conquests he gained the land and power that he has in the The Knight's Tale. The narrator allots him respect for these deeds, singing his praises for these conquests. Duke Theseus also suggests that military success in a tournament sanctioned by him is the most appropriate way for Arcite and Palamon to prove themselves.

Slay his contrary, or out of listes drive,

Him shall I give Emily to wive,

To whom that fortune gives so fair a grace.

When suggesting this tournament Duke Theseus seems to imply that who ever wins is the best. It is fortune, a higher a power, giving the victory to the knight who is the greatest. To me, this suggestion brings to mind the idea that the victor is divinely ordained to win. Succeeding militarily could be a way of proving that one is favored by God, and that winning is associated with something greater than luck or sheer physical strength.

In a time when power seems to be taken forcefully rather than given by the people who are to be governed, military success is what allows someone to become a leader. They must have the adequate strength to subdue their opponents and entice the population into submission.

[britlitgroupblog]

Might is Right vs. Might for Right

According to T.H. White, these two conflicting ideals lie at the heart of argument within the book The Once and Future King. In the book, many of the antagonists follow “Might is Right”. By contrasting them with the teaching of Merlin, this doctrine also helps to characterize what a true Arthurian leader is. In the Once and Future King, the young Wart first sees this ideology when he is turned into a fish by Merlin and visits the giant pike in the moat who rules with fear and allows his desires to dictate how he rules.

Later, when the Wart has become King Arthur, he fights against this doctrine. Best exemplified in the cruel knight Sir Bruce Sans Pitié. In a conversation with Merlin, Arthur said, “He is a swine. He goes murdering maidens—and, as soon as a real knight turns up to rescue them, he gallops off for all he is worth. He breed special fast horses so that nobody can catch him, and he stabs people in the back. He’s a marauder”(White, 228). Merlin argued that Sir Bruce was truly not so different from the other knights of his time, “Might is Right, that’s the motto. Bruce Sans Pitié is only an example of the general situation. Look at Lot and Nentres and Uriens and all that Gaelic crew, fighting against you for the Kingdom…This is their chance to pay off racial scores, and to have some blood-letting as sport, and to make a bit of money in ransoms” (White, 229). Unlike these other leaders, King Arthur with the help of Merlin were fighting to put an end to all that. Merlin even had harsh words for Arthur’s father Uther Pendragon, saying, “Look at the barns burnt, and dead men’s leg sticking out of ponds, and horses with swelled bellies by the roadside…That is chivalry nowadays. That is the Uther Pendragon touch” (White, 229). For White, there is a distinction between using might for right and might being right and he would argue that a good Arthurian leader accepts the former rather than the latter.

[britlitgroupblog]

Chivalry

The appearance of Chivalry is a defining characteristic of Arthurian Leaders. Chivaliary in these tales is encompassed by the concept of “Might for Right”. Examples of this may be rescuing distressed maidens, participating in tournaments to win love and honor, or embarking on spiritual quests, such as fighting in the Crusades or questing for the Holy Grail.  An Article from the Weekly Standard Against Chivalry illuminates these ideas about chivalry in the following passage.

Chivalry was an attempt to give a religious dimension to all aspects of life — to saturate the world with Christianity. The famous chivalric romances sought to civilize war, to temper its savagery with Christian notions of mercy. As chivalric romance developed, the Quest for the Holy Grail became one of its dominant motifs, giving a spiritual and deeply Christian goal to the knights' striving. Chivalry was bound up with courtly love. A knight was supposed to worship his lady from afar and undergo a spiritual discipline, a quasi-religious purification, in his quest to perfect himself for his mistress's sake.

Chivalry, and protecting the weaker sex is demonstrated by King Richard in his attack of the castle in order to rescue Lady Rowena and Rebecca from those who might compromise their chastity. He responded to Gurth and Wamba request for aid on the behalf their master as so “I will, therefore, ask thee no further questions, but aid thee in setting at freedom these oppressed captives (Ivanhoe, Chapter 20)”. It is also seen in the many tournaments Lancelot fights in order to protect the good name of Queen Guinevere in The Once and Future King by T.H. White. 

