#holy grail mythos

[gawrkin]

(From Visions of History: Robert de Boron and the English Arthurian Chroniclers by Edward Donald Kennedy)

The way I interpret the French Tradition is that it "started" with Robert de Boron. In a way, Robert de Boron is like the "Second Father of Arthuriana". Robert de Boron didn't so much alter King Arthur's story as he instead gave it a new context.

Despite Chretien de Troyes and Robert Wace introducing the Round Table, the Holy Grail and Sir Lancelot, it was Robert de Boron who truly established the "Christian Chivalric Universe" - by writing about the history of the grail and the introduction of Joseph of Arimathea as a patriarch, Robert de Boron gave the (Literary) Chivalric genre a Mythic Past and a continuity of sorts. It fits in the Christian worldview of history as part of a giant plan - and story - of God's for Mankind's salvation.

It fully establishes the Christian origin and heritage of (Literary-)Chivalry-as-an-institute by not only having Joseph bring Christianity to Britain, where the future fantastical setting of Arthur and his warriors was to be established, but also having him serve as the ancestor to multiple Arthurian characters such Percival, Tristan, Lancelot, King Lot, his son Gawain, and Arthur himself (fulfilling the aristocratic need for genealogical fantasy).

This essentially pushes away, and negates the symbolic consequences of, the original narrative set forth by Geoffrey of Monmouth - the almost kind-of secular and worldly portrayal of Arthurian History.

For all intents and purposes, Joseph of Arimathea replaces Brutus in importance for the Era of Camelot. This is why (in Vulgate cycle, at least) Joseph is said to be a knight.

Nowhere is that felt more than in Robert's introduction of one of the most iconic pieces of Arthuriana: The Sword in the Stone.

The Sword of the Stone, an item not mentioned at all in Historia Regum Britannia, and its attendant story arc of Arthur's hidden upbringing by Antor/Ector, essentially functions as a second origin story for King Arthur without having to negate or omit Geoffrey's older story of Arthur being born through a thoroughly un-Christian manner.

Whatever or whoever Arthur was before pulling the sword doesn't particularly matter, the sword in the stone effectively grants the same Divine privilege to rule as if he was conceived and raised as a normal royal.

AND

Arthur's ignorance of his heritage affords him synergy with his knights, many of whom are often of the "Fair Unknown" archetype, including Lancelot, Gawain, and of course, Percival.

[prokopetz]

For all its dumbfuckery, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is genuinely the closest a film adaptation of the Arthurian mythos has ever gotten to capturing how deeply weird the source material really is.

[melrosing]

a while back you mentioned bran being a fisher king type of figure if he becomes king. i am so intrigued by that concept. can you tell us more?

so full disclosure, I don't have a great deal of familiarity with Arthurian legend or British/Welsh mythology, which is what the Fisher King really draws upon, so I don't think I can say anything of real substance on this subject! i keep meaning to just sit down and swot up on this stuff but it's. not really something you can do in one sitting lol

HOWEVER i think even to a wiki peruser it's patently clear that GRRM is drawing on the Fisher King concept with Bran (as in, once you know he's doing that, you realise he isn't even trying to hide it). and I do tend to think that GRRM is more likely to stick with the top line of a myth or historical event he means to parallel rather than get lost in the minutiae - e.g. Matilda v Stephen succession crisis inspiring Rhaenyra v Aegon, the Black Dinner of 1440 inspiring the Red Wedding, this is GRRM taking the substance of an event but not the details of how it came to pass.

I'm going to guess that rather than getting into the finer details of the Fisher King mythos, GRRM is going to utilise it much like he's used Shakespeare's Richard III for Tyrion, which is another inspiration that seems painfully obvious from the moment you spot it, but is hardly lifted beat for beat, and I seriously doubt that Tyrion's story ends up anywhere like the end of RIII. but you can see GRRM taking the bits and pieces of RIII he finds interesting and twisting them for Tyrion in ASOIAF.

so with that in mind, I'm just going to quickly list the key points I can personally gather from the Fisher King myth that seem to gesture to Bran, and why I think these are probs interesting to GRRM as a writer (but as I say there are people who know lots about arthurian legend and british/welsh mythology who would probs have a lot more to say here):

the Fisher King is usually depicted as being wounded in the groin/legs/thigh - this is considered synonymous with his inability to have children and so propagate his line. immediately obvious parallel to Bran, and I think through both ASOIAF and F&B, GRRM is trying to show that ruling through dynasties where everything hinges on how the next guy's son turns out, is not a viable way to run a country. Bran will not be succeeded by children of his own blood, but I think much in the way that he himself has succeeded Bloodraven

the Fisher King is one with his land as such: his welfare is the welfare of the land, and when he takes a wound (and becomes infertile), the land too becomes barren. the Fisher King awaits a hero who will heal and restore him and so the land (but I can only imagine GRRM would subvert this - it's clear through GRRM's writing of disability that he doesn't see value in just 'curing' his characters. he wants to actually write them as disabled people). and I think there's a lot in Bran's story about man learning to respect the land he lives upon - the children and the first men's peace pact was agreed upon the grounds that the first men would essentially preserve Westeros and its weirwoods etc, and so I think it's generally agreed ASOIAF could end with a similar kind of pact to end the Long Night (or after the end of TLN)? so again, think this point is about Bran representing a renewed relationship between the lands of Westeros and its peoples - the welfare of all is tied together through him

the Fisher King is guarding the Holy Grail. im way out of my depth on this point, someone with more knowledge re. the Holy Grail needs to weigh in here lol, but I would guessssss that maybe this has something to do with Bran ending the story on the Isle of Faces, protecting the peace from there or SOMETHING idk

then the most obvious point: the Fisher King as he appears in Arthurian legend is thought to draw on the figure of Brân the Blessed, a character of Welsh mythology - which immediately recalls Bran the Broken (something Bran literally calls himself several times). the name 'Bran' also translates to crow or raven in Welsh, so, duh. and Brân the Blessed's story ends with his requesting that his head be buried on the White Hill of London - and as long as it remained there, Britain would be safe from invasion. more about Bran being tied directly to the welfare of the land and its peoples

(again there's doubtless a lot more that could be added here by someone who understands the Fisher King myth better than I do, but these seemed like the most obvious points that anyone could draw on)

anyway I absolutely take it as a given that Bran will be King at this point, and whilst it's really hard to imagine what that looks like, I do think it resonates. GRRM likes writing about dynasties but I don't think he believes in them. I'm sure he feels much the same way about feudalism, but I doubt that will be gone by the end of ASOIAF, too, so this is how I picture it??

