Launcelot's 'Purity'
In the context of this film, is this just a euphemism for virginity? Or does it mean pure "in heart" (like without malice).
http://saucybetty.blogspot.com
In the context of this film, is this just a euphemism for virginity? Or does it mean pure "in heart" (like without malice).
http://saucybetty.blogspot.com
Both, he was a virgin as well as pure of heart
Perfection in darkness
But in that case he was mistaken: I believe he says his strength derives from his purity, yet he does not cease to be the best knight once he starts sleeping with Guinevere. He still defeats any knight who claims the queen and Lance are lovers (how handy to be the strongest...). it's not like he's some sort of Sansum who loses his strength once his hair is cut.
I'm a Sidekick and proud of it.
in the story it does though, he is defeated by his son and fails any chance of seeing the holy grail himself
Perfection in darkness
Actully in the books he is not pure. He is already married, and galahad is already born. When merlin tells arthur of the chosen one he is refering to the son not the father. Then when arthur meets them he gets it wrong and Knights the father instead of the son.
shareIn what books? Are you talking of The Once and Future King? Because in the medieval texts (Malory and the French Vulgate), Lancelot never marries Elaine, he conceives Galahad under the influence of an enchantment that makes him believe that she is Guinevere.
I'm a Sidekick and proud of it.
As far as I know in the books by "White". Plus the film "excalibur", and, The mini series "merlin". Launcelot is married with the baby before he meets arthur.
shareOK, thanks for the precision. Of course, modern writers can do whatever they like with the legend. They can have Merlin father Mordred or Guinevere sleep with every knight in Arthur's kingdom when they wish. It's one of the fun things in Arthurian fiction, you read and see so many new takes on the traditional legend, some you like, some you detest, some that become the new rule in the eyes of the public (like Morgan as Mordred's mother, a rather recent addition to the myth, but one that has become the norm for many people).
I'm a Sidekick and proud of it.
Nope, In the one and future king and le morte darthur he never marries elaine, and doesnt meet her either until guinever first shuns him
Perfection in darkness
In this version I'm pretty sure Lancelot's a virgin. The lyrics to "C'est Moi" at least point in that direction. He says "his heart and his mind as pure as morning dew", dew signifying virginity in Medieval literature (I know this from randomly reading a book of Medieval English verse ). Actually that whole second verse of "C'est Moi" pretty much supports the whole virginity thing:
"The soul of a knight should be a thing remarkable,
His heart and his mind as pure as morning dew.
With a will and a self-restraint
That's the envy of ev'ry saint
He could easily work a miracle or two.
To love and desire he ought to be unsparkable,
The ways of the flesh should offer no allure.
But where in the world
Is there in the world
A man so untouched and pure?"
And then the last line is:
"And here I stand, as pure as a pray'r,
Incredibly clean, with virtue to spare,
The godliest man I know!"
So yeah, in terms of this interpretation (both the film and musical), it's pretty clear to interpret Lancelot's purity as being virginity.
However, in terms of the other contemporary interpretations of Lancelot, even if he was married, he would still be "pure" in that he wasn't sleeping around with random people out of wedlock. But either way, whichever interpretation there is, he'd loose his "purity" as soon as he had it off with Guenever because *that* would be adultery LOL. It's funny how quickly all his morals disappear as soon as he meets a woman, Guenever presumably being one of the only women he's ever met .
"Keeps Troy together, not apart
Nor lets one tower fall down ..."
- T.H. White
His purity is really his downfall. A little experience with love would have made him more able to cope with the overwhelming feelings he had about a married woman.
It was his over the top intensity that also attracted geunevere so much.
If he had been a little less pure more good would have been done.
And pure is really an invention anyway. Being with the opposite sex doesn't make you impure, it makes you experienced in the ways of lust and love. More able to understand what is chemical and what is emotional.
Chastity is a perversion and it has nasty side effects.
Look at at the "pure" catholic priests who like to wank on young boys.
Do you think if they were allowed to be married as they should be in a real christian church that they would have had thier minds pushed to such extreems to satisfy thier lust?
The body does not stop trying nor does the chemical mind just because you have found "god".
