What do you think?
Rate this book
The Once and Future King #3
The Ill-Made Knight
The Ill-Made Knight is based around the adventures, perils and mistakes of Sir Lancelot. Lancelot, despite being the bravest of the knights, is ugly, and ape-like, so that he calls himself the Chevalier mal fet - "The Ill-Made Knight". As a child, Lancelot loved King Arthur and spent his entire childhood training to be a knight of the round table. When he arrives and becomes one of Arthur's knights, he also becomes the king's close friend. This causes some tension, as he is jealous of Arthur's new wife Guinevere. In order to please her husband, Guinevere tries to befriend Lancelot and the two eventually fall in love. T.H. White's version of the tale elaborates greatly on the passionate love of Lancelot and Guinevere. Suspense is provided by the tension between Lancelot's friendship for King Arthur and his love for and affair with the queen.
Audio Cassette
First published January 1, 1940
84 people are currently reading
3244 people want to read
About the author
T.H. White
108 books1,480 followersBorn in Bombay to English parents, Terence Hanbury White was educated at Cambridge and taught for some time at Stowe before deciding to write full-time. White moved to Ireland in 1939 as a conscientious objector to WWII, and lived out his years there. White is best known for his sequence of Arthurian novels, The Once and Future King, first published together in 1958.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 302 reviews
September 14, 2017
“Middle-aged people can balance between believing in God and breaking all the commandments without difficulty.”
― T.H. White, The Ill-Made Knight
You might think a novel that basically focuses on a love-triangle (a quadrilateral if you include God), several affairs, a man's struggle between his love for a woman, love for God, love for his best friend, would not hold the interest of a 13 and an 11-year old for long, but this is T.H. White. The Ill-Made Knight characters are so human, so filled with frailties, heroics, and insecurities that White could have written about cooking for 300 pages and my kids would have been rapt from page 1 to the end.
In this the third book of the greater The Once and Future King epic, the story turns solidly to Lancelot. It is impossible to understand Lancelot without looking at Arthur, Guinevere, Elaine & Galahad. And the Ill-Made Knight digresses to capture these stories. The middle of the book pivots as Camelot, under Arthur's leadership, undergoes a change from physical quests (Round Table v. Might makes Right) to spiritual ones (Round Table > Grail quest). This change captures/mirrors the dynamic of Lancelot's own story (the vacillation between the physical and spiritual).
― T.H. White, The Ill-Made Knight
You might think a novel that basically focuses on a love-triangle (a quadrilateral if you include God), several affairs, a man's struggle between his love for a woman, love for God, love for his best friend, would not hold the interest of a 13 and an 11-year old for long, but this is T.H. White. The Ill-Made Knight characters are so human, so filled with frailties, heroics, and insecurities that White could have written about cooking for 300 pages and my kids would have been rapt from page 1 to the end.
In this the third book of the greater The Once and Future King epic, the story turns solidly to Lancelot. It is impossible to understand Lancelot without looking at Arthur, Guinevere, Elaine & Galahad. And the Ill-Made Knight digresses to capture these stories. The middle of the book pivots as Camelot, under Arthur's leadership, undergoes a change from physical quests (Round Table v. Might makes Right) to spiritual ones (Round Table > Grail quest). This change captures/mirrors the dynamic of Lancelot's own story (the vacillation between the physical and spiritual).
August 4, 2022
Live a little, Lance
complete the love triangle
try for a threesome.
complete the love triangle
try for a threesome.
March 2, 2019
At the half way point of the epic, it’s clear T.H. White isn’t simply recounting the events of Arthurian myth. At several points, he tells us to go read Malory if we want to read about the ‘events.’ This is a retelling for a modern audience, focusing on the people in the myth from a psychological point of view: the stuff modern audiences want, how people tick, why they behave a certain way and so forth.
This book starts to hit you in the emotional breadbasket much harder. It’s necessary. The Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot love triangle tests more than the three people involved. Yet, it’s presented in a neutral manner. White never asks us to take sides, just to understand how it came to be, what motivated each character to reach the point they did. The subtle compare and contrast to modern relationships adds weight (perhaps gravitas is a better word) to the tragedy. Man, this is miles from the lighthearted book that opens the series. Some readers may need to have a box of tissues handy for this one.