KL: destroyed. red keep: fucked. some level of politics may continue here post-series, but I think it will no longer be the heart of westeros. the fact that it is in AGOT is I think GRRM trying to show the corruption at the heart of this country - KL is constantly described as a cesspit where the rich play their games and live and eat luxuriously directly atop the shoulders of the poor and downtrodden, divorced from what's happening in the rest of the 7K.

the new heart of Westeros will be the Isle of Faces. this is where I think Bran will end up. we don't know much about it, bc noone is able to sail there, but this was where the pact between the COF and the First Men was created, and it's one of the last places in the south where weirwoods still grow (here, in abundance). and apparently there was once a Green King of the Gods Eye?? if the Green King, of the Rivermen, is in any way the role Bran will soon be occupying, maybe this is where his Tully heritage is somehow relevant. and also like 'god's eye', Bran's whole thing is about learning to see all, so. likely place for him to be. ultimately, I don't think Bran will remain in Winterfell; the story is supposed to be about unity I think, and not northern exceptionalism, so a remaining Stark sibling will take up that seat and as I said before, I tend to think that will be Sansa.

and I guess the most I can imagine beyond this point is Bran living alongside the COF (perhaps in the company of Meera idk?), functioning less as a political entity and more as a figurehead, perhaps an oracle, who lives for the welfare of his people. there will still be politicians to run the country, but they will be guided by Bran in some way, and like Bloodraven, Bran will choose his own successor. what the intricacies of any of this look like i have no idea, but this really does sound to me like the start of GRRM's answer to all his concerns re. dynasties and corruption etc etc

sorry this was all garbled as hell but this is basically what the Fisher King endgame means to me for now. in short, not a whole lot that I can make sense of but I like the feel of it, I think it's consistent with the themes of the text and suggests the start of real change at the end of the story, rather than the start of yet another dynasty.

[gingersnaptaff]

@caer-gai answering your questions here!!! :D

😇 Who is a character you discovered this year? (Positive, blorbo)

Is it weird if I say Lancelot? I knew about him obviously but I was one of those who was a bit like *wrinkles nose* at him when I first learned about him. Thankfully though everybody on the Arthuriana Tumblr has made since reconsider the review of him as this idk interloper I guess? He's pretty cool and the reasons around his inception into the mythos are fascinating (thank u @gawrkin @dullyn and @queer-ragnelle for educating me!)

🖼️ What was your favorite Arthurian art piece made by someone else this year? (Any medium)

Oooh, okay, so either any one of your art, @oneshoulderangel @nekomaidmordred , @grail-lifesupport In terms of stories then defo @dullyn 's Lancelot story. (Omg, Kit I know I probably don't say this often enough but HOLY SHIT!!!! AMAZING!!!). And @girlwholovesherwords story. (It's Welsh mythology but I LOVE IT!!!!! It would be a disservice if I didn't include it.

(Also @gwalch-mei 's Gawain art!!!!! All of it!!!!)

[revoevokukil]

Sapkowski the Pagan: The Grail & The Goddess

Andrzej Sapkowski and Stanisław Bereś. 2005. Historia i fantastyka

One of the more fascinating features of Sapkowski's writing is the intertextuality of his works; their relation not only to preceding legends and fantasy, but also to his own works. There are several topics and ideas that repeat, in various shapes, throughout. As I am going through the Hussite Trilogy right now, I am taking notes.

Among his works I herein count The Witcher, The Hussite Trilogy & The World of King Arthur. Maladie. The latter must constitute the closest we have gotten so far to authorial research notes on ideas of interest.

The ley lines (so far):

Humanim, i.e. decency

(Erotic) Love's salving & dooming qualities Amantes amentes. Those who love are out of their minds. Take heart. Have pity.

Woman, the Grail of being

Fairy tales brought to life (but there's a snag)

Prophecies/Grand narratives

Folk stories & beliefs

Witchcraft

The Cult of the Goddess, the Great Mother, The One who is Three

The perishing of the old (but not quite disappearing) & the brutal onset of the new. Change and upheaval.

Common sense vs idealism vs pragmatism

Anti-taxes, anti-clergy

Anti-fanaticism

The Grail & The Goddess

"For the Goddess has many names. And still more faces."

First, Andrzej Sapkowski construing Ciri as The Holy Grail is documented. It's not merely conjecture based on the text(s), although the text overwhelmingly declares it.

Cutali, Daniele. 2015. Interview with Andrzej Sapkowski

But so what?

The Witcher is an extremely allusive and meta-literary work. It deconstructs mythical matter and fantasy canon in the same breath as establishing itself in the eternal mythical present of legends. It completes itself as a self-aware analogue, because everything has already happened, and everything has already been written about. And Ciri - Cirilla Fiona Elen Riannon - sits at the centre of its method and madness; not only the axis of plot events, but also the spindle of its meta text. It's apparent already in her name. O Elaine, O Rhiannon. All Christian legends have a pagan origin. This Polish newborn has Arthurian origins. And Arthurian itself…?

In The World of King Arthur, Andrzej Sapkowski gives his account of the Arthuriana's transformation through centuries of re-writes. It is self-evident for him that for anyone to understand anything at all about Arthur, they need to orient in the history of the British Isles and in Celtic mythology.[1] Arthur was, in all probability, a Celt. And so was the Grail, if not even more ancient. 'The Grail - like almost every element of the Arthurian legend - has its origins in Celtic mythology. This is absolutely certain and has been confirmed many times,' he writes in Świat króla Artura. So what did Arthur believe? What views and values lay at the heart of the world in which he originated? Why is this relevant for a more meaningful reading of The Witcher?

Because the world of the Celts, as so many pre-Christian cosmologies, was a living world - an animistic, self-eating and self-renewing entity, cyclical, circular, without beginning or end, embracing life out of death - and Ciri is a living Grail. Ideas repeat in Andrzej Sapkowski's writing.

Ciri, a living Grail. A girl. A young woman. A Goddess. She who is Triple. A source of rebirth and hope, of death too. Strange magic is enclosed in her veins, as in Ceriddwen's Cauldron, that is of the essence of life. Cauldrons abound in Celtic mythos (be you Dagda, hero Cuchulainn, Brân or Pwyll, you got your hands on a cauldron eventually). But Ciri does not need to be rendered an artefact in order to hold power, because… she is a woman. That alone is enough.

Sapkowski's appreciation for compelling female characters should be well-known.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

'Celtic mythology,' Sapkowski notes in Świat, 'is mainly about the love life of the gods.' Gods fighting, scheming, and transcending themselves for goddesses. It's called the oldest story in the world; girl meets boy. But that's not quite the beginning of it: in the beginning, we're all born to a mother.

The Grail's functions and characteristics are notably maternal and feminine, and the mystery and nature of the Grail's power is love.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

Great, White, Triple

Who? And what features?

The ability to provide food is the property of the Grail most often referred to. Nourishment. Revitalization. Mother is the only parent who may truly feed her child with her body. Or give birth. The Chalice symbolically representing the "Womb of the Mother" is a very old idea. Old and basic. The most basic. Bernard of Clairvaux even calls upon Mary, saying: "Offer your son, sacred Virgin, and present the blessed fruit of your womb to God. Offer the blessed host, pleasing to God, for the reconciliation of us all" (qtd. in Bynum, 268). But we'll talk about the role of Christianity and symbolism another time. For first, we are pagans.

"Drawing from various sources, I assumed that – although I am not a blind follower of this theory – the feminine element dominates in nature. If there is any cult not related to politics, it is the cult of the Great Mother, the Goddess. The belief in the male God, Yahweh, worshiped by Jews, had a political character – Yahweh was invented because he had to be invented to maintain certain social structures. For primitive people, the mysterious, divine element was exclusively femininity, the ability to give life. However, I emphasize that I am not defending these theories from a religious studies standpoint; they simply resonate with me." - Andrzej Sapkowski and Stanisław Bereś. 2005. Historia i fantastyka

This idea that resonates with Andrzej Sapkowski so strongly as to appear in virtually everything he has written was re-kindled as an ideology by the neo-Celtic, neo-pagan Wicca movement (Gardner, Murray, Starhawk, et al). Foundational text: The White Goddess by Robert Graves. The idea precedes the Celts though, and, at heart, revolves around nature and man being inseparable.