[britlitgroupblog]

Chivalry makes Arthurian leaders inherently masculine

Knights and Kings are expected to protect women as part of “the code of chivalry” , and it seems that women in filling the role of the ones who must be protected can’t fulfill the role of protectors and leaders. An Article from the Atlantic ,Give Chivalry Another Chance, make the argument that Chivalry leads to gender discrimination because it assumes women to be a weaker sex and in need of chivalrous protection. 

Chivalrous behavior is benevolent because it flatters women and leads to their preferential treatment. But it is sexist because it relies on the "gendered premise" that women are weak and in need of protection while men are strong. "Benevolent sexism," Kathleen Connelly and Martin Heesacker of the University of Florida write in the study, "is an ideology that perpetuates gender inequality."

[britlitgroupblog]

Religious Influence

(Video retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv6pwzIiRKc)

Arthurian rulers are all influenced by a higher power. For King Arthur, by pulling the sword from the stone, he received a divine right to rule. King Richard I, in Ivanhoe, was so devoted to his faith that he left Britain to fight in the Crusades. These examples provide a link between religion and leadership in the Arthurian tradition. Similarly, the United States, every President has officially identified as a Christian. This speaks to the deep relationship between Christianity and national leadership in Western society.

This image represents a romantic interpretation of Richard I the Lionhearted fighting in the Holy Lands during the Second Crusades. The idea of a crusader as a moral and just figure continues to resonate in modern political discourse. 

The Article, Tattooed former US solider 'wants to keep the church bells ringing' in ancient community, discusses the motivations of certain Westerners in returning to fight the Islamic State in the Iraq, Syria and Levant. For our current president, the easy side to take is that of Christianity in a theological conflict with the Muslim world. This argument has been used time and again by western leaders to back up their decisions to enter conflicts in the Middle East. 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=79573

[britlitgroupblog]

Apply such a narrative to the U.S.' current leader - President Trump. How does he stand up? Why is this comparison important to you?

In our current time we use our potential for force to keep the peace, in a similar fashion to how King Arthur seemed to maintain the peace, by holding the strongest military, such that other countries are afraid to oppose us. We have approached our conquest with a similar pretext of “might for right” that may be seen in Arthurian leadership, using our power to displace dictator much the same as knight’s rescuing fair maidens. However Trump the pretext of righteous that we use to justify force may be just a pretext, and our current leadership more self serving that that which Arthur idealized in “The Once and Future King”. 

[britlitgroupblog]

Similarly to King Arthur and his knights of the Round Table, who sought out quests and people to save, the U.S. intervenes time and again to depose dictators or oppressive regimes. However, while ISIS is certainly worth fighting against, President Trump has outlined a strategy based on the use of might because we have it, rather than using it for something worthwhile.

[britlitgroupblog]

Rather than accepting the institutions that were put in place to defend against this behavior. This article documents how President Trump is using his newly gained political power, to silence dissent of those who oppose him. This demonstrates the idea of “Might is Right” where because he is now the President of the United States, he must therefore be right and allowed to legally attack his opponents...

[britlitgroupblog]

Another example of “Might is Right”, this article highlights how President Trump has showed a willingness to use his position of power as President of the United States to further his personal agenda and disparage those who stand in opposition to that agenda. 

[britlitgroupblog]

In contrast to the chivalric code of King Arthur and his knights, President Trump has shown marked disrespect for women throughout his professional adult life. While Arthurian chivalry is also inherently biased, in that women were objectified and discounted from positions of leadership, Trump’s treatment of women would have been ill-received in Camelot, where women were objects to be saved and won, rather than in Trump’s case, simply won...

[britlitgroupblog]

Why is this comparison important to you?

While the Arthurian leader is by no means perfect and an obviously romanticized representation of a ruler, it is still beneficial to compare current leaders with the likes of King Arthur, King Richard, and other historical and literary leaders. The literary works of The Once and Future King, Ivanhoe, Cymbeline, and other literary works we have read all offer a critique of the social, literary, and historical factors that influence our societies interpretation of leadership and what makes a “good” leader. By comparing our current President, it becomes clear that his motivations and actions are in no way new, rather, they are apart of a longstanding pattern of leadership in western civilization that has been influenced by the very factors we have discussed during this course.