As well as the detailed character study of Lancelot, we also battle alongside Arthur as he sees his grand plan ‘Right over Might’ is fundamentally flawed. The only way to achieve Right over Might is with more Might. I guess it was lucky he had the greatest knight in the world to deal with the bad guys, but this too is presented in a neutral way, where we see Right (Might in disguise) repeating the same patterns of injustice. At the risk of repeating myself, wow, this is good storytelling.
This book starts to hit you in the emotional breadbasket much harder. It’s necessary. The Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot love triangle tests more than the three people involved. Yet, it’s presented in a neutral manner. White never asks us to take sides, just to understand how it came to be, what motivated each character to reach the point they did. The subtle compare and contrast to modern relationships adds weight (perhaps gravitas is a better word) to the tragedy. Man, this is miles from the lighthearted book that opens the series. Some readers may need to have a box of tissues handy for this one.
As well as the detailed character study of Lancelot, we also battle alongside Arthur as he sees his grand plan ‘Right over Might’ is fundamentally flawed. The only way to achieve Right over Might is with more Might. I guess it was lucky he had the greatest knight in the world to deal with the bad guys, but this too is presented in a neutral way, where we see Right (Might in disguise) repeating the same patterns of injustice. At the risk of repeating myself, wow, this is good storytelling.
July 19, 2022
MY GIRL ELAINE DESERVED BETTER!!!
August 22, 2012
T.H. White doesn't make me feel as sympathetic and tender toward Lancelot as Steinbeck does, though there are some similarities in the two treatments. The way he talks about Guinevere, too -- I don't know, it bothers me. It's tender and it tries to understand her, but at the same time it's so condescending and just... knowing from research how closely the portrayals of Morgan/Morgause and Guinevere are linked, and knowing how Morgause is portrayed in the earlier books, it shades T.H. White's portrayal uglier.
He does very well at exploring Lancelot's character, though I miss the insights into Arthur's character that the first book promised. And I can't get on with White's version of Gawain.
Anyway, this isn't very useful for my dissertation, but I thought I'd revisit it anyway in case something thematic popped up.
He does very well at exploring Lancelot's character, though I miss the insights into Arthur's character that the first book promised. And I can't get on with White's version of Gawain.
Anyway, this isn't very useful for my dissertation, but I thought I'd revisit it anyway in case something thematic popped up.
July 16, 2025
Well, this is certainly the closest anyone’s ever come to making me like Lancelot - and I don’t know how I feel about that. I rather enjoyed my seething resentment of him 🤣😁
February 19, 2011
The Ill Made Knight covers the story of Lancelot from his beginnings to near the end of the time in Camelot, and chronicles his love for Guinevere and Elaine's love for him, and his struggles in the quest for the grail. I was quite amused by the references back to Malory, and found myself rather wanting to revisiting that book (in the original, of course: not an abridgement or a retelling).
T.H. White has a certain amount of tenderness for and an understanding of his characters that makes their stupidities endearing and understandable, but even he couldn't make me stop wanting to shake all three of them. I liked his interpretation of the triangle as a quadrangle including God, on Lancelot's part, and I felt that the last few pages were wonderful -- I love the story of Sir Urry for what it says about Lancelot, and for that surprisingly humbled pride of Lancelot's, when he cries at having performed a miracle.
Without Merlyn, the book is a lot less vibrant, and like many versions of the story, it becomes unstuck from Arthur as the centre and devolves to Lancelot. I always feel some disappointment about that.
T.H. White has a certain amount of tenderness for and an understanding of his characters that makes their stupidities endearing and understandable, but even he couldn't make me stop wanting to shake all three of them. I liked his interpretation of the triangle as a quadrangle including God, on Lancelot's part, and I felt that the last few pages were wonderful -- I love the story of Sir Urry for what it says about Lancelot, and for that surprisingly humbled pride of Lancelot's, when he cries at having performed a miracle.
Without Merlyn, the book is a lot less vibrant, and like many versions of the story, it becomes unstuck from Arthur as the centre and devolves to Lancelot. I always feel some disappointment about that.
November 10, 2019
Sir Lancelot's tumultuous and complicated and violent and love-filled life makes for probably my favourite part of the series so far, although weirdly enough I liked the actual romance - probably the centerpoint of the entire thing - the least. I like a good romance, but this one never truly grabbed me.
But the narrative's still great, the hero's conflicts real, and there were a bunch of good fights.
But the narrative's still great, the hero's conflicts real, and there were a bunch of good fights.
April 17, 2015
2.5 stars. Hated Lancelot.