Ceridwen is one of the forms of the Celtic Goddess, and her cauldron is the womb-cauldron of rebirth and inspiration. In early Celtic myth, the cauldron of the Goddess restored slain warriors to life. It was stolen away to the Underworld, and the heroes who warred for its return were the originals of King Arthur and his Knights, who quested for its later incarnation, the Holy Grail. The Celtic afterworld is called the Land of Youth, and the secret that opens its door is found in the cauldron: The secret of immortality lies in seeing death as an integral part of the cycle of life. Nothing is ever lost from the universe: Rebirth can be seen in life itself, where every ending brings a new beginning. Most Witches do believe in some form of reincarnation. This is not so much a doctrine as a gut feeling growing out of a world view that sees all events as continuing processes. Death is seen as a point on an ever-turning wheel, not as a final end. We are continually renewed and reborn whenever we drink fully and fearlessly from “the cup of wine of life.” - Starhawk. 1979. The Spiral Dance

Nature's heartbeat resounds in reincarnation through reproduction. The gentle fury of love.

“Listen to the words of the Goddess, whose arms and thighs are wrapped around the Universe!” called the shaman. “Who, at the Beginning, divided the Waters from the Heavens and danced on them! From whose dance the wind was born, and from the wind the breath of life!” “I am the beauty of the green earth,” said the Domina, and her voice was like the wind from the mountains. “I am the white moon among a thousand stars, I am the secret of the waters. Come to me, for I am the spirit of nature. All things arise from me and all must return to me, before my visage, beloved by the gods and mortals.” “Eiaaa!” “I am Lilith, I am the first of the first, I am Astarte, Cybele, Hecate, I am Rigatona, Epona, Rhiannon, the Night Mare, the lover of the gale. Black are my wings, my feet are swifter than the wind, my hands sweeter than the morning dew. The lion knows not when I tread, the beast of the field and forest cannot comprehend my ways. For verily do I tell you: I am the Secret, I am Understanding and Knowledge.” "Worship me deep in your hearts and in the joy of the rite, make sacrifices of the act of love and bliss, because such sacrifices are dear to me. For I am the unsullied virgin and I am the lover of gods and demons, burning with desire. And verily do I say: as I was with you from the beginning, so you shall find me at the end." Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

It is for this reason the Irish recorded so many songs of aitheds - motifs of female abduction. It is for this reason one of the earliest legends of the search of the Grail is the tale of the hero Culhwch's quest for the hand of Olwen, who, wherever she stepped, made four white clovers bloom under her feet.[2] It is why Ciri, the living Grail in whom the function of the Goddess has been doubled, finds herself in a double-bind; as the keeper of power and immortality she is more frequently seen as means to an end rather than an end in herself. Not unusual for any failed relationship where the parties confuse love for something else. And while we are confusing notions of erotic and spiritual love, the Question of the Grail which must be asked of the Fisher King, undoubtedly, still comes down to a question about love.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

Celtic mythology is about the love life of the gods. The longing for a union; that completes. That turns the wheel and closes the cycle. That revitalizes, heals, nourishes, allows for flourishing. That immortalizes; if not oneself, then at least a moment. And what is life but fleeting moments, grains of sand passing through an hourglass?

Sapkowski, A. Something Ends, Something Begins

It can get confusing. The Goddess has many names and many faces, and three aspects.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

As to the inherent eroticism of the Grail, well…

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

He wanted to tell her everything, but the words stuck in his tight throat. She saw it. She knew. How could she not? For only in Reynevan’s eyes, stupefied by happiness, was she a maiden, a trembling virgin who was embracing him, eyes closed and biting her lower lip in painful ecstasy. For any wise man—had there been one nearby—the matter was clear: she was no shy and inexperienced young lass, but rather a goddess proudly receiving the homage due to her. And goddesses know and see everything. And do not expect homage in the form of words. She pulled him onto her and the eternal rite began. - Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

Sapkowski's interest for the fates of men in the power of the Goddess is only surpassed by his hope for the triumph of common sense and humanism. And the mystery of the Grail - what unleashes its power? - is of both sexual and platonic variety. Humanity is important. Heart. As in Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival. As per Campbell: 'The big moment in the medieval myth is the awakening of the heart to compassion, the transformation of passion into compassion. That is the whole problem of the Grail stories, compassion for the wounded king.' [4]

Thanks to Ciri, the story of Geralt of Rivia - a grail knight who set out with his hanza in search of a dream - is ennobled and raised on par with King Arthur. It is Yennefer and Geralt's love and compassion and sacrifice for Ciri, which ultimately heals them. An echo of love for his daughter melts the ice shard in the heart of an Emperor. The mystery and nature of the Grail's power resides in love.

"Love has many names,” said Hans Mein Igel suddenly, “and it will determine your fate, young herbalist. Love. It will save your life when you won’t even know that it is love. For the Goddess has many names. And still more faces.” - Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

By the end of The Witcher, Ciri's journey as the Goddess has barely begun. And what has begun has begun traumatically. Her journey to know herself, to find, forgive, understand, and accept (or reject) the Grail within, has not yet dawned. She remains in a liminal space between the Maiden and the Woman after having, already and much too early, worn the guise of Death, the Crone. The author doesn't tell; he lets the reader wonder. For before Ciri is everything. But Grail, the Goddess, requires something, and also empowers with what she requires.

Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

Love leads spring into the Waste Land of the human heart.

Love, compassion, willingness to suffer with and for another, readiness to transcend one's own pain, selfishness, and rage. For three things last forever: faith, hope, and love - and the greatest of these is love.[3]

-----

[1]: Sapkowski mainly used Mythology by Thomas Bulfinch, Celtic Myth and Legend, Poetry and Romance by Charles Squire and Mabinogion. [2]: In order to marry Olwen, Culhwch must take her from her father, but Ysbaddaden will first set him on an endless quest; a list of long and laborious tasks. In the name of a woman. [3]: Or, as The Tower of the Swallow renders it: 'Are, then, Chaos, art and learning according to you, the Powers capable of changing the world? A curse, a blessing and progress? And aren't they by any chance Faith? Love? Sacrifice?' [4]: Campbell, J. 1991. The Power of Myth

[blue-cat-shitposts]

My mutuals will already know this, but after a while I decided it was funny enough to share on Tumblr too. Today I watched OSP's video summarizing the legends of King Arthur, for the sole purpose of finally learning the context for High Noon Over Camelot. Because beforehand, the extent of my knowledge on these mythos was:

there's a king named Arthur

he pulled the sword out of the stone and that's how he became the king of England (I know that from the Disney movie)

he's fabled to return from the grave to rule England again? I remember that from a Tumblr post about some flour called King Arthur "rising" to the top of popularity charts

there's a holy grail. What's the significance of it? Fuck if I know

there's another sword but given by the Lady Of The Lake. The only reason why I remember this is because Ciri in the Witcher books got isekai'd into the Arthurian legend and got confused for Lady Of The Lake, but refused to give out her sword.

Which of the swords is Excalibur? Unclear, probably depends on the telling

there's Merlin, he's a wizard. There's a TV series about him where I think he's a twink and possibly banging Arthur? Sources unclear on that one

there are the knights of the round table

not to be confused with the knights who say.... Ni

[dreamingdormouse]

Context!

