Novels: Fantasy High‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

King Arthur Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject King Arthur, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of King Arthur, the Arthurian era and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.King ArthurWikipedia:WikiProject King ArthurTemplate:WikiProject King ArthurKing Arthur articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discussion

Untitled

With respect to "The Ill-Made Knight", the article says:

  "(which is the longest book and focuses mostly on the character Lancelot)"

In my copy of _The Once and Future King_ (Berkley, ISBN 0-425-05076-9), the sections have the following text page counts (does not count title pages or inter-section blank pages): "The Sword in the Stone": 201, "The Queen of Air and Darkness": 100, "The Ill-Made Knight": 200, "The Candle in the Wind": 123.

Although it takes me longer to get through "The Ill-Made Knight", that's subjective. It's the second-longest section of the book.

Is there any reason that I shouldn't delete "which is the longest book and" from the parenthetical comment? Mstemper (talk) 15:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion of Elaine in "The Ill-Made Knight" linked to the wrong Arthurian Elaine (there are a number of them, so this is hardly surprising). I corrected this.

-- TalynDerre —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.99.94.242 (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure of the facts, but this article states that the MOVIE Camelot was made in 1967. It was a musical before, perhaps before the Disney movie. That's an idea.

-- Jsan 20:56, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I grabbed this off of the article on T.H. White and was going to merge it here:

The early section of the book, describing Arthur's childhood and tuition by Merlin, was dropped from Camelot, but later adapted into the Disney animated film, The Sword in the Stone. An unpublished final section of the book was published after White's death, as The Book of Merlyn.

BUT:

The first sentence is incorrect. The Disney movie (1961) predates Camelot (1967). Therefore, that cannot be correct.
The second sentence already exists here.

--Raul654 20:41, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

But the play version of Camelot came before the movie version. I think the play opened in 1960. Kuralyov 02:06, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The book, taking place on the isle of Gramarye,

Is "the isle of Gramarye" more than or other than a poetic name for Great Britain here? Marnanel 02:04, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

From the book, I think it's supposed to mean Glastonbury. Kuralyov 02:06, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't think so: As early as the first chapters, White seems to use "Gramarye" to refer to the entire kingdom, including the Castle of Forest Sauvage, which is in the Welsh Marches. "Gramarye" would normally be used to refer specifically to a magical place (like Glastonbury), because its meaning comes from "book of magic." However, in TOaFK, it is clear that "Gramarye" is a much larger place, an entire kingdom (cf. Book I, ch. 14, "In other parts of Gramarye, of course, there did exist wicked and despotic masters...." writingjen 16:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In T. A. Barron's Merlin series, "Gramarye" is used to represent Great Britain, but not ?Ireland. To me, this seems more likely what White intended. 74.230.234.138 (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is White's book not considered canonical Arthurian lore? It's not referenced in any of the articles pertaining thereto. 74.230.234.138 (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed 'Arthur invents chivalry' to 'reinvents' because on more than one occassion Merlyn refers to the Old Chivalry which Uther Pendragon promoted. This is the Old Chivalry which the Orkney Faction employs in volumes 2-4.Cariel 15:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

White spells the Queen's name "Guenever" not the traditional "Guinevere," so I added in a reference in the beginning to this. In which way should the rest of the article refer to her as? I left it as is, except for a mention at the beginning but I'm not sure if it should maybe be changed to follow how White has it. Crito2161 19:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My copy also has "Launcelot" instead of the more common "Lancelot". Should there be a mention of this, or is this a regional spelling difference, like "colour" instead of "color"?Pooneil 07:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This book is also mentioned in H. G. Wells - The Sleeper Wakes, one of the books in the future.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.249.231.6 (talk • contribs) 3 December 2006.

Different Versions?

I've read several different versions of the book; most of the differences are in The Sword in the Stone: in some copies, the ants, the geese, Madame Mim, Galapas, or Robin Wood are paraphrased or left out entirely. Is there a reason for this? Razor Rozar7 (talk) 21:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ant and geese episodes were written for another book, THE BOOK OF MERLYN. When the publishers turned it down, White transferred the episodes to later versions of SWORD IN THE STONE, which had already been published without them. Likewise, THE QUEEN OF AIR AND DARKNESS started out as a longer book called THE WITCH IN THE WOOD (which may have included the Robin Wood episdoe; I haven't read it). Basically the epic was sort of a work-in-progress. CharlesTheBold (talk) 23:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archimedes

On the archimedes disambiguation page, it says that Merlin's owl is named Archimedes here. And in the disney movie of Sword in the Stone, he also has a talking own named Archimedes. I just think that's interesting because Richard Harris, in his role as Arthur in the musical Camelot, says "We have an owl here that talks, called Archimedes". Is this Archimedes a part from the original myth, or was he invented here and they copied it? --Mithcoriel 15:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're still waiting for someone to tell you, both the musical and the Disney movie are adapted from this book (which you'd have learned if you'd read the articles on them). Archimedes is not part of the original myth, he's a creation of T.H. White. Themill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.120.38 (talk) 23:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plagarism

I'd like to point out that the contents of the section entitled "The Work as a Political Commentary" is a direct rip-off from the sparknotes webpage for the novel (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/futureking/). Perhaps they ripped out their analysis from Wikipedia, but in either case someone is plagiarizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.139.95 (talk • contribs)

