What do you think?
Rate this book
Arthur Rex: A Legendary Novel
The Arthurian legend as it has never been told before . . .
The myth of King Arthur has been told countless ways since the sixth century, always combining action, adventure, romance, and tragedy. In Arthur Rex, Thomas Berger updates the legend in irreverent fashion, forever changing King Arthur and his Round Table. In Berger’s medieval England, the damsel in distress is never what she appears to be. Merlin is a wizard of a completely different stripe. Classic heroes and villains are vividly reimagined, breathing fresh life into a familiar story. Powerful, emotional, and at times laugh-out-loud funny, Arthur Rex is an unforgettable tribute to one of the most celebrated tales of all time. This ebook features an all-new introduction by Thomas Berger, as well as an illustrated biography of the author including rare images and never-before-seen documents from his personal collection.
The myth of King Arthur has been told countless ways since the sixth century, always combining action, adventure, romance, and tragedy. In Arthur Rex, Thomas Berger updates the legend in irreverent fashion, forever changing King Arthur and his Round Table. In Berger’s medieval England, the damsel in distress is never what she appears to be. Merlin is a wizard of a completely different stripe. Classic heroes and villains are vividly reimagined, breathing fresh life into a familiar story. Powerful, emotional, and at times laugh-out-loud funny, Arthur Rex is an unforgettable tribute to one of the most celebrated tales of all time. This ebook features an all-new introduction by Thomas Berger, as well as an illustrated biography of the author including rare images and never-before-seen documents from his personal collection.
584 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1978
133 people are currently reading
1163 people want to read
About the author
Thomas Berger
231 books139 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.
Thomas Louis Berger was an American novelist, probably best known for his picaresque novel Little Big Man, which was adapted into a film by Arthur Penn. Berger explored and manipulated many genres of fiction throughout his career, including the crime novel, the hard-boiled detective story, science fiction, the utopian novel, plus re-workings of classical mythology, Arthurian legend, and the survival adventure.
Berger's use of humor and his often biting wit led many reviewers to refer to him as a satirist or "comic" novelist, though he rejected that classification.
Thomas Louis Berger was an American novelist, probably best known for his picaresque novel Little Big Man, which was adapted into a film by Arthur Penn. Berger explored and manipulated many genres of fiction throughout his career, including the crime novel, the hard-boiled detective story, science fiction, the utopian novel, plus re-workings of classical mythology, Arthurian legend, and the survival adventure.
Berger's use of humor and his often biting wit led many reviewers to refer to him as a satirist or "comic" novelist, though he rejected that classification.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews
May 22, 2015
I came across Arthur Rex twenty seven years ago, in my high school library. That day I discovered two things: the joy of browsing stacks and finding random gems, and the joy of reading Thomas Berger.
Arthur Rex was like no other book I’d ever read, (nor was it like any other Berger wrote, I’d come to find). Seemingly gussied up with thees and thous, it was nevertheless easy to read. Such a matter-of-fact style. And that whole “show, don’t tell” rule? Annihilated.
Berger sticks to the Arthurian romance most of us already know, and gets us through the big stories: Arthur’s accidental fathering of Mordred, Tristram and Isolde, Guinivere and Lancelot, Gawaine and the Green Knight, to name a few. But in the finer details, Berger maintains a consistency that would be otherwise missing if this was just a gathering of the old stories. Gawaine, for example, when tested by temptation before he faces the Green Knight, speaks no ill of women (unlike the “Pearl Poet version) when he realizes the nature of the Green Knight's game. In this way, Berger takes the traditional definition of “romance” and updates it to mean what it meant all along: novel.
I decided to reread Arthur thanks to being able to get it “free” on my e-reader via Kindle Unlimited, and I found myself reading it on all of my devices that support the Kindle App. On my tablet before bed, on my PC at work, on my phone waiting in the doctor’s office. Berger’s prose style for Arthur Rex is that easy to fall into. It really does feel like you’re being told a story by your old grandpa. The Princess Bride treatment of The Round Table.
Lovers of the King Arthur stories should read this book, as it stands up against any other telling, including Mallory, White, and Pyle. Lovers of Thomas Berger should read this book, as it shows how his subtle hand can nevertheless create a deep and rich tapestry. Lovers of reading should read this book because it’s just fun to read.
Arthur Rex was like no other book I’d ever read, (nor was it like any other Berger wrote, I’d come to find). Seemingly gussied up with thees and thous, it was nevertheless easy to read. Such a matter-of-fact style. And that whole “show, don’t tell” rule? Annihilated.