Hey, other parents! PSA: Many works of pop culture derive significant portions of their humor and/or meaning from familiarity with cultural touchstones. Monty Python and the Holy Grail, for instance, assumes you know who King Arthur is! Children are not born familiar with these stories. Educating your kids does not JUST mean teaching them to read and write and do math and why they have to wear a seatbelt. Familiarize them with your culture's lexicon of mythology and references, both modern and ancient, and ideally some of those of other cultures!

I read the first few pages of Howl's Moving Castle to my kids a few days ago, and on the very first page it said "In the land of Ingary, where such things as seven-league boots and cloaks of invisibility really exist, it is quite a misfortune to be born the eldest of three. Everyone knows you are the one who will fail first, and worst, if the three of you set out to seek your fortunes." And I had to stop and give context - I summarized the fairy tale trope "Youngest Child Wins," seen in such stories as "Diamonds and Toads," "Ivan and the Firebird," most of the "Askeladd" stories, "The Princess on the Glass Hill," and non-Disney "Beauty and the Beast." I didn't tell them all of these stories, just explained that there were a lot of old fairy tales where the youngest of three siblings does much better than their older siblings, and that, at the time, that was a subversion of assumptions because the eldest was expected to inherit and to do well.

You don't have to start with the full (adult, graphic, tragic) version. Think about what references people are likely to make in person or in the media your kid consumes, and go from that. I do think my kids should know who Hercule Poirot is, but he can be on my "for later" list - partly because he's a more obscure reference, and partly because he largely figures in murder mysteries, which are less appropriate for 7-12 year olds. If my kids want old mysteries, we can go with Encyclopedia Brown instead. (Side note, recently ran into those again, shocked but not actually surprised to find out they were published in, like, the 1970s.)

And when you encounter problematic things, like period-typical bigotry of various kinds, you can discuss why those things existed and why we don't think like that, but knowing they did exist is also context.

For our family, we're working on the Grimm fairy tales, the Olympians, the Asgardians (not because of Marvel, because of Grandma), and based on their blank looks when I talked about Merlin the other day, I need to add the Arthurian mythos.

Later additions can include Anansi, Osiris and Ra, Coyote and/or Raven, Star Wars, Peter Pan, Sherlock Holmes, Shahrazad, Lang's Blue Fairy Book and some of the sequels, Robin Hood, Shakespeare, Llyr of the Long Hand, Amaterasu, Paul Bunyan (especially because great-great-uncle Paul was a logger), Bilbo Baggins, Narnia, Poirot and Miss Marple... whoo boy.

Yes I'm aware there's an English bias in what I've just listed, and that some of those are problematic in certain ways. I'm not listing everything they should eventually read, or trying to build up role models here. This is just me trying to cover the things that will form a basis for references in other stories and general conversation; "Elementary, my dear Watson" (which Homes never said, but is often quoted) means nothing without context.

[reikiajakoiranruohoja]

While these books are not fanfiction, the way they impacted the world versus what they were is hard not to put in fanfic terms. Sometimes you write a self-insert crossover fic so good that it becomes how people see hell, purgatory and heaven from then on out (Divine Comedy.)

Sometimes the fanfic you wrote to showcase how cool your OC is ends up creating a holy relic out of nothing that people think is real (King Arthur mythos-Galahad and the Holy Grail.) Sometimes a switched perspective fic about a mixture of Satan and Lucifer is so well done that people start taking it as Biblical canon (Paradise Lost.) The fact that we have sources for all of these and for two we know the very authors, yet they still get treated as part of Biblical canon is hilarious.

To explain, as far as I know; Hell in the bible is nothing like the one in Inferno. It is as far as I understand it from Revelation, a waiting line for souls to be judged until judgement day. After which it is an absence from God. The lake of fire is for the Beast and co. The Holy Grail does not exist in the bible. Jesus drank from a normal cup that stayed normal. The Grail is from a written version of the Arthurian Myth. Given how insane the relic collecting got in the Middle Ages, you'd have a lot of cups chilling alongside 'saint' bones if it was mentioned in the bible at all. (Actually, aside from the Arc of Covenant, I don't think bible has many relics in it.) Lucifer and Satan are not the same character and Lucifer is thought to be a mistranslation from a king's name. Satan had no tragic backstory or was forced into Hell.

[juniaships]

As much as I want to ignore Shrek the Turd I think it's a lot rewarding to address its flaws than take the easy way out. So here us a list of what I would've changed had I wrote the movie.

Harold's death

- the choice of song is rather out of place

- only serves to push a dramatic moment/shove Artie into the plot

- I actually like Harold :/

How to fix it:

- Harold doesn't die. Instead he gets an old man crisis & Lillian decides to take him on vacation to recuperate; naturally leaving Fiona and Shrek in charge

- Harold does die but the moment is treated with actual respect.

- Harold doesn't die BUT there is a death: Artie's father. The Royal Family go to Camelot for the funeral and meets Uther's estranged son Artie. That way Artie's daddy issues has more purpose in the story bc he truly can't reconcile with his dad, and Shrek a more sympathetic reason to steps up as a father figure.

- Alternatively, Artie's mom dies and he is sent to live in FFW bc his father doesn't want custody. So Shrek AND Fiona has to deal with a teenager and both have fear of parenthood byt still wants to give Artie the best. This also allows Fiona and Artie to interact with each other

Artie

Problem: suffers what I call Chicken Little Syndrome, he's kinda bland and we don't know much about him. Also his bullied nerd background Only serves to make him sympathetic cuz everyone is so mean to him! Beyond being kind and kinda dramatic Artie doesn't have much else

How to fix it:

- Everyone has beef with Artie because of his father's reputation. Perhaps Uther had a bad spending habit which left Camelot in financial ruin or his habit of flirting with women left a lot of illegitimate children now they're all fighting over rightful inheritance and puts down Artie bc he's the youngest/weakest

- Camelot has a very warrior like society but Artie is more diplomatic/soft, which makes him look weak in the eyes of everyone else. Eventually his softness saves Camelot

- Artie has a legitimate flaw (his trust issues) which makes him unable to properly communicate with others.

- Artie has a few true friends who are outcasts like him. But their support drives him to pursue a career in politics so he can help them and ppl like them (giving his speech more credibility)

The Princesses

Problem: most of them were boring at best, unlikable at worst.

How to fix it:

- Give the princesses more likable personalities: say they WERE strong and capable but got so caught up in glamor bc they don't want to remember the painful past

Problem: Charming and Rapunzel

- Comes right out of nowhere

- doesnt make since given Charming's arc is all abput becoming villain why would he date ANOTHER princess?

How to fix it

- Rapunzel's new motivation is she doesn't want an ogre on the throne, or she got tired of the princesses bullying her for her baldness. Or that she's jealous the princesses still have their princes yet Rapunzel lost hers. Or maybe Charming DID save her and she's working with him as a favor.

- However she discovers Charming is not as cool as she thought bc he still treats her (and any princess) like objects and not their own person

- Keep Rapunzel in the princess group and create a new character from scratch

- this new OC is a part of the villains not because she is one herself but because they're the only ones who accepted her for one reason or another. This makes her a foil for Charming and Godmother's relationship. She's wants to help them & save the Poison Apple from closing.

- however Charming is very bad at being evil so she teaches him how to be more assertive and this sets up a romance.