Better to find God and mix this wisdom with some common sense, and find a girl to make some music with. One that is availabe and not married to the King is best.
The most simple explanation is usually the correct one - Databyter
Your comments are extremely offensive. I was OK with your post up until you reached the part about "chastity being a perversion" and it was downhill from their. This may come as a surprise, but there is still such a thing as sexual purity in this world. As for comments about catholic priests - celibacy does not lead healthy people to start messing around with young children. These people unfortunately had deep seated problems to begin with. Why not look at the enormous good that has been done by the many fine priests in this world that *do not* have these problems?
shareIn response to the previous offended person:
In my previous post I use the word perversion with it's original definition before it became only a bad word to most. A synonym of perversion is unnaturalness, or abberant behavior.
I wouldn't dispute that a man who is chaste can find some peace and focus, But it is an unnatural state for a human being. It is best left for those wise old souls who have experienced life before becoming chaste.
As far as "those people" having deep seated problems to begin with I disagree.
A natural man raised in a natural state would have much less of a chance to commit harmful acts against children than those in the overcrowded stressfull world we live in.
A man deprived of sexual satisfaction will fantasize, and get aroused. The fantasies may become more and more "perverse" as the old fantasies become insufficient to fill the artificial void caused by the depravation of natural response. For some it becomes an addictive obsession. Its pretty basic psychology.
The most simple explanation is usually the correct one - Databyter
Hi - I thank you that your reply was polite and not nasty!
I understand some of the points that you make. I think my biggest issue was the comment about the priests. I know many hardworking, loving priests and there has been (as you know) a lot of criticism about priests because of those involved in scandals, which has reflected unfairly on all the others. Of course, I do realize you were not talking about all priests / religious.
I do know a lot of folks that are as of yet unmarried and live chastely (mostly due to religious beliefs) and do seem to be at peace. Of course , the sex drive being what it is, we all struggle-married or single-to some degree or another.
Again, thanks for your courteous response to my posting.
Mike
I want to register my feelings on this matter as well, in a very general way, and not simply as a criticism of an individual poster.
The matter of priests molesting children has been given a huge amount of publicity. Of course it is much more sensational to write an article about a priest molesting an altar boy than to write about a salesman molesting his daughter, an accountant molesting his step-son, a motor mechanic molesting his niece or a schoolboy molesting his younger brother. In fact, the charging of the priest will almost certainly make headline news, while the others might rate four lines in the local paper. This gives a completely false picture to the insidious nature of the sexual abuse of children. It makes it appear as if celibacy and child abuse are closely linked. In fact, children are more frequently related to the people who abuse them. Those people are often married and many are in apparently healthy sexual relationships with their partners.
Moreover, of those priests who commit crimes of a sexual nature, or who commit an offense which brings the ire of the church upon them, many of them are not celibate. Married Anglican and other Protestant clergy have also been charged with pedophile crimes, just like all the other married people who have been charged. All this means that many of the church bodies have held investigations, have taken a serious look at the pattern of clergy/church worker relationships with children/teenagers and have put in place training schemes, counselling schemes and checks. In many churches, for example, a lone adult is not permitted to drive home a number of children (after church fellowship, for example), if it means that at the end of the run, one child will be alone with the adult. This does not mean that the Christian adult is more likely to be an offender- it means that the church has looked at ways of preventing incidents of harm.
Another comment that I would like to make here is that among non-ordained people within the church (any church) there are often a fairly high percentage of people who suffer mental illness or a personality disorder. This is because the church provides an accepting place for troubled people of all sorts. This is the nature of Christianity.
Secondly, it is the nature of pedophiles (those who don't have an available related child to prey on) to place themselves where they have access to other people's children. Paid or volunteer work in church youth groups, the scouting organisation, games and video shops, as sporting coaches and music teachers all suit predatory people. Teaching is an ideal job for a pedophile, and many pedophiles are teachers. But all of us who have passed through formal education and therefore know a large number of teachers, will , I am sure, agree to this- while many pedophiles become teachers, in the larger scheme of things, not very many of the teachers we know are pedophiles.
I hope that this provides a better balance to the popular misconception that many Catholic priests are pedophiles.
"great minds think differently"