“He would not call himself Sir Lancelot. He would call himself the Chevalier Mal Fet—the Ill-Made Knight.So far as he could see—and he felt that there must be some reason for it somewhere—the boy’s face was as ugly as a monster’s in the King’s menagerie.”
This story begins the downfall of Arthur. Readers learn a great deal about Lancelot the son of a French king who decides from a very young age to dub himself Chevalier mal fet–The Ill-Made Knight because Lancelot is supposedly ugly, looking more like an ape than a man, which is very unusual in Arthurian lore for him not to be some handsome, shining prince like Jaime Lannister. Lancelot trains from a very young age to become one of Arthur’s knights after he begins to hero worship Arthur after a meeting where he’s decided he already loves the King and he will be everything the king wants him to be. He strives to be the best, and he wants Arthur’s attentions for himself (not like that… what kind of book do you think these are?). For this reason, Lancelot loathes Guinevere at first because she commands Arthur’s attention. Arthur seeing that the two people closest to him are unable to get along has Guinevere assist Lancelot in falconing.
Despite his appearance, Guinevere acquiesces that he isn’t attractive in any conventional way, but she see his looks as more interesting than appalling. Lancelot only begins to fall for the Queen after he insults her and sees the real harm he’s done. It’s here where the book explains that Lancelot can’t care about things unless he’s done some grievance. Then, he feels he has to atone for his grievance, which leads to a love affair between the two. Lancelot still loves both his king and now, his queen, which puts in him constantly in odds with himself. He takes on quests to avoid her, but we know how fate goes.
This book didn’t make me like Lancelot at all. Not even a little bit. It’s not even actually like he was a “good” person. It made me despise Gawaine for the most part, too, who is known to fly into rages and harm/kill even women, but somehow he’s still considered chivalrous. I also hated the way that White wrote Guinevere and just women in particular, straddling them with unnecessary pettiness, blaming them for their “downfalls,” which surely was their own fault and worthy of the extreme violence bestowed on them.
The only thing I really liked about this was the obvious conflict in all parties involved in the love triangle. All these characters love one another–Lancelot loves the King and the Queen, and they both love him in turn. They also love each other in their own way. Arthur isn’t blind. Even without knowing what Merlyn has told him, he knows Lancelot loves his wife (and vice versa), but he cares deeply for both. I appreciated that White tried to give this some complexity because it’s not always as simple as “YOU CHEATED ON ME! YOU GOTTA GO!” Sometimes, very complex and conflicting feelings come into play during such situations.
“He would not call himself Sir Lancelot. He would call himself the Chevalier Mal Fet—the Ill-Made Knight.So far as he could see—and he felt that there must be some reason for it somewhere—the boy’s face was as ugly as a monster’s in the King’s menagerie.”
This story begins the downfall of Arthur. Readers learn a great deal about Lancelot the son of a French king who decides from a very young age to dub himself Chevalier mal fet–The Ill-Made Knight because Lancelot is supposedly ugly, looking more like an ape than a man, which is very unusual in Arthurian lore for him not to be some handsome, shining prince like Jaime Lannister. Lancelot trains from a very young age to become one of Arthur’s knights after he begins to hero worship Arthur after a meeting where he’s decided he already loves the King and he will be everything the king wants him to be. He strives to be the best, and he wants Arthur’s attentions for himself (not like that… what kind of book do you think these are?). For this reason, Lancelot loathes Guinevere at first because she commands Arthur’s attention. Arthur seeing that the two people closest to him are unable to get along has Guinevere assist Lancelot in falconing.
Despite his appearance, Guinevere acquiesces that he isn’t attractive in any conventional way, but she see his looks as more interesting than appalling. Lancelot only begins to fall for the Queen after he insults her and sees the real harm he’s done. It’s here where the book explains that Lancelot can’t care about things unless he’s done some grievance. Then, he feels he has to atone for his grievance, which leads to a love affair between the two. Lancelot still loves both his king and now, his queen, which puts in him constantly in odds with himself. He takes on quests to avoid her, but we know how fate goes.
This book didn’t make me like Lancelot at all. Not even a little bit. It’s not even actually like he was a “good” person. It made me despise Gawaine for the most part, too, who is known to fly into rages and harm/kill even women, but somehow he’s still considered chivalrous. I also hated the way that White wrote Guinevere and just women in particular, straddling them with unnecessary pettiness, blaming them for their “downfalls,” which surely was their own fault and worthy of the extreme violence bestowed on them.