Issue: Arthurian myth

Problem: Aside from being retooled as a school campus, the Arthurian mythos doesn't have much prominence in the story

How to fix it:

-change the main goal to finding Excalibur or the Holy Grail (kiddie Monty Python)

- or have it where Camelot is in a crisis of succession so an election or tournament is held to decide the new king. Noblemen from all over participate (introducing us to the Princesses). Shrek and Fiona helps Artie while Charming joins so he can finally get his own kingdom

- Artie turns out to have magic instead of Merlin (who is just a wacky alchemist/scientist) but he lacks confidence

- At the end have it where Artie forms the knights of the round table (with some of the characters and villains as members)

- Maybe make Charming "Lancelot"

Girl Power Message

Problems: They were sidelined most of the movie, preventing Fiona from truly delving into her responsibilities as Queen. Also most of the girl characters like the Princesses & Guinevere were portrayed as shallow b*tches or not having much relevance

How to fix:

- Make Fiona the focus character this time and her story is juggling queenly duties and her trauma in the tower

- Have the princesses be an underground guerilla force they help her take out Charming during the movie

- or have it where the tower was actually a school to train princesses-to-be and Fiona's Kiss was part of a sceret test of character to see if she really is fit to be Queen; accepting her ogress form means she accepts EVERYONE, so she passed the test

- Fiona demonstrates her leadership skills by planning and carrying out targeted attacks, & taking care of civilians

- MAKE ARTIE A GIRL it makes a cool twist fitting for a franchise like Shrek. Or give Artie a female companion/love interest who accompanies him on his quest (perhaps Guinevere or a new character)

- instead of Merlin they meet Nimue/Lady of the Lake who takes the role of the kooky mentor

- Like I mentioned, explore why Rapunzel betrayed the team; perhaps make her have a change of heart and help her ex friends escape.

- Or like giving Charming a new love interest one who is a caricature of the Evil Sexy Villainess or YA Novel Girlboss Protagonist (have her learn it's okay to be vulnerable)

- have Shrek puss and Donkey be the ones in danger and fiona and her princesses are the ones to go on a journey to save them

Puss and Donkey's subplot

Problem: it doesn't do much to serve the story but for cheap comic relief. Donkey is a father himself but doesn't seem to do much to help Shrek and Artie

How to fix it:

- make Puss absent of stay with the princesses to help them

- Donkey talks with Shrek about his experiences as a father

- Remove the body switch entirely

- or have a subplot where Donkey and Puss still aren't getting along and Merlin switches them so they can learn to see from a new perspective.

- Maybe have Puss admit he doesn't have a good relationship with his own dad or something, or is actually great with kids (stunning Shrek and Donkey)

Shrek's arc

- Issue: we don't delve much into his backstory, he only wants to shirk his royal duties instead of doing the smart thing and actually confronting them

How to fix:

- introduce more Ogres or Shrek's dad. Have it be a family reunion or Shrek's dad finds out he married into royalty and that sets up the overall conflict

- Have the babies born before the movie and the plot is spent with him being a stay at home dad or caring for them while in Camelot while Fiona is tbe working parent

- also sets up an arc where Fiona struggles to balance mother hood and her job

- artie gets more used to ogre (children) leading to a realisation he has to step up to make a better future for their sake (again a more sympathetic reasoning)

The Villains

Issue: Charming is just Farquad 2.0, the rest seem to be props in their own story, Rapunzel

How to fix

- Make a new character who represents the villain side we get an intimate look at how society treats outcasts

- Give the villains more screentime like say we follow a group of them during theur trip to capture Shrek. They eventually have a confrontation and in the fray Artie ends up helping a villain much to their shock. They realise Artie isn't a threat. Or have it set at the play

- give Hook or Doris a prominent role

- or a new major villain; make it Charming's dad who takes him under his wing under the guise of wanting to help his son but is just manipulating him for the throne

- Make Charming struggle how ti adapt to being a villain due to his upbringing

- make some of the villains less open to wanting him in his group or have it where they try to help him be more evil (setting up potential jokes)

- Have Charming and Fiona have an actual moment with Fiona pointing out she did dream of a prince but is happy with Shrek and warns Charming that he still wouldn't be happy even if he did get everything

- Give Charming an actual villain love interest as a foil to Shrek and Fiona

- Don't include Charming at all (marry him off to Doris even lol) and create a new villain inspired by Arthurian lore. Maybe the Black Knight? Mordred? Morgan le Fay?

- Or even Artie himself! he wants to use his new position to enact revenge on his bullies

- Instead of the villains taking over it's the other fairytale heroes led by a jilted Charming and Shrek teams up with the villains to save FFW

- Make Uther the main villain

[notmuchtoconceal]

Yo, bro.

When you're talking to a dogboy, phrase everything like a quest.

Not a task, a quest. A quest is a task with a mythos.

It will teach the dogboy to engage with his literary sensibility from the boots up. It will compel him to think out the mechanics and the logistics of the task more deeply by netting it in a shroud of intrigue.

If you look back, you might notice this was a dominant literary mode for centuries. You send the dogboys out lookin for the holy grail, you tell em they're lookin for a cup, cause they don't know what lookin for enlightenment looks like. They know what a cup is, though.

A magic cup. Maybe the magic cup was enchanted by the Josh's spit like that magic spear was enchanted by the Josh's blood.

The Josh is the ultimate dogboy. The Josh is crowned in thorns and tied up dead and naked to a tree, lashed and welted in his psychic pain aura.

The Josh is a radiant mind of the world, from which all light and grain emerges in a paradoxical unity of give and take, receive and deceive.

Dogboy's gonna go around lookin for that cup, thinkin real good, makin all sorts of connections, and then he's gonna realize -- holy shit, bro!

It's not about my mother-sister's warm hot fertile cunt and how she can bring me back to life after I nut in her, it's like -- that scene in the Last Crusade where you pick the old bronzed dimmed and subtly lustrous antique cup over the big shiny bejeweled cup cause Our Lord Josh was a Humble Servant of the Lord Himself... bro that's like...

Is it like half the story or is it a further obfuscation? Are people gonna come away from that thinkin like ... aw, damn. I got this all wrong. I gotta be lookin at like ... old dingy worn out shit instead of pretty, shiny, shimmering, googling like ... shit that screams "touch me".

Bro, why's it asking to be touched so bad, bro?

It gonna hit me with its venom?

Then it's like... bro, you gotta realize. Who cares what other people do?

If other people haven't yet learned that their desires are an expression of their values (or lackthereof) it's not your place to teach em.

Still got to much left to teach yourself, bro.

Just smack your forehead, explain all your reasoning to big bro, and be like "bro, am i a dumbass, be honest, please? i dunno the truth from lies?"

to which he'll be like "yeah, lil bro you're a dumbass. you ever stop and wonder why your dick gets hard when i call you a dumbass?

it's cause you're so smart not to run and accept it. more you accept and call yourself a dumbass, smarter you're gonna be, lil bro."

and it's like ... damn, bro.

Fuckin preach.

[warmth-and-wonder]

PERSONAL MUSINGS ON THE KING, ARTHUR

As an Arthurian pagan, I find myself clutching to scraps of fiction and impossible quests. Arthur loves sending us to little few pdfs of ancient to somewhat modern texts, panning the past for the truth. Whether or not Arthur even existed is a grail quest within itself! So when I read stories offering something as supposedly concrete as a prophecy, especially a prophecy foretelling the coming of Arthur, I get excited.