I can't find anything that looks like an exact quote—yet; I'm still working on it. It can stay for now. —Scouter Sig 15:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blind Guardian

Since "the once and future king" is also a quote from the well-known tomb, isn't it more likely that Blind Guardian's song references the tomb, not the book? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.176.105.39 (talk)

XKCD

Hi, I saw this webcomic [1] and added the link in the trivia section. But I don't think I phrased the sentence properly. Anyone else wan't to give it a shot? --ISeeDeadPixels 14:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parody

The Once and Future King is not a parody of the Arthurian tales. While, yes, the fist section, The Sword in the Stone is quite humorous, the rest of the book becomes increasingly serious and dark. 71.175.23.190 and I have now traded reverts and I want to ensure that an angry edit war does not take place. Am I right in my reading of the book? —Scouter Sig 14:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, parody in the first book only, but satire throughout. --Quiddity 16:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is serious in text does not mean that it is not a parody; it is based off of an already existing text, and satirizes humanity. -71.175.23.190 07:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Satire is employed, but it's definitely not a parody. A parody is "a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule." White's work is far too broad to call it a parody of Malory's, and only parts of it are intended for comic effect. Plus, it draws from a much wider range of sources than just Malory. It's White's reworking of an entire body of legend. Themill

XMen reference: "When will they learn how to fly"?

In the writer's DVD commentary on X Men 2, one of the writers states that Magneto's comment "When will they learn how to fly?", is a reference to the fans complaining that the X Men did not fly in the first X Men movie (as they are apt to do in the comics).

So, the statement that it is a reference to an event in "Once and Future King" is not correct.

141.117.1.164 16:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in the Viral Marketing for Days of Future Past ==

I'm not a wikipedia editor, so I don't know how to edit the article properly and make it look pretty, but an additional X-Men reference can be found in the viral marketing for Days of Future Past. At http://www.thebentbullet.com/#!/full-article , The Once and Future King is referenced as one of the few fiction books kept in Magneto's cell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.79.0.254 (talk) 16:10, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the "darkening"

"However, the tale gradually becomes darker until Ill-Made Knight loses much of the original humor and The Candle in the Wind is mirthless"

This sentence makes it sound as if this is a failing on White's part. Actually he was simply choosing the proper mood for each tale. "Sword in the Stone" can be funny because it is about childhood fantasies. "Candle in the Wind" is unfunny because it has a tragic theme, the downfall of a noble dream of a perfect society.

We find the same progression from humor into darkness in the Hobbit/Lord of the Rings, and in the contrast between Rowling's light "Philosopher Stone" vs the heavy "Deathly Hallows". CharlesTheBold (talk) 04:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-ideal Use of Underscoring?

In the "Use or application of Political Ideals" section:

Underscoring the story of Arthur's life, from his youth and education to the end of his reign, is a well thought out commentary on how mankind should govern itself, written in the context of the Second World War. :

"Underscoring" is the wrong word, here; it simply means "to underline," or in a less literal sense, to emphasize. The sense the writer is looking for is "underlying" or "running through." rowley (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the lion king?

wasn't that the title of an instrumental orchestra song in the lion king? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.201.169 (talk) 03:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Grail

In the book what does it say the holy grail is and what powers it has??????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.75.218.251 (talk) 20:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are no exlicit statements in the book regarding the nature of the Grail. If you're actually interested in the Grail rather than statements in the book, here's a reasonable starting point: ^[1]. Mstemper (talk) 21:06, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in Babylon 5 Episode, 'A Late Delivery From Avalon'

Season 3 Babylon 5 Episode [Late delivery from Avalon'], revolves around a man appearing on the Station claiming to be King Arthur. At the end of the episode a British character Marcus states "They say Merlin aged backwards, so he knew the future because he could remember it. Maybe he formed the Round Table by remembering us, now." (I'm typing that from memory so I paraphrase slightly). Since as far as I know there is no reference to Merlin knowing the future by aging backwards before T.H.White this can only be a reference to the Once and Future King, not to Arthurian mythology in general.

What do people think? 46.14.20.89 (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other references

'the book is a metaphor for Magneto' - not clear to me (haven't seen the film, though). Can anyone clarify? Notreallydavid (talk) 15:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:The Once and Future King/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Fairly full article that warrant more attention, in its field worthy of a High importance rating

Last edited at 11:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 08:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

"Arthur actually lived some time around the 6th century"

This implies that Arthur was a real person, which is heavily disputed by historians. Instead it should read something like "The original tales put Arthur in some time around the 6th century" 184.57.117.130 (talk) 13:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Once and Future King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:18, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate reference?

In "Film, television and theatrical adaptations > Other references > Television" section, there's a bullet point about House Of Cards quoting from the musical Camelot and/or it's movie adaptation. Isn't such a reference out of place here? It would fit much better on the musical or film's pages. Without a quotation, we can't even be sure if the lines are originally from White's work or not. Norrey Headfoot (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

King Arthur - Britain's Greatest King - Will Return

I added this to the opening... The Once and Future King is first a phrase originating c.1485 that refers to Britain's greatest king - Arthur - and how he will return<ref]https://study.com/academy/answer/what-does-the-once-and-future-king-mean.html </ref]. 2601:582:C480:BCD0:30A2:2C19:9C75:9632 (talk) 11:59, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^ http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06719a.htm

[1] ttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06719a.htm

[1]