The only thing I really liked about this was the obvious conflict in all parties involved in the love triangle. All these characters love one another–Lancelot loves the King and the Queen, and they both love him in turn. They also love each other in their own way. Arthur isn’t blind. Even without knowing what Merlyn has told him, he knows Lancelot loves his wife (and vice versa), but he cares deeply for both. I appreciated that White tried to give this some complexity because it’s not always as simple as “YOU CHEATED ON ME! YOU GOTTA GO!” Sometimes, very complex and conflicting feelings come into play during such situations.
January 9, 2022
Boy, this was such a weird reading experience.
Although I mostly really liked Merlin in the previous books and was the best part of the novels. He's not present in this one, but the novel was still on the way to being my favourite in this series, but oh my god.
The author wrote the women so horribly, especially Guinevere. I hated the way she acted and especially how the author wrote her thoughts to justify it. I hated it so, so much and White seemed to be so judgmental in the way he wrote, especially later on.
I generally liked Lancelot, but most of the characters made me so mad, that I started to hate-read this and it never got better.
Although I mostly really liked Merlin in the previous books and was the best part of the novels. He's not present in this one, but the novel was still on the way to being my favourite in this series, but oh my god.
The author wrote the women so horribly, especially Guinevere. I hated the way she acted and especially how the author wrote her thoughts to justify it. I hated it so, so much and White seemed to be so judgmental in the way he wrote, especially later on.
I generally liked Lancelot, but most of the characters made me so mad, that I started to hate-read this and it never got better.
January 6, 2022
Sic et non
June 29, 2014
This was really unexpected! I picked the 3rd book of White's "Once and Future King" expecting it to be the least interesting one. I never really liked the romance of Lancelot and Guinevere. One reason is, I know in the earliest legend there was no character as Lancelot [and Guinevere's adulterous affair was with Gawaine, Arthur's nephew and Arthur fathered a son, Mordred with Queen Morgause rather than Morgan Le Fay]. The other reason was, I knew, it is influenced by the medieval romance: The tale of Tristan and Isolde which I have read before these. And Lancelot and Guinevere felt as a repetition - a badly done one. I guess it was because the character motives are so unrealistic in "Lancelot and Guinevere" tales.
This book tells the tale of Lancelot (a young boy when he first meets Arthur) who suffers from internal conflicts about his unworthiness and decides he will become Arthur's greatest knight to prove his worth to himself and others. He believes he is Ill-Made because he is "ape-like and ugly". His lack of self-esteem is the reason behind the obsession with being pure and a knight who seeks God ( The Holy Grail quest). However he is far from reaching perfection. When all is lost, he is driven into madness.
Personally, I never saw any romance in the love triangle of Arthur, Lancelot and Guinevere. I don't understand how adultery can become romantic! or Having an affair with your best friend's wife for that matter? However, here, it was all explained.
I was moved by White's portrayal. The deep psychology. In "The Ill-Made Knight" Lancelot is a man full of self-loathing, sandwiched between his love for Arthur, his idol (the man saw beyond his ugliness) and his love for the only woman who paid him attention.
This book tells the tale of Lancelot (a young boy when he first meets Arthur) who suffers from internal conflicts about his unworthiness and decides he will become Arthur's greatest knight to prove his worth to himself and others. He believes he is Ill-Made because he is "ape-like and ugly". His lack of self-esteem is the reason behind the obsession with being pure and a knight who seeks God ( The Holy Grail quest). However he is far from reaching perfection. When all is lost, he is driven into madness.
Personally, I never saw any romance in the love triangle of Arthur, Lancelot and Guinevere. I don't understand how adultery can become romantic! or Having an affair with your best friend's wife for that matter? However, here, it was all explained.
I was moved by White's portrayal. The deep psychology. In "The Ill-Made Knight" Lancelot is a man full of self-loathing, sandwiched between his love for Arthur, his idol (the man saw beyond his ugliness) and his love for the only woman who paid him attention.