This post contains an excerpt from King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, by Thomas Malory and edited by Rupert S. Holland. This book is free on the Apple bookstore where I read it. Here is my personal commentary and understanding of, again, this prophecy, or moreso a specific quote from it. Take this with as much or as little salt as you desire.

A young Merlin kneels before King Vortigern, weeping as he foretells the coming of Arthur.

“and his end shall no man know; he shall be immortal in the mouths of the people, and his works shall be food to those that tell them”

I found this incredibly profound upon reading it. Merlin foretells not just the war and it’s results, but I believe he foretells Arthur’s place as a figure of fiction. Arthur is meant to be hard to define. He was destined to be a character as much as he was to be King.

“So many scholars have spent so much time trying to establish whether Arthur existed at all that they have lost track of the single truth that he exists over and over.” -John Steinbeck.

Arthur’s very fate is to exist again. So every time an author adds a piece of plot line, a character, a mcguffin, or a new twist to the tale of Arthur, it sustains him. It feeds us just as much as it keeps Arthur alive. Every new ahistorical piece of the tale was destined to be. The addition of a grail to quest for, a knight to seduce his wife, the pulling of Excalibur, and generally getting absorbed into Christian mythos. It was all necessary to pass the story down to the next age by whatever torch would carry it.

The idea of finding concrete, undiluted truth to any fraction of Arthur’s story sounds like the greatest honor in the whole world. The tragedy is that we may never have that truth. For as hard as we clutch to Arthur, as fiercely as we proclaim his return, we blur his features each time. Arthur remains as king by reigning in fictions. Half truths, made up stories, tales too old to be discarded. To keep Arthur, we must lose him in the process. The truth of Arthur must be lost to maintain the story of Arthur, and thus his existence and kingship.

Arthuriana has several unending, impossible quests and questions. From grails, to questing beasts, to raiding the otherworld. These quests are fated to be undertaken, though. Including their impossibilities. The Knights must quest for the grail despite never being able to find it. Camelot must patiently wait for her King to return. Mordred must be the betrayer, and Merlin must be his guide. And we, the seekers, must continue searching. We must continue trying to dig out fact and UPG and what young adult novel does it best.

The perfect rendition of the truth will only be found when he comes back to us. Otherwise, we will just have to continue searching. I believe more and more as I continue reading that it is our holy duty to ensure he exists over and over again. To make sure there are those who know his name, regardless of it’s surefire truth, when he returns again.

That is the terror of any prophecy. For no matter how great Arthur may be, who may escape the doom of god? Who prophesied to exist in fractions might remain whole?

[gawrkin]

On making a Welsh version of the entire story of King Arthur:

No Lancelot and No Affair. PERIOD. And absolutely no compromise or cheating on this one: you cannot turn anyone else (coughBediverecough) into a Lancelot analogue. You must sacrifice the Love Triangle completely - no "duty vs. love" drama. You're going to have make do without that conceit. You must exercise your own creativity and forge a different dramatic conflict for Arthur and Gwenhwyfar, if at all.

Supplementary to the above: Divorce is legal.

Arthur is at the forefront. Sometimes, Cai, Gwalchmai and Bedwyr is the focus of a particular adventure, but Arthur is a Man of Action, who often outdoes his own warriors. And in particular, he may not even be a King - he may even just be a military chief (Wleddig, Ameraudur or Dux Bellorum), freeing him up to rove around.

Giants, not fairies, as the primary supernatural race Camelot interacts with. Next to that, Saints and Deities come afterwards.

Note that Queen Guinevere herself is the daughter of a giant.

On the legal side: Celtic Law is Tort Law - a weregild system is at play, known as Saraad (Insult/Honor Price) and Galanas (Injury/Homicide Price). Livestock as a measure of wealth. Inheritance system is Gavelkind (although tribal politics may come into play. See Tanistry).

Emphasis on Poetry, Song and Poetic Speech. Englyns are recommended. Bards as serious authority figures.

Be liberal with the supernatural. Mystical items are always fought over and Knights have cyneddf, or mystical abilities.

The Grail Quest has to be whole sale rewritten and given a new mythos: it's either "The Raid on the Otherworld" where the story is about the capture of a mystical Cauldron (Preiddu Annwfn). AND/OR. It's the Peredur version of Perceval, involving a Severed Head instead of a Grail - Maybe its Bran the Blessed himself! - and possibly a battle with the "Nine Sorceresses"

Exceptions to the "No Affair" rule: Medraut and Melwas. The former requires commitment to Traitor!Guinevere and the latter ends with Arthur winning and taking back Guinevere, whether Melwas lives or not.

The Fall of Camelot - There 3 options for how it should unfold without Lancelot: a) defaulting towards Historia Regum Britanniae's version of events. b) the Gwenhwyfach feud. And c) Non-Traitor Medraut ending. The first, similar to the No Affair exception, requires commitment to Traitor!Guinevere. The second involves establishing Gwenhwyfach as a character in her own right. The third and last is the most difficult: the writer must concieve a sufficiently satisfying third party as an opponent for Arthur and Mordred for a tragic last stand.

No Incest. Medraut remains Arthur's Nephew.

No Villain!Morgan

Optional for the above: Iddog Cordd Prydain as an instigator for the hostilities between Arthur and Medraut

As an extention of the "No Lancelot" rule, No Lady of the Lake and No Galahad either.

Arthur assumes the throne through normal means - No Sword in the Stone or Sword from the Lake. Kings Lot and Urien are allies all they way. Excalibur/Caledfwlch is part of a set of Three Holy Weapons, the others being Rhongomyniad and Carnwennan.

Exceptions to the "No Affair" rule: Edern ap Nudd as Guinevere's lover. Highly unrecommended, either for potentially establishing a Love triangle (defeating the whole purpose of removing Lancelot) and for potentially resulting in Arthur's early, non-Camlann death.

Trystan and Essyllt potentially do not end in tragedy (Total omission of Brittany, Isolde White Hands and the Black Sails motif) (Writer's choice). Although Mark could still treacherously kill them both, ala Prose Tristan.

King Mark as potentially Conomor the Cursed.

[coolmaycroft]

More thought on spawn:

So, as far as I can tell, the only direct refference to the christian mythos happens after the 100th issue. Any time before that we don't have a direct mention of the usual figures of christianity like god, jesus, noah´s arc, the princes of hell.

Which is weird in a comic about a guy becoming a hellish superhero. But Mc farlane accomplishes this by 1) not touching anything earthly in christianity and 2) Making up his own angels and demons, 3)throwing earthly foes to Spawn like the cyber-gorilla guy.

for example, Malebolgia is the "king of hell" and hell goes into disarray once he exits the picture. Usually you'd have lucifer or belzebub as the king of hell or at least even feature other known demons as part of the infernal nobility. As for the angels, The Redeemer and Angela are also his own creations and there's no use or mention of the archangel's or metatron.

This again gives it a different flavor when it comes to his worldbuilding. Spawn again feels more like a "supernatural" merecenary rather than an agent of hell. The demons we see look more like goblins or trolls with horns. Hell looks more like a lovecraftian location in the sense that it looks moldy, osified, organic. I like the depcition of hell spawn presents. It's more desolate and original than anything I've seen.

My conspiracy theory is that Mcfarlane actually wanted Spawn to be a lovecraftian superhero but since Lovecraft was still niche in the 90's he used hell and demons because readers were more familiarized with them.