Berger sticks to the Arthurian romance most of us already know, and gets us through the big stories: Arthur’s accidental fathering of Mordred, Tristram and Isolde, Guinivere and Lancelot, Gawaine and the Green Knight, to name a few. But in the finer details, Berger maintains a consistency that would be otherwise missing if this was just a gathering of the old stories. Gawaine, for example, when tested by temptation before he faces the Green Knight, speaks no ill of women (unlike the “Pearl Poet version) when he realizes the nature of the Green Knight's game. In this way, Berger takes the traditional definition of “romance” and updates it to mean what it meant all along: novel.
I decided to reread Arthur thanks to being able to get it “free” on my e-reader via Kindle Unlimited, and I found myself reading it on all of my devices that support the Kindle App. On my tablet before bed, on my PC at work, on my phone waiting in the doctor’s office. Berger’s prose style for Arthur Rex is that easy to fall into. It really does feel like you’re being told a story by your old grandpa. The Princess Bride treatment of The Round Table.
Lovers of the King Arthur stories should read this book, as it stands up against any other telling, including Mallory, White, and Pyle. Lovers of Thomas Berger should read this book, as it shows how his subtle hand can nevertheless create a deep and rich tapestry. Lovers of reading should read this book because it’s just fun to read.
February 10, 2012
A very pure (in my opinion) retelling of the King Arthur legend. Good for my addiction...
January 23, 2010
I wish I could rate Berger's novel more highly, but, ultimately this is about 2.5 stars for me. When it comes to irreverent and anachronistic takes on Malory's stories, The Once and Future King sets the standard, and Arthur Rex suffers by comparison.
I am most interested in Arthur, as opposed to all of the ancillary characters, so Arthuriana that focuses more on others, with Arthur as a symbol but not a realized human being, is not satisfying to me. This is why I love Stewart's Arthurian Cycle and White's book (because, even though there's a focus on other characters later in White, Arthur's character is well-established and his sensibility and the reader's appreciation for him is what makes the book so powerful). I have mixed feelings about Berger's Arthur--in some ways he's simplistically rendered and a non-entity, but there is power in that simplicity, particularly in the final chapters of the novel, as Arthur's dream begins to crash around him.
I'm still processing the depiction of Lancelot and Guinevere's relationship. I appreciate Berger's take on it as being more about power dynamics and desires to control or be controlled than about love, but those dynamics make it more difficult to be sympathetic to either character or the betrayal of their husband/best friend.
But I'm very glad that Berger gives Gawaine his due. Stewart's cycle focuses on the twisted aspects of the Orkney clan's dynamic, and Gawaine loses much of his charm. It's refreshing to read a portrayal as filled with affection and admiration for the character as Berger's. In the end, however, I think he paints himself into a corner. Gawaine's insistence on confronting Lancelot even as his character acknowledges that the battle will accomplish nothing but death for one of them is not consistent with the development of his character. I understand that Berger is satirizing the aspects of the legend that promote "honor" at the expense of all else, but, in light of Gawaine's character arc, the satire feels shoehorned in.
I first read this novel when I was in my early teens, and I'm glad that I re-read it now, a few decades later. I can't be as enthusiastic about it as other reviewers, but the book has some fine qualities.
I am most interested in Arthur, as opposed to all of the ancillary characters, so Arthuriana that focuses more on others, with Arthur as a symbol but not a realized human being, is not satisfying to me. This is why I love Stewart's Arthurian Cycle and White's book (because, even though there's a focus on other characters later in White, Arthur's character is well-established and his sensibility and the reader's appreciation for him is what makes the book so powerful). I have mixed feelings about Berger's Arthur--in some ways he's simplistically rendered and a non-entity, but there is power in that simplicity, particularly in the final chapters of the novel, as Arthur's dream begins to crash around him.
I'm still processing the depiction of Lancelot and Guinevere's relationship. I appreciate Berger's take on it as being more about power dynamics and desires to control or be controlled than about love, but those dynamics make it more difficult to be sympathetic to either character or the betrayal of their husband/best friend.
But I'm very glad that Berger gives Gawaine his due. Stewart's cycle focuses on the twisted aspects of the Orkney clan's dynamic, and Gawaine loses much of his charm. It's refreshing to read a portrayal as filled with affection and admiration for the character as Berger's. In the end, however, I think he paints himself into a corner. Gawaine's insistence on confronting Lancelot even as his character acknowledges that the battle will accomplish nothing but death for one of them is not consistent with the development of his character. I understand that Berger is satirizing the aspects of the legend that promote "honor" at the expense of all else, but, in light of Gawaine's character arc, the satire feels shoehorned in.
