"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
> Tim Bruening wrote:
> >
> > PAUL GADZIKOWSKI wrote:
> >
> >> In alt.legend.king-arthur Tim Bruening <tsbrueni@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> >> : I still suggest that Arthur could have stalled for time by asking
why
> >> : Guenevere has been convicted of treason and by demanding to review
the
> >> : evidence.
> >>
> >> To what end? Really, how would it have served the story? There would
have
> >> been a long scene consisting of talking heads as each knight who'd
been on
> >> the scene when Lancelot was discovered repeated exactly the same
story to
> >> Arthur as ewvery other, right at the climax of the play when tension
needs
> >> to be building up toward the final catharsis with Tom on the
battlefield.
> >> Way to destroy the mood.
> >
> > My suggestion is for Arthur in the Arthurverse, not for the writers of
the play.
>
> "Arthurverse" is a bit vague -- there are hundreds, perhaps thousands,
> of 'em. But if you mean the specific Arthurverse of "Camelot", then, as
> we've remarked, Arthur /already knows/ the horrible truth, and knows
> that Mordred, Agravain, and the rest are eyewitnesses. If he tries to
> deny it, then all that he has done in his reign is exposed as hypocrisy.
In the version I saw, Mordred et al did not actually SEE Lancelot and
Guenevere in bed
together. I would suggest that Arthur ask the eye witnesses if they
actually saw the
two of them making love! If not, perhaps Arthur could sentence the two to
probation,
and send Lancelot far, far away.
BTW, why didn't Arthur arrance to send Lancelot out of Camelot when he
realized that
Lancelot was after Guenevere?
|
