Sites of Arthur

296 Pages·2013·10.49 MB·English

Sites of Arthur: Mythic quests for cultural identity and
value
Benjamin Earl
Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies
Cardiff University
March 2007
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
UMI Number: U584114
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI U584114
Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Declaration
This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not
concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree.
This thesis is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
of PhD.
This thesis is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where
otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit
references. A 39-page bibliography is attached.
I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and
for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside
organisations.
Signed (candidate)
Date ..
For William Edmund Richardson and Thomas Charles Earl.
“Marvellous! ”
Acknowledgements
The approach of Phil Mogg, lead vocalist for UFO, had always appealed to me. As the
guitarist Michael Schenker spent time self-indulgently writing to celestial spirits and
saviours, Mogg would simply say:
‘Thanks.’
Acknowledgements: Part II
As I thought about it however, I realised I might have to be a little self-indulgent
myself. Not being the best at expressing myself face-to-face, there are a number of
people who deserve me putting on record an expression of debt and gratitude. So,
accept this page as the words of someone who just needs to say ‘Thanks.’
Matt Hills has been a formidable supervisor. The number of books he’s read can only
be matched by the number of books he threatens to write in a year. However, the
effort of trying to hang on to his coat tails has stopped this thesis being quite as slap­
dash as it could have been. I’d also like to thank James Thomas for his constructive
criticism, and helpful comments as it neared completion. Thanks also go to Sara
Gwenllian Jones for looking through the work at the end.
So on to those without whom I wouldn’t have got where I am today (to paraphrase CJ
from Reginald Perrin!). To my parents I owe my existence... along with a huge wad
of cash and the sanity that comes from not being forced to be an Accountant.
Friends are hard to find, still harder to keep, so the following deserve a mention for
going beyond the call of duty. Steven Rowe’s still about, even though we’re getting
ever older 20 years later! Does anyone deserve to suffer me for quite so long?!? There
was a former life, when I was the kind of student who exasperates me now. For those
who shared that time, it’s worth recalling the nights me, John Gilheaney, and Matthew
Pearce spent drinking and philosophising about nothing. By the way Matt, why are
you having to gazump me by doing yet another degree? Ruslan Ekkel remembers
those times as well, hopefully he’ll remember me in the future when his movie earns
him fame and notoriety.
Richard Coad deserves a mention for loyalty, goodwill, and turning up in the middle
of the night thoroughly unexpectedly when needed, while Kurt Hitchen keeps the
Nitelight Burning! Stephen Henning put up with living with me for a couple of years,
and (barely) complained. Maybe, one day, a couple of his truly fantastic TV proposals
might see the light of day. Rebecca Hancock has had the grace to visit and distract
whilst, occasionally, getting emails about boring academic things while my
supervisor’s got emails about me stuffing cheeseburgers down my throat by mistake.
All in the best possible taste! Without Abigail Grater’s confidence in my ability, this
wouldn’t even have reached so far as a proposal. Now it’s finished, it’s worth saying a
big ‘Thanks’ (or a big ‘Grrrrrr!’ maybe?) for helping to start the whole thing off.
Meanwhile there are also those who, without their help, this thesis quite literally
wouldn’t have been possible. Step forward Bobby Jack and Layla Paggetti.
Talking of Nitelights, Yan Wu has allowed me to see the light can bum just when you
think it’s all gone dark. Choon Key Chekar has kept me afloat, when I threatened to
be holed below the water-line, Rakesh Kaushal has suffered the fate of watching
Coventry in Wales, and shown the value of perseverance. Rebecca Farley meanwhile,
has reminded me that culture is just as ‘important’ as media, journalism or politics.
I’m sure I’ve missed some people out, but you’ll just have to believe me when I say
‘Thanks’.
iv
Abstract
From the Gododdin to Gary Hughes, from Sir Thomas Malory to Bernard Cornwell,
from Tintagel Castle to the Camelot Theme Park, the Arthurian myth has continued to
exert a fascination and pull over the centuries. Different interpretations are
appropriated by different cultures, subcultures and individuals as a marker of
distinction, yet they find themselves tied to the dominant chivalric myth even when
positioning themselves against this form of Arthur.
This thesis looks at the cultural-historical conditions that result in certain Arthurian
texts being valued more highly than others, and argues that contrary to Barthes’s
assertion of ‘The Death of the Author’, Foucault’s author function allows for an
understanding as to why the Romance chivalric version of the myth as exemplified by
Malory has come to be dominant.
By showing how Arthurian signifiers are ‘floating signifiers’ that allow meanings to
be contested at any one time according to the taste-cultures concerned, this thesis
looks at how the Arthurian myth is appropriated as a means of distinction for cultures,
subcultures, and individuals. This contest over meanings sees different sections of
society attempting to naturalise and value certain interpretations of the Arthurian myth
as ‘authentic’ in order to legitimate their own taste-culture.