I first read this novel when I was in my early teens, and I'm glad that I re-read it now, a few decades later. I can't be as enthusiastic about it as other reviewers, but the book has some fine qualities.
September 2, 2014
I've started this book before, but only now have read it to the end. It gives in detail the story of King Arthur & the Knights of the Round Table, including the stories of Sir Launcelot & Queen Guinevere as well as of lesser known knights, such as Gawaine, Percival & Galahad; also the tragic love story of Tristram & Isold. There are good powers, Merlin & the Lady of the Lake, as well as villains, Morgan la Fey & Mordred, Arthur's bastard son; also there is Excaliber (the "sword in the stone") & the elusive Holy Grail. The novel is written in an archaic English style which once familiar becomes very readable.
The narrative reflects a legendary phase of early British culture, when men & women had distinctively prescribed roles: the men as warriors and protectors, the women as keepers of the household. The culture also had distinct social classes, with the king & knights preeminent and the lower classes of serfs far below. Also homosexuality & pederasty were characterized dismissively. This presumably reflects an early era & a primitive form of Christian thinking.
The story depicts Arthur as a king who brought order, civility and virtue to a savage and barbaric world. Of course, this achievement did not last and had its share of tragedy as well as glory. In my view, this is a classic novel well worth reading.
The narrative reflects a legendary phase of early British culture, when men & women had distinctively prescribed roles: the men as warriors and protectors, the women as keepers of the household. The culture also had distinct social classes, with the king & knights preeminent and the lower classes of serfs far below. Also homosexuality & pederasty were characterized dismissively. This presumably reflects an early era & a primitive form of Christian thinking.
The story depicts Arthur as a king who brought order, civility and virtue to a savage and barbaric world. Of course, this achievement did not last and had its share of tragedy as well as glory. In my view, this is a classic novel well worth reading.
September 28, 2014
DNF
A joke that stops being funny after a just a few paragraphs, Berger wrote a 500 page parody of the Malory-style Arthurian legend that annoys rather than amuses.
March 19, 2020
I just could not enjoy this book. I got quite far with it, but gave up and read something else instead. The jokes felt dated and the characters were uninteresting, particularly the women. This one was just not for me!
May 7, 2012
A quite enjoyable read. It must have been a daunting task for the author to maintain such a high and specific style of storytelling for this, a fairly huge book. While it is never so funny as in the first chapter, there is a sense of the wildly out of proportion and fantastical all through the tale. While it will surely grate on some readers, I found it to be a great stylistic exercise, if nothing else.
Also, being exposed to some of the archaic and bawdy terms of the story was a hoot. If you enjoy the old-fashioned tales, and high narrative style (omniscient POV, lots of telling, clearly biased narrator), you'll love it. Worth picking up, if only for the bravura hilarity of the first chapter.
Also, being exposed to some of the archaic and bawdy terms of the story was a hoot. If you enjoy the old-fashioned tales, and high narrative style (omniscient POV, lots of telling, clearly biased narrator), you'll love it. Worth picking up, if only for the bravura hilarity of the first chapter.
June 30, 2016
Hmm. I love Arthurian literature as a general rule, but I had mixed feelings about this one. Initially I had the impression that Arthur Rex was essentially trying to be The Once and Future King, but wasn't doing a very good job of it. Like White, Berger retells Mallory's Morte d'Arthur, making story and character changes of his own here and there. But Berger's retelling moved me far less, and seemed pointlessly sordid in chunks. Until the end, that is. I'm not sure if my change of heart was due as much to Berger's skill as it was to the inherent beauty and tragedy of his source material, but he did shape the ending well.
April 17, 2009
If you can take a joke, no several jokes, read this. It's a masterful retelling of the Arthur saga from a cynical humorist's point of view.
June 4, 2011
I can't help but compare this book to T.H. White's The Once and Future King, my absolute favorite Arthurian re-telling. Arthur Rex lacked much of its whimsy and all of its earnestness. Berger was too cynical, too tongue-in-cheek for my tastes.
The sin for which I cannot forgive Berger is his treatment of the Arthur/Guinevere/Lancelot triangle. Guinevere was made a bitch, Lancelot a whiner and Arthur a buffoon; in my opinion, a terrible handling of a beautiful and heartbreaking story of loyalty, love and fate.