September 7, 2013
This wasn't necessarily a terrible book, but it wasn't, in my opinion, a great book either. I started reading it in June, it is now September. I generally read books a lot faster than I did this one. As with the previous books in the series, it seems that T.H. White has so many thoughts and details that he wants to include in this book, however he just doesn't include them all. The book is all over the place. Battle scenes and tournaments are cut short, characters inner dialogues and struggles aren't fully described or explained, and overall direction of the story of Arthur as a whole just seems to be on hold while T.H. White tries to explain Lancelot and his inner demons further. All in all it was an ok story. I didn't entirely hate it, but it just didn't contain the components other books generally have held for me in the past, to make me want to sit down and keep reading to find out what happens next. If it were not for my OCD that does not allow me to leave a book or series unfinished no matter what, I do not know if I would have picked this book back up to continue reading it or not.
I wouldn't go out of my way to recommend this book for someone to read, but I wouldn't discourage them from reading it either.
I wouldn't go out of my way to recommend this book for someone to read, but I wouldn't discourage them from reading it either.
December 4, 2015
It is difficult to know what to do with this book. Mostly it seems to be more a commentary of the tradition (especially Malory) rather than a narrative at all. White skips over some major parts of the story and the end of the narrative seemed to me to be rather unsatisfactory. Often White stops the action to delve into not the psyche of his characters but their potential psyche. This potential, moreover, seems to be based not entirely on Malory or some other writer but the characters as if they were actually historical humans. Thus the book is really a meditation of what Lancelot, Guenever, Arthur, and the rest of the knights may have been like in a space between history, the tradition, and White's own created works. At times this works beautifully; at other times it is very trying, slow, boring, and almost even surface (surprisingly). The book really comes through in the middle with the quest for the Grail; here White is able to balance all his modes and create a very awesome narrative. If the entire book were written like this it would be one of the greatest books in the fantasy genre. Unfortunately, White too often moves quickly over interesting points of character -because- he is so heavily commenting on the tradition.
February 12, 2019
It does not quite compare to the beauty of The Sword and the Stone, but it does feel more like it is in that vein than Book 2 was. It was hard for me to make it through the bleakness of The Queen of Air and Darkness, but I’m so glad I did because I thought that this book was beautifully written and more of a sequel.
The contents of this part of Legend do not make for a happy love story, so it was bound to be a sad tale. But these characters seemed so real, and you could feel for their struggles. I really enjoyed this book. Not as much as Book 1—because that book is special—but much more than Book 2. Now on to Book 4!
The contents of this part of Legend do not make for a happy love story, so it was bound to be a sad tale. But these characters seemed so real, and you could feel for their struggles. I really enjoyed this book. Not as much as Book 1—because that book is special—but much more than Book 2. Now on to Book 4!
May 8, 2009
This rather sad retelling of the story of Sir Lancelot focused on the warrior's obsession with his own ugliness and inadequacy.
May 20, 2025
I don’t honestly know where to begin. This book was incredibly complex, and I can’t decide how I feel about it or about its protagonist—Lancelot, the Ill-Made Knight. I feel sympathy, pity, frustration, affection for him all at the same time. I began by loving him—he’s the besotted knight determined not to betray his friend and King, who accomplishes incredible feats all so he can forget Guinevere. And then he succumbs, and there’s something compelling about their love, but it’s also so frustrating and hard to believe. Like is the force of their desire really that strong that it is impossible to resist? I wonder what exactly White is saying about their love—is it good or bad, are they acting or being acted upon by this force of illicit love? This had Anna and Vronksy written all over it, especially as Guinevere becomes suspicious and jealous of Lancelot. The Elaine storyline made me so INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATED—the first time she tricked him was one thing, but the second time I found ridiculous. How could Lancelot not realize that she wasn’t Guinevere? Okay and then there’s Lancelot’s conversion/repentance/humbling during the Quest for the Holy Grail. I found that compelling and beautiful, but then he ends right back with Guinevere where he started?! (Also his time in the boat with his son Galahad was so sweet 🥹) I am very intrigued by White’s view of God. He spends several paragraphs talking about how Lancelot really saw God as a person, a person that was owed fidelity and obedience. It was this personal love for God that caused him to give Guinevere up for almost 2 years, but then later he gave God up for her. Devastating. I feel pity for poor Arthur—he’s the background character in his own marriage and kingdom (at least, in this book). I just don’t understand how he could be so okay with this situation. It’s hard to believe that Arthur, Lancelot, and Guinevere could really and truly love each other, all while the betrayal of Arthur persists in the background for 25+ years. I think White’s an incredible writer, but he’s playing with so many themes that I’m not sure what exactly he’s saying. I really do like his attempts to make sense of Guinevere, and of women in general. I think he’s insightful, and he does succeed in unraveling the jumble of her complexity somewhat.