Drawing on Bourdieu’s notions of Cultural and Symbolic Capital, and Fields of
Production, it is possible to look at how the Arthurian myth is used to naturalise the
position-taking strategies of both producers and consumers. Analysis consists not only
of certain representative ‘Sites of Arthur’, but also of inter-texts surrounding these
works, and audience research in relation to specific case studies. The thesis focuses
not only on the response within the cultural fields themselves, but also at how Arthur
is appropriated by those outside of the respective fields, and looks at the cultural
contexts in which Arthur is sited.
Contents
Declaration.........................................................................................................................i
Dedication..........................................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................iii
Abstract..............................................................................................................................v
Contents............................................................................................................................vi
List of Figures and Tables...........................................................................................viii
Introduction: Siting Arthur............................................................................................1
Siting This Thesis.........................................................................................................2
SECTION I- THEORY..................................................................................................11
Chapter 1: Authorial Sites of Arthur: Questing for authorial
value...................................................................................................................................12
1.1 The Once and Future Author: Roland Barthes and authorship..........................13
1.2 Sir Thomas Malory and Authorial Cultural Construction.................................16
1.3 The Editorial Role of Caxton in Malory’s Cultural Construction....................20
1.4 Cornwell’s Intertextual Positioning....................................................................30
Chapter 2: Mythical Sites of Arthur: Questing for subcultural mythical
value..................................................................................................................................37
2.1 The Once and Future Myth: Roland Barthes and the uber-myth.....................40
2.2 Sir Thomas Malory and Mythical Cultural Construction..................................50
SECTION II- FILM.......................................................................................................64
Chapter 3: Online and Filmic Sites of Arthur: Caught in the (Arthur)net..........65
3.1 Academic Language As a Barrier To Entry........................................................69
3.2 Just Another Blockbuster? Revaluing the Myth of History in King Arthur’s
Inter-Textual Positioning...........................................................................................75
3.3 Where’s the Romance Gone From Our Lives? An Arthumet Uber-Mythic
Reading of King Arthur.............................................................................................80
3.4 Focussing In On the Subject: Counter-mythic readings of King Arthur..........87
SECTION III- PLACE................................................................................................108
Chapter 4: Heritage Sites of Arthur: “It’s English Heritage isn’t it!”................109
4.1 An ‘Authentic’Ancientness: Tintagel and the construction of authenticity...! 16
vi
4.2 The Arthur Function: Alternative appropriations of value..............................125
4.3 The Continuing Presence of the Author Function...........................................130
4.4 Othering and Negative Tastes: Constructing identity in opposition...............140
Chapter 5: Themed Sites of Arthur or On Either Side the River Lie\ From high
culture to the everyday.................................................................................................147
5.1 Presentation of the Site......................................................................................148
5.2 Inauthenticity and Cultural Capital..................................................................160
5.3 An Arthurian Building Site: Cultural value and everyday life.......................166
SECTION IV- MUSIC.................................................................................................177
Chapter 6: Excessive Sites of Arthur? Progressive Rock Formations.................178
6.1 Heart of the Sunrise: The field of progressive rock........................................179
6.2 The Solid Time of Change: Wakeman’s shift towards the commercial
field............................................................................................................................189
6.3 Sound Chaser: The Arthurian myth and taste-formers’ battle for authenticity in
rock............................................................................................................................196
Chapter 7: Commercial Sites of Arthur? Middlebrow Anxiety and the Melodic
Rock Aesthetic..............................................................................................................203
7.1 Vicious Companions: The struggle for status in the melodic rock
field............................................................................................................................203
7.2 Bom To Be King? Gary Hughes’s Arthurian Interpretation...........................208
7.3 Before First Light: The inter-textual shaping of OAFK..................................214
7.4 Can I Hear the Crowd Applauding? The Melodic Rock Audience’s Reception
of OAFK...................................................................................................................220
Conclusion: The Once and Future Thesis................................................................229
Where To the Future?..............................................................................................232
Endnotes........................................................................................................................237
Bibliography..................................................................................................................245
Appendix: Focus group demographics for the film King Arthur.........................285
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 3.1: Publicity poster for King Arthur..................................................................78
Figure 4.1: Postcard purchased from Tintagel Village on visit..................................115
Figure 4.2: Postcard purchased from Tintagel Village on visit..................................115
Figure 5.1: A seemingly weak Arthur function at the park........................................153
Figure 5.2: Queue jumping defined precisely by the park.........................................158
Figure 5.3: ‘Spectacular’ houses..................................................................................171
Figure 6.1: The centre of Wakeman’s gatefold sleave................................................184
Figure 6.2: David Measham conducting the number 92 bus.......................................193
Table 7.1: Comparison between Bernard Cornwell’s Warlord Chronicles and Gary
Hughes’s Once and Future King...................................................................................210