The stories of the apocryphal knights like Percival and Gawaine are the best part of this book. Since they're not familiar territory, they come across as fun and interesting.
The sin for which I cannot forgive Berger is his treatment of the Arthur/Guinevere/Lancelot triangle. Guinevere was made a bitch, Lancelot a whiner and Arthur a buffoon; in my opinion, a terrible handling of a beautiful and heartbreaking story of loyalty, love and fate.
The stories of the apocryphal knights like Percival and Gawaine are the best part of this book. Since they're not familiar territory, they come across as fun and interesting.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 6, 2014
A re-telling of Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur by Thomas Berger, the author of "Little Big Man". The cannon and tales of King Arthur, Kay, Launcelot, Guinevere, The Lady of the Lake, Merlin, Tristam & Isolde, Morgan le Fey, Galahad,Percival, and other knights of Camelot are retold with all the xenophobic prejudice and admirable defense of sometimes silly principles at the heart of British culture. If you know the names but not the legend, Berger's retelling is an enjoyable way to learn.
August 29, 2014
I read Berger's Little Big Man in high school and I loved it--a great tale told well. This is the same in a completely different category--he uses the high language of an earlier period but throws in great humor, astute social & cultural observations, and enough touching moments to be sure the tears are never far away. HIGHLY recommended, but it isn't easy to find outside of a library. I read a recent piece in the New Yorker about Berger and his grasp of style, that's what inspired me to find this book (good thing I work in a library).
July 18, 2017
This is a wonderful retelling of the King Arthur stories/legends with much more humor than usual. It also touches on subjects not seen in most prior Arthur books, including disapproval of torture, questioning of the church and more while reemphasizing the concepts of chivalry, courtly love, loyalty, honor and more. The writing is somewhat heavy as it attempts to resemble old English but it is still worth reading. The Arthur stories are so complex with so many strong characterizations that this may not be the book to start with if you have never read an Arthur novel before.
February 25, 2023
This was so well-written, with a medieval style and great bawdy humor. It is the well-known tell of King Arthur and his knights of the round table, but with many added sexual adventures. Quite entertaining, if a bit long in the middle parts, where there is some repetition that draws the story out. 300 pages would have sufficed, rather than 540.
None of today’s politically correct sensibilities are paid heed to, so be forewarned.
I’d place it somewhere between the movies Excalibur and Monty Python’s Holy Grail.
Definitely worth a read!
None of today’s politically correct sensibilities are paid heed to, so be forewarned.
I’d place it somewhere between the movies Excalibur and Monty Python’s Holy Grail.
Definitely worth a read!
May 6, 2016
This is one of the few books that had me wishing I could get back some of the time I spent reading it. While the author stuck close to the Thomas Malory model of the Arthurian lore, and borrows from Chretian de Troyes and Wolfram Eschanbach... he detailed it with a lot of gross-out humour that turned me off (and turned my stomach). Definitely not for the truly mature-minded reader.
September 12, 2007
Part of my Arthurian legend phase...and probably the best and funniest book I read during that time. The jousting scene is THE BEST.
June 13, 2014
Berger's approach to the Arthurian legend successfully synthesizes the fatalistic fantasy of T.H. White with the gritty historicity of S.A. Laubenthal.
May 26, 2025
For some reason I've read a lot of King Arthur books in the last few years. This one did some things quite well - some other things not so good.
The good things:
1. Merlin was magical and started the whole shebang with a flash bang with the sword in the stone.
2. Morgan le Fay was mostly appropriately evil (yes, I've read and really liked The Mists of Avalon - but you can also have a standard issue evil witch just as you can have an evil Mordred.
3. Guinevere was not a saint, but neither wholly devious.
4. Percival was handled really well - not quite a village idiot superman.
5. Lancelot was an insufferable twerp. Not much you can do with that one.
6. Uther Pendragon was modeled after Donald Trump so I finally got a good handle on his character.
The bad things:
1. Galahad was useless as the perfect knight - I was really tired of the book and had my patience tried with his so strong but so weak blah blah blah.
2. Sir Gawaine for the most part was the most interesting character - but he whipsawed through so many changes - it was hard to get a bead on the character. Maybe the most human?
3. The obvious discriminatory passages - towards homosexuals and dwarves in particular. It might be in the source legends (though I kinda doubt it) - but having the characters and narrator go out of the way to insult with "vile sodomite" and so on when there really was no reason got really old. Methinks Berger had a few hangups.