All that to say, I liked this. I’m a little confused. And I am so pained by the affair, despite my sympathy for all three parties in the love triangle.
All that to say, I liked this. I’m a little confused. And I am so pained by the affair, despite my sympathy for all three parties in the love triangle.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 17, 2024
What a great series this has been. Not gonna lie I did not like the way this book started but by the end I think it’s my favorite so far.
July 30, 2019
“What kind of person was Lancelot? I know about half the kind of person he was, because Malory contented himself with sharing the obvious half. He was more interested in the plot than the characters, and, as soon as he had laid down the broad lines of the latter, he left it at that. Malory’s Lancelot is: 1. Intensely sensitive to moral issues. 2. Ambitious of true - not current - distinction. 3. Probably sadistic or he would not have taken such frightful care to be gentle. 4. Superstitious or totemistic or whatever the word is. He connects his martial luck with virginity, like the schoolboy who thinks he will only bowl well in the march tomorrow if he does not abuse himself today. 5. Fastidious, monogamous, serious. 6. Ferociously punitive to his own body. He denies it and slave-drives it. 7. Devoted to ‘honour,’ which he regards as keeping promises and ‘having a Word.’ He tries to be consistent. 8. Curiously tolerant of other people who do not follow his own standards. He was nor shocked by the lady who was naked as a needle. 9. Not without a sense of humour. It was a good joke dressing up as Kay. And he often says amusing things. 10. Fond of being alone. 11. Humble about his athleticism: not false modesty. 12. Self-critical. Aware of some big lack in himself. What was it? 13. Subject to pity, cf. no. 3. 14. Emotional. He is the only person Mallory mentions as crying from relief. 15. Highly strung: subject to nervous breakdowns. 16. Yet practical. He ends by dealing with the Guenever situation pretty well. He is a good man to have with you in a tight corner. 17. Homosexual? Can a person be ambi-sexual - bisexual or whatever? His treatment of young boys like Gareth and Cote Male Tale is very tender and his feeling for Arthur profound. Yet I do so want not to have to write a ‘modern' novel about him. I could only bring myself to mention this trait, if it is a trait, in the most oblique way. 18. Human. He firmly believes that for him it is a choice between God and Guenever, and he takes Guenever. He says: This is wrong and against my will, but I can’t help it. It seems to me that no 12 is the operative number in this list. What was the lack? On first inspection one would be inclined to link it up with no 17, but I don’t understand about bisexuality, so can’t write about it. There was definitely something 'wrong’ with Lancelot, in the common sense, and this was what turned him into a genius. It is very troublesome. People he was like: 1. Lawrence of Arabia, 2. A nice captain of the cricket, 3. Parnell, 4. Sir W Raleigh, 5. Hamlet, 6. me, 7. Prince Rufant, 8. Montros, 9. Tony Ireland or Von Simm […] or whatever, 10. Any mad man, 11. Adam.”
— T.H. White’s notes on the character of Lancelot.
— T.H. White’s notes on the character of Lancelot.
June 19, 2015
In my response to The Queen of Air and Darkness, the previous part of The Once and Future King, I argued that that book’s weaknesses stemmed from the fact that it was largely a tool to set up a subsequent volume. I hoped, then, that the effort would be worth it. It was. Ill-Made Knight has its imperfections, but it remains some of the most touching prose I’ve encountered.
This chapter in Arthurian legend switches focus away from the King, to look at his friend and captain, Lancelot. The reader watches Lancelot react to his first encounter with Arthur, we see him grow, go to court, and deal with the trials of being the greatest knight in the world while dealing with his forbidden love. It is no spoiler to reveal that Lancelot and Guenever become lovers. Besides, I must, in order to say that White’s treatment of that affair is fantastic. In fact, my biggest gripe with the book is the time it spends away from that domestic drama. Arthur’s struggle to find peace and justice in an unruly land, though intriguing stuff on its own, pales in comparison to the simple pains of those two figures. White, too, seems somewhat obliged to cover these other topics, which is why they’re largely delivered second hand, or summed up in snippets. So that we can get back to what really matters.
Because wrapped up in White’s recollection of the first love triangle, is a recollection of humanity. He sees things that I don’t, and can express things I never could. He has, in his own words, “knowledge of the world.” And that is tragic, and true, and demands to be read.
This chapter in Arthurian legend switches focus away from the King, to look at his friend and captain, Lancelot. The reader watches Lancelot react to his first encounter with Arthur, we see him grow, go to court, and deal with the trials of being the greatest knight in the world while dealing with his forbidden love. It is no spoiler to reveal that Lancelot and Guenever become lovers. Besides, I must, in order to say that White’s treatment of that affair is fantastic. In fact, my biggest gripe with the book is the time it spends away from that domestic drama. Arthur’s struggle to find peace and justice in an unruly land, though intriguing stuff on its own, pales in comparison to the simple pains of those two figures. White, too, seems somewhat obliged to cover these other topics, which is why they’re largely delivered second hand, or summed up in snippets. So that we can get back to what really matters.
Because wrapped up in White’s recollection of the first love triangle, is a recollection of humanity. He sees things that I don’t, and can express things I never could. He has, in his own words, “knowledge of the world.” And that is tragic, and true, and demands to be read.
November 4, 2017
The dark emotions within Lancelot and "adult" subject matter of an affair make it hard to believe that this story has been fare for children. More puzzling still is that White will allude to the wound within him and comment on its impact on his adulthood, but then he makes no attempt to really explore it. His narrator plainly says that we cannot know from this distance what wounded him so deeply. The author's tendency to move from probing, and even uncomfortable, examination of his characters' innermost thoughts to suddenly looking from 30,000 feet and zooming over decades at a time is disconcerting.
Nevertheless, this book deserves its reputation as a classic. It is at once poignant and candid. The conflicts it explores with and without its characters are timeless, and White makes this point even without Merlin's time-traveling perspective to describe events in Arthur's time with analogies familiar to the 20th and 21st century reader. I laughed. I cried, or came close. And I will be sure to work the final book of this tragic and compelling saga into my reading cycle.
SECOND READING: Forget disconcerting. This book was magical, even more so on rereading.
Nevertheless, this book deserves its reputation as a classic. It is at once poignant and candid. The conflicts it explores with and without its characters are timeless, and White makes this point even without Merlin's time-traveling perspective to describe events in Arthur's time with analogies familiar to the 20th and 21st century reader. I laughed. I cried, or came close. And I will be sure to work the final book of this tragic and compelling saga into my reading cycle.
SECOND READING: Forget disconcerting. This book was magical, even more so on rereading.
January 12, 2014
The Ill-Made Knight is a story primarily concerned with Lancelot. Lancelot believes he is "ill-made" because of he is described as ape-like and ugly, with ears that stick out straight from his head. Instead, we find Lancelot is obsessed with being pure, a true Athurian knight, who seeks God, but despite the attempt to achieve perfection, Lancelot proves most fallible, again and again. Lancelot's search for true chivalry is set against the desire of most men to fight and kill, a desire for a time "when men could be men". Lancelot's story fills in between the lines of what living under Arthur's reign could have been, and his complexity brought the legend to life.
December 31, 2020
This book just made me hate Lancelot.
April 9, 2022
"The Ill-Made Knight" gives its readers a new version of Lancelot du Lac, the well-beloved knight of the round table. Instead of the beautiful-beyond-belief and confident figure that Arthurian fans are accustomed too, we have an unattractive Lancelot who struggles with severely low self-esteem while simultaneously harboring unattainable ambition. White provides an interesting look into his, Arthur's, and Guinevere's psychology as they navigate the affair that everyone knows about but won't speak of. The medieval texts weren't particularly interested in the psychology of their characters; plot, propaganda, and religious lessons were often at the fore. Thus, the characters often acted with motives that were not explored too deeply. For the first time, the reasons why Arthur turns a blind eye to his wife's extramarital affairs are explored and it makes for an interesting read and look into his character. It is undeniably a faithful re-telling of the original story, but it has a fresh angle to it.
I enjoyed this one, but White has his issues. He leans toward the sexist in his portrayal of women. I've read worse, but it is there. He tried harder than many of his contemporaries to make his women, particularly Guinevere, well-rounded and human and I give him credit for that. To be fair, making the Guinevere of the medieval texts likable and understandable was no small feat. She is a reflection of the way medieval men viewed women after all, and it must have been difficult to remain faithful to the story and bring her into the light as a more modern figure. The medieval Guinevere is irrational, cruel, jealous, and emotionally unstable. It's hard to blame her, but it's also hard to like her for being so cruel to her devoted knight most of the time. White gives her dimension, but fails to completely eradicate the sexism in