But yeah, again; Stories with christian mythos have their known tropes. The coming war of heaven and hell, the magical artifacts like the holy grail or the arc of the covenant playing a role, hybrids of angels and demons running around. And in Spawn there is the war between heaven and hell coming as well but the lead-up is very unconventional and it's more like a dangling plot thread rather than something the narrative builds up to.

So yeah, I'm torn because aesthetically the worldbuilding is original but at the same time much of the usual substance of this type of story is absent, so it feels like it was written by someone that had a ver surface knowledge of chirstian mythos and imagery. Like there's anime out there that has better knowledge of these themes than spawn.

[skaruresonic]

Amr (ah-mer), Gwydre (gwee-dre, like "Deidre"), and Llachau (lla-khay; the "ll" is a nasal vowel which sounds a little like "sh") are Arthur's sons in pre-Galfridian (pre-Geoffrey of Monmouth) and Welsh sources. Amr was said to be Arthur's chamberlain in Gereint and is named as his son in Culhwch and Olwen. His death goes thusly: There is another wonder in the country called Ernyng (Ercing). There is a tomb there by a spring, called Llygad Amr; the name of the man who is buried in the tomb was Amr. He was a son of the warrior Arthur, and he (Arthur) killed him there and buried him. Men come to measure the tomb, and it is sometimes six feet long, sometimes nine, sometimes twelve, sometimes fifteen. At whatever measure you measure it on occasion, you never find it again of the same, measure, and I have tried it myself. Llachau is the most prominent of Arthur's sons in the literary sources we have available, though how he died varies depending on the source. In the poem Pa gur? (What man is the porter?), Arthur implies Llachau and Cai either killed each other or fell together in battle: Unless it were God who accomplished it. Cai's death were unattainable. Cai the fair and Llachau, they performed battles before the pain of blue spears (ended the conflict). Another translation of the same passage is Cai the fair, and Llachau, Battles did they sustain, Before the pang of blue shafts. and adds the footnote:  In Y Seint Greal (the Welsh version of Perlesvaus: The High History of the Holy Grail), Cai kills Llachau out of envy for the younger man's prowess (moreover, Llachau was Arthur's son and presumed heir; killing him paved the way for Mordred). Llachau was furthermore implied to be a renowned warrior: …I have been where Llachau was killed, son of Arthur, marvelous in songs, when the ravens croaked over blood… The Welsh Triads list him as one of the "Three Fearless Men of the Island of Britain": Three Fearless Men of the Island of Britain: The first was Gwalchmai son of Gwyar, the second was Llachau son of Arthur, and the third was Peredur son of Earl Efrog.

Other Triads contend that he was a "naturalist" and/or "well-endowed (with knowledge)":

Three Well-Endowed Men of the Island of Britain: Gwalchmai son of Gwyar, and Llachau son of Arthur, and Rhiwallawn Broom-Hair. 

Three naturalists of the Island of Prydain. Gwalchmei son of Gwyar; and Llachau son of Arthur; and Rhiwallawn Gwallt Banadlen. However, later French romances quietly phased him out as Lancelot became the more prominent hero, replacing his Welsh name with the name "Loholt." (Also, mandatory side note that Arthur has more bastards in French Vulgate than just Mordred. The Frenchified names Amhar and Loholt recall Amr and Llachau; Sir Borre is his bastard son by Lady Alienor.) Personally, I'm loath to gloss Amr or Llachau as "Welsh!Mordred" because it's overreductive; they are not the same character as Mordred, nor do they serve the same purpose. While elements of their stories echo Mordred's, to say any of them were the ur-Mordred erodes the unique roles they occupied within Welsh mythos. No moral judgment is being passed on Arthur when we're told he killed Amr; we can speculate on his reasons for our own emotional closure, but the story is less concerned with Arthur's motivations than with the magical properties of Amr's tomb. Being a local folk tale, it invites people to venture to the site and measure the tomb for themselves. Mordred is himself largely a product of the Christian culture in which the French romances were steeped. Compared to the Welsh folk tale of Amr's tomb, wherein Arthur's slaying of Amr is mentioned almost nonchalantly as though such a deed were expected of a warlord as a matter of due course (and given how much more brutal and volatile Welsh!Arthur is compared to later versions of the character, I've always personally interpreted Amr's slaughter as a crime of passion he immediately regretted), Christian writers would have found it more germane to explore the moral and spiritual ramifications of killing one's son. The French romances turned Mordred into Arthur's incest baby in order to preach Christian parables against the sin of incest. His name was taken from Prince Medrawt of Goddoddin, said to be "wise in peace and ferocious in battle" in the Welsh Triads. The Battle of Camlan (spelled with one N in Welsh) is attributed to the fact that Medrawt dragged Gwenhwyfar (Guinevere) from her throne, struck her (or beat her), and ate all the food in Arthur's court: a favor which Arthur returned. At a glance, that may seem cartoonish without context; in this post, however, I explain that the Welsh version of events may reflect a historical memory of the year 536 AD: a period of war, famine and plague following an apocalyptic climate change incurred by a massive volcanic eruption.

king arthur has been dead for 1481 slutty, slutty years

[sinsism]

Straight from the studies

T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land and Its Relation to Dante’s Purgatorio

T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land is a cornerstone of modernist poetry, and its intricate relationship with Dante’s Purgatorio reveals a profound dialogue between the medieval and the modern. Eliot’s poem is steeped in allusions to Dante’s work, creating a rich tapestry of intertextuality that deepens its exploration of disillusionment, spiritual desolation, and the quest for redemption. The opening line, “April is the cruellest month,” immediately sets a tone of irony and disenchantment, contrasting sharply with Dante’s depiction of Hell, where time and seasons hold no meaning. This inversion signals the fragmented, chaotic nature of the modern world, where traditional sources of meaning and renewal have been upended. Eliot’s use of April—typically a symbol of rebirth—as a cruel force underscores the spiritual barrenness that pervades the poem, a theme that resonates with Dante’s portrayal of souls trapped in the infernal depths.

Eliot’s journey through the wasteland of modern life mirrors Dante’s descent into the circles of Hell, both in its fragmented structure and its exploration of moral decay. The disjointed, non-linear narrative of The Waste Land reflects the disorientation of a world stripped of coherence and purpose, much like the souls Dante encounters in Hell. This structural parallel is reinforced by Eliot’s vivid imagery of desolation, which evokes Dante’s barren, lifeless landscapes. The barrenness of Eliot’s wasteland—its “stony rubbish” and “dead trees”—parallels the spiritual emptiness of Dante’s Hell, where souls are condemned to wander in despair. The river that flows through The Waste Land can be seen as an allusion to Dante’s Styx, a boundary between the living world and the realm of spiritual anguish, symbolizing the transition into a state of existential and moral crisis.

Central to both works is the figure of a guide who illuminates the path through suffering. In The Waste Land, Tiresias, the blind prophet who witnesses the decay of society, serves a role akin to Dante’s Virgil. Both figures act as mediators between the human and the divine, offering insights into the nature of suffering and the possibility of redemption. Tiresias’s presence underscores the poem’s exploration of human frailty and the cyclical nature of decay, while also hinting at the potential for renewal. This theme of redemption is central to both works: just as Dante’s journey through Hell ultimately leads to hope and salvation, Eliot’s depiction of despair is tinged with a longing for renewal, suggesting that even in the midst of chaos, the search for meaning persists.