On the whole, it wasn't too bad of an experience. But I would recommend "Mists of Avalon" or the ultra recent The Bright Sword as maybe a good counterweight to the regressive "Arthur Rex" - though, I would say it suffers from some of the same ideological problems, although in a totally different way.
The good things:
1. Merlin was magical and started the whole shebang with a flash bang with the sword in the stone.
2. Morgan le Fay was mostly appropriately evil (yes, I've read and really liked The Mists of Avalon - but you can also have a standard issue evil witch just as you can have an evil Mordred.
3. Guinevere was not a saint, but neither wholly devious.
4. Percival was handled really well - not quite a village idiot superman.
5. Lancelot was an insufferable twerp. Not much you can do with that one.
6. Uther Pendragon was modeled after Donald Trump so I finally got a good handle on his character.
The bad things:
1. Galahad was useless as the perfect knight - I was really tired of the book and had my patience tried with his so strong but so weak blah blah blah.
2. Sir Gawaine for the most part was the most interesting character - but he whipsawed through so many changes - it was hard to get a bead on the character. Maybe the most human?
3. The obvious discriminatory passages - towards homosexuals and dwarves in particular. It might be in the source legends (though I kinda doubt it) - but having the characters and narrator go out of the way to insult with "vile sodomite" and so on when there really was no reason got really old. Methinks Berger had a few hangups.
On the whole, it wasn't too bad of an experience. But I would recommend "Mists of Avalon" or the ultra recent The Bright Sword as maybe a good counterweight to the regressive "Arthur Rex" - though, I would say it suffers from some of the same ideological problems, although in a totally different way.
May 8, 2014
Overall a fun read, especially for someone whose tastes tend toward historical fiction and legend. The one sentence comes down to: King Arthur by way of Monty Python with a flavor of Christopher Moore ("Lamb," "Fool," etc.). It's a fun conceit or framework, but gets a bit wearing by halfway through. It could be the epic format - I've also needed a break in the middle of "Orlando Furioso," the Odyssey, the Divine Comedies, and the like. The conceit of using archaic language could also be a contributing factor. It was kind of fun to see words used in their literal or original ways, but I'm pretty well-versed in epics and vocabulary and still had to make frequent use of my Kindle dictionary (with almost every word coming up with the designation "archaic").
I know this pre-dates Christopher Moore's satirical-historical works, but Moore is ultimately more successful in keeping at least this reader's interest. I can definitely see this as an origin or influence for Moore's format or style, but it lacks his finesse. That could be due to adherence to the epic format or that few liberties were taken with the actual story. It is the Arthurian legend with few details changed (among the many versions available), just told in a more irreverent and human style, including the cursing and likely stink of a medieval world and blatantly acknowledging the jumps in logic attributed to magic.
Worth the read, fun but not funny, mid-book break recommended.
I know this pre-dates Christopher Moore's satirical-historical works, but Moore is ultimately more successful in keeping at least this reader's interest. I can definitely see this as an origin or influence for Moore's format or style, but it lacks his finesse. That could be due to adherence to the epic format or that few liberties were taken with the actual story. It is the Arthurian legend with few details changed (among the many versions available), just told in a more irreverent and human style, including the cursing and likely stink of a medieval world and blatantly acknowledging the jumps in logic attributed to magic.
Worth the read, fun but not funny, mid-book break recommended.
August 15, 2024
Needing something to read, I ran across several Thomas Berger novels on my shelves and remembered why I had so many. Berger was a terrific writer and storyteller, eclectic in his range of topics, ever so clever in the use of language, and Arthur Rex, his take on the Arthurian legends is an epic example of his skills. I read this initially when it was first published back in 1978 when 500 page hardcover novels were still only $10.95! Now, 46 years later, rereading Arthur Rex was maybe even more pleasurable and instructive than it was initially. Full of lessons of morality, after all, these were knights of the Round Table that had to live up to impossible standards, you may be left wondering if Berger believed these lessons, or were they all tongue in cheek? One passage towards the very end of the book struck me as appropriate for our current times when Guinevere suggests to Arthur about power "Those who crave power are neither those who have none, nor those who have all but rather those who have some claim to it but can not get enough". Trump, Elon Musk and a handful other billionaires and so-called world leaders come to mind.
Arthur Rex has all the adventure, romances and tragedy that we have all come to associate with the King Arthur legends, and a wonderful wry and satirical vein of humor as well.
Arthur Rex has all the adventure, romances and tragedy that we have all come to associate with the King Arthur legends, and a wonderful wry and satirical vein of humor as well.
