Le Morte D'Arthur

De: Sir Thomas Malory

Narrado por: Frederick Davidson

This monumental work made the Arthurian cycle available for the first time in English. Malory took a body of legends from Celtic folklore that had been adapted into French literature, gave them an English perspective, and produced a work that ever since has had tremendous influence upon literature.

The story begins with King Uther Pendragon's use of enchantment to lay with Igraine, Duchess of Cornwall. Arthur is conceived and taken away in secret, returning as a young man to claim the throne by pulling the sword Excalibur from the stone. In retelling the story of Arthur's rule of Britain, Malory intertwines the romances of Guinevere and Launcelot, Tristram and Isolde, and Launcelot and Elaine. Sir Galahad's appearance at Camelot begins the quest for the Holy Grail. Finally, Camelot is brought down by the conflict between King Arthur and his natural son, Mordred.

(P)1997 Blackstone Audio Inc.

Reseñas de la Crítica

"The most authoritative version of the legend in the English tradition." (The Concise Oxford Companion to English Literature)
"Le Morte d'Arthur remains an enchanted sea for the reader to swim about in, delighting at the random beauties of 15th-century prose." (Robert Graves)

Wonderful story and reading.

Would you listen to Le Morte D'Arthur again? Why?

Le Morte D'Arthur is an easy listen and I would listen to it again because these timeless tales are always entertaining.

Have you listened to any of Frederick Davidson’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

This book is just as great as other Frederick Davidson's readings. I don't know why some people do not like his voice, I find it great. Have you ever heard him read Les Miserabes by Victor Hugo...FANTASTIC!

Good Performance Boring Book

I enjoy classical literature, The Iliad, Aeneid, De Troyes Poems, and others, but Malory was a struggle. i started reading this over a year ago and was only.able to finish by switching.to an audiobook. Le Morte de Arthur is an impressive piece of scholarship and required reading for those interested in the Arthurian Mythos, but not well-written or engaging. Still, there's a captivating trait of the core of the legend that engages the imagination. To that, I can't say I enjoyed it, but I cannot say,I wouldn't recommend reading it.

Before weekly TV, radio & comics there was Arthur

What did you love best about Le Morte D'Arthur?

Le Morte is not just one story but many, not the first but one of the best compendiums of King Arthur's knights. The Roundtable was host to diverse knights with substantially varied personalities and types of adventures. A Sir Tristan tale and a Sir Gawain tale represent different mini-genres within chivalric romance.

What other book might you compare Le Morte D'Arthur to and why?

Le Morte is most like a collection of super-hero stories like the Avengers and the Justice League, representing the work of many different authors, versions of the characters, and evolving narratives.

Which scene was your favorite?

The Book of Sir Tristan is a personal favorite for its examination of uncertain truth, depressive madness, and broken love.

Frederick Davidson does a great job with a true cl

Any additional comments?

I really wrote this review because I was was nearly put off buying this audiobook because of the negative reviews of Frederick Davidson's narration. I'm glad I took the plunge. Davidson does an absolutely fabulous job with what is, after all, some challenging material. He makes it fresh and personal while preserving the formality of this old text. A triumph of literature (obviously) and of narration (contrary to the opinions of some other reviewers)!

Once a knight, always a knight...

Twice a night, and you're doing all right (so saith the Goodies). To deal with the narrator first, clearly he divides opinion, but I am a big fan of Mr Davidson. He was the reason I took this book on and he did not disappoint - his carried me through endless lists of jousting scores and left me always wanting more. To me he represents the best of England - deeply erudite, yet wearing his learning lightly, with diction that could cut diamond. To render Malory's early modern English in a way that is faithful to the text yet flows naturally for the modern listener is a formidable intellectual exercise as much as a dramatic performance - as a simple example, his reading of the common but tricky sentence "I will well" is a minor masterpiece in prosody and emphasis. To hear him dwell on the phrase "He knew her, fleshly" is to hear all the vice of Sodom and Gomorrah packed into four words. I also love his characterisation - young voices, old voices, Welsh, Scots, Irish, male, female, knight, priest, "damosel", and peasant, are all vividly and effortlessly differentiated. His crowning achievement (sorry) is the way Arthur evolves through the book from the likely lad to dying saint, while always recognisable as the greatest among Christian men.

As for the text, in addition to being the first prose masterpiece in the language, it offers so many golden nuggets of expression - including the word "bigly", which so many attribute to the current US President. On the downside, Malory, and his editor Caxton, are careless of the modern conventions of fiction - they throw spoilers in as a matter of course, and frequently "bury the lead". Also I'll admit I skipped a large part of the tale of Sir Tristram. However at times it reaches lofty heights of drama and pathos - the speeches of Sir Lancelot near the end ring with passionate resignation. On an scholarly note, it is also fascinating to hear how the pagan coexists with the Christian, and magic with divine grace.

One warning... as often happens during my listening, I found theme music constantly running through my head - in this case it was "Knights of the Round Table" from the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail in alternation with "Camelot" from the musical of that name, so beware of that.

Not Quite as I Remembered

Like so many, I grew up reading the tales of Arthur, and though it's been years since I've read this particular version of it, it's always stood out to me as one of the best versions. Let it be said that it's still a fantastic version, but it's nowhere near as straightforward as I remember it.

The knights and their lineages are given rapidly (it's good to have Wiki or some other resource with you), and many of the story points are told out of order or given through prophecy. I realize that spoilers are a bit of a non-issue for a story like this, but for a first-timer, it's not the most friendly version. Then again, they do kind of give you all the spoilers in the book's description, don't they? Even so, it doesn't detract from the magic of the tales.

This particular reading... skip it. Unless you're already predisposed as liking Frederick Davidson's narrating style, let this be a warning. Like so many other reviewers, I find his voice to be ok, but his tone and presentation make him come across like a British Tommy Lee Jones: bored, annoyed, and otherwise disgusted with the material. I have an abridged version on cassette narrated by Derek Jacobi that I bought some 20+ years ago, and it's a far, far superior reading. I'd love to find an unabridged version by him or someone with equal enthusiasm for the material.

Superheroes of Ancient England Assemble!

What did you love best about Le Morte D'Arthur?

It is difficult to pick only one thing and so I feel the best part of this book is the fact that you may see the root from which so many other hero stories draw their inspiration.

Have you listened to any of Frederick Davidson’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

I have heard a number of Mr Davidson's performances and I feel that this one maintains the high standards that he has set before.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

This is not a book for a single sitting. Putting it simply, there are just too many stories, characters and events for a single sitting (I had to break it up with something more modern; Hamlet). This is not truly flowing story because you are introduced to a astounding number of characters and the heroic events of their lives, which, putting it directly, makes this book better to be taken in sections in order to digest the events just listened to.

Any additional comments?

I was initially nervous about purchasing this book due the number of complaints about Mr Davidson's reading of it, but I can honestly say that his reading was excellent and that I have no idea why there are the complaints that there are or what provoked them. The reading was done by an Englishman about Englishmen and his variation of accent and attitude were excellent. The only complaint that I have ever had with Mr Davidson's characterizations were in the way he reads American accents, but as there are no Americans in this book I have no complaints about his performance.

Chapter Marking are Helpful

The chapter markers are completely meaningless for chapters in the work. Really disappointed in that. The reading is good but you really have to pay attention as it is read really quickly without a lot of breaks between sections of the stories.

Lifeless narration

I was excited to hear the Arthur story, but after only a couple chapters I had to stop listening. The narrator is emotionless and lifeless. He sounds so bored and is reading in such a monotone voice he seems to be racing to get to the end so he can go home.

I will be listening to the story, just with a different narrator.

This reader is not for me.

Would you recommend this book to a friend? Why or why not?

I'd certainly recommend the book to a friend, but definitely not this specific recording.

What did you like best about this story?

Well, obviously the stories (which I heard bits and pieces of since childhood).

How could the performance have been better?

Honestly, it would be better if it used another reader. I read the other reviews complaining about this reader, but thought that maybe it was just the accent. I grew up in England, so I figured it wouldn't bother me. What I found is that it isn't the accent so much as the reader's style of reading. As someone else wrote, he really does read the story like there is something very foul and distasteful right under his nose. Somehow there also seems to be a constant note of condescension in his voice, like he's reading the story to what he thinks are group of not-too-bright school boys.It's very distracting.

Was Le Morte D'Arthur worth the listening time?

Since I ended up listening to it all over again with a different group of readers, no. Now the actual story (or really set of stories) is definitely worth the time -- it brings together some of the fundamental myths of western culture.

Any additional comments?

I have listened to hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of recorded books. Readers have their pluses and minus, but this one, with this book, is awful. I struggled through the first two books (about 10 hours) before I gave up and got the LibriVox version -- the amateur readers there do a much better job (and some can even pronounce the French correctly) :)