Specific sections of The Waste Land further highlight its engagement with Dante. “The Burial of the Dead” evokes themes of death and rebirth, echoing Dante’s encounters with the dead in Hell, while “What the Thunder Said” explores spiritual longing and the quest for redemption through its imagery of water and thirst, paralleling Dante’s themes of purgation and renewal. Eliot’s use of these motifs underscores the poem’s insistence on the possibility of transcendence, even in a world seemingly devoid of hope.

Symbology in The Waste Land

The Fisher King

The Fisher King is a central figure in Arthurian legend and the Grail mythos, and his presence in The Waste Land is deeply symbolic. In the legend, the Fisher King is the guardian of the Holy Grail, but he is wounded and unable to fulfill his role, causing his kingdom to fall into a state of decay and barrenness—a literal wasteland. Eliot draws on this myth to reflect the spiritual and cultural malaise of the modern world. The Fisher King’s wound symbolizes a deeper, collective wound in humanity, one that stems from a loss of faith, meaning, and connection to the divine. His suffering mirrors the desolation of Eliot’s wasteland, where individuals are disconnected from each other and from spiritual truths. The quest to heal the Fisher King parallels the search for redemption in The Waste Land, suggesting that only through addressing this spiritual wound can the wasteland be restored to fertility and life.

Allusions to the Grail

The Holy Grail is a subtle yet significant presence in The Waste Land, symbolizing spiritual fulfillment and the quest for meaning. The Grail myth is most explicitly evoked in the Fisher King narrative, where the wasteland’s restoration depends on the healing of the king and the recovery of the Grail. The poem’s fragmented structure and its themes of spiritual desolation can be seen as a modern retelling of the Grail quest, where the seeker must navigate a chaotic and barren world in search of redemption. The imagery of water and thirst in sections like “What the Thunder Said” further alludes to the Grail, as water is often associated with the Grail’s life-giving and purifying properties. These allusions reinforce the poem’s engagement with Dantean themes, as both the Grail quest and Dante’s journey through Hell and Purgatory are ultimately about the search for spiritual renewal and salvation.

The Tarot and the Sibyl

One of the most striking symbolic elements in The Waste Land is the use of the Tarot, particularly in the opening section, “The Burial of the Dead.” The cards mentioned—the drowned Phoenician Sailor, the Belladonna (the Lady of the Rocks), and the Hanged Man—serve as archetypal symbols of death, transformation, and spiritual stagnation. The Hanged Man, for instance, is traditionally associated with sacrifice and renewal, themes that resonate with both the Fisher King myth and Dante’s journey through Hell and Purgatory. Additionally, the Sibyl of Cumae, who is referenced in the epigraph, embodies the paradox of immortality without eternal youth, a symbol of the spiritual decay that pervades the poem. Her plight mirrors the existential despair of Eliot’s modern wasteland, where life persists but lacks meaning. This connection to ancient prophecy and myth reinforces the poem’s engagement with timeless questions of suffering and redemption.

The Desert and the Waste Land

The barren desert imagery in The Waste Land is a powerful symbol of spiritual desolation, echoing Dante’s depiction of the souls in Purgatory who endure suffering in their quest for purification. The desert represents a place of testing and trial, where individuals confront their innermost fears and failings. In Eliot’s poem, the wasteland is not just a physical space but a metaphor for the modern world’s moral and spiritual emptiness. This imagery parallels Dante’s Purgatory, where souls must traverse a landscape of hardship to achieve redemption. The desert’s aridity contrasts with the life-giving potential of water, another recurring symbol in the poem, emphasizing the tension between despair and hope.

The Thunder and the Voice of God

In the final section, “What the Thunder Said,” the sound of thunder is a multifaceted symbol that draws on Hindu mythology from the Upanishads. The thunder’s voice, which utters the commands “Datta” (give), “Dayadhvam” (sympathize), and “Damyata” (control), represents a call to spiritual awakening and ethical action. This moment of divine communication can be linked to Dante’s encounters with divine voices in Purgatorio, where the souls are guided by celestial figures toward redemption. The thunder’s commands suggest a path out of the wasteland, emphasizing the need for compassion, self-discipline, and generosity—virtues that are central to both Eliot’s and Dante’s visions of spiritual renewal.

The City and Urban Decay

The city is a recurring symbol in The Waste Land, representing the fragmentation and alienation of modern life. London, in particular, is depicted as an “unreal city,” a place where individuals are disconnected from each other and from the natural world. This urban decay mirrors Dante’s vision of Hell, where the souls are trapped in a chaotic, disordered landscape. The city’s lifelessness and mechanization reflect the spiritual emptiness of the modern world, contrasting with the organic, cyclical renewal symbolized by nature. This duality of the city and the natural world underscores the poem’s exploration of humanity’s estrangement from both the divine and the earth.

The Phoenix and the Fire Sermon

The Phoenix, a mythical bird that dies and is reborn from its ashes, is a potent symbol of regeneration and renewal. In The Waste Land, the imagery of fire in “The Fire Sermon” evokes both destruction and purification, echoing the Phoenix’s cyclical process of death and rebirth. This theme of fire as a transformative force can be linked to Dante’s Purgatorio, where souls are purified through fire before ascending to Paradise. The Fire Sermon also draws on Buddhist teachings, emphasizing the need to transcend worldly desires—a message that aligns with Dante’s emphasis on spiritual purification. The interplay of fire and water in the poem creates a dynamic tension between destruction and renewal, reflecting the dual nature of the human quest for meaning.

The Chapel Perilous

The Chapel Perilous, a symbol drawn from Arthurian legend, appears in the final section of The Waste Land as a place of trial and spiritual testing. In the Grail quest, the Chapel Perilous is a site where the knight must confront his fears and prove his worthiness. In Eliot’s poem, it represents the modern individual’s struggle to find meaning in a fragmented, chaotic world. This symbol can be linked to Dante’s journey through Purgatory, where souls must endure trials to achieve redemption. The Chapel Perilous underscores the poem’s exploration of the human condition, emphasizing the challenges of the spiritual quest and the potential for transcendence.

Conclusion : The Use of Myth

Eliot’s use of myth in The Waste Land—drawing on figures like the Fisher King, Tiresias, and the Grail quest—universalizes the poem’s themes, connecting the fragmented modern experience to timeless archetypes and narratives. This mythic framework strengthens parallels to Dante’s Purgatorio, where spiritual crisis and redemption are explored through a Christian mythological lens. The rich symbology in The Waste Land—from the Tarot and the desert to the thunder and the Chapel Perilous—deepens its connection to Dante, creating a layered, universal text that resonates with the timeless quest for meaning amidst despair. Together, myth and symbolism underscore the cyclical nature of suffering and the possibility of transcendence, offering a profound meditation on the human condition and the search for redemption in a fractured world.

[that-one-transwoman]

Hi there!

I'm Amore, This is my personal blog. I mostly post and reblog about whatever I'm fixated on at the moment, or think is funny. I also am frequently seen lesbianposting or posting anything vaguely historical.

A few things about me

-I'm writing a very lesbian, semi-historical fantasy novel with knights, alchemy, witches, magical yarn, and dragons! It's partly based off lancelot and the holy grail, and the broader authurian mythos. Ask me about it!

-I'm going to university to become a librarian/archivist

-I love pre raphaelite art, mediveal things, or anything like it. Old buildings and trinkets are my things

-I'm canadian

-I also often blog about the games I'm playing, what I'm reading, or about bits and bobs that are on my mind. My ask box is open, don't be a stranger!