September 8, 2014
Much like his novel just previous to this one, _Who Is Teddy Villanova?_, this work represents an exercise in idiom by Thomas Berger. But while in that earlier novel, Berger proved the master of his chosen idiom, the idiom masters him in this work. Some of Berger's comic touches show through the heroic legendary prose and plot, this novel too often devolves into simply one more retelling of the Arthurian cycle without any particular insight or irony that would lift it above its sources. True, Berger does solve some interesting issues in plotting posed by his use of multiple Arthurian and Grail legends (the separation of Elaine of Astolat and Elaine, the mother of Galahad, for instance), those sorts of details are likely of little appeal to a reader who is a non-specialist in medieval romance literature. A rare disappointment from an ordinarily solid comic writer.
December 29, 2020
Fun! For me, the great joy of this novel is the language of the narrator. It’s an impossibly beautiful, archaic style of English that rings beautifully in my ear. The book is a retelling of the legend of King Arthur and the knights of the Round Table. I’ve read reviews that deduct points for unfaithfulness to some previous version of the tale but, since everything I know about that I got from Python, I am unfettered by any such fealty. The characterizations are amusingly ironic and the adventures are delightfully ridiculous. The main thing, though, is the language. I find it miraculous that this novel was written by the same author who wrote Little Big Man, a colloquial narration of the adventures of a semiliterate character in the Old West.
August 23, 2008
I find this, recommended to me by Sonnet, to be an entertaining and educational companion to T.H. White's definitive masterpiece The Once and Future King. It both delves into and twists some of the often unexplored aspects of the character's psyche (A/L and G's relationships, M and his mother's separation from A) without necessitating a comparison with neither Malory's text nor White's brilliant contributions. I highly recommend Berger's understated offer to the rich (but often poorly executed) heritage of the Legend of King Arthur.
January 29, 2015
Okay, I should probably give this book 4 stars, but something in me just can't. It really is pretty good for what it is. It's the "what it is" that the (admittedly amateur) literature critic in me deplores.
The book, though, is funny, and has a good perspective -- I recall it to be rather cynical, and comical about its cynicism.
Alright, I give it 4 stars for succeeding with what it attempts to do. But still, 3 stars for me.
I read this book outloud, mostly in bed, in college with my then-boyfriend. He would give it 4, or possibly even 5 stars.
The book, though, is funny, and has a good perspective -- I recall it to be rather cynical, and comical about its cynicism.
Alright, I give it 4 stars for succeeding with what it attempts to do. But still, 3 stars for me.
I read this book outloud, mostly in bed, in college with my then-boyfriend. He would give it 4, or possibly even 5 stars.
January 15, 2008
The MOST fun you'll ever have with King Arthur and the guys. This is based on Malory but turns him upside down, inside out, and backward. Hilarious, though it misses 5 stars because of a few weak parts. I've never taught it because it's always been out of print (well, "always" in the last 12 years at least) but it's not hard to find.
Read
November 6, 2008To avoid Thomas Berger.
I love Arthurian literature in almost any form. But this book was absolute trash. How did it ever get published?
If you have read this book then you will know the scene that captures the spirit of this tale in a nutshell --- "Shake your head, my lord."
SHEESH . . .
I love Arthurian literature in almost any form. But this book was absolute trash. How did it ever get published?
If you have read this book then you will know the scene that captures the spirit of this tale in a nutshell --- "Shake your head, my lord."
SHEESH . . .
March 30, 2017
Incredibly irreverent and very funny, this book still shows a kind of respect for the Arthurian narrative. Berger's treatment of the story is ribald and wry, but even he can't touch the poignancy of the ending. Some of the humor is dated, and at times politically incorrect. I can't decide if it's celebrating or satirizing the cultural backwardness and intolerance of medieval legend.
September 18, 2011
An entertaining story based on the King Arthur story. Berger adds some tales from other medieval lyrics that generally are not attributed to the Arthur tale. Nonetheless, the add-ins are appropriate and familiar to the time frame of the original tale.
May 4, 2015
I read this on a cross-country road trip to Banff. It was hard to get interested at first, but once I got past the first chapter, I couldn't stop reading and giggling. Very funny take on the Round table. I thought it funnier than Little Big Man, and I recommend both.
May 10, 2017
An unusual book from an unconventional author. Berger takes the familiar Arthur story and puts a few dents in the story. The Knights of the Round Table are more human and fallible than told elsewhere. Prejudice and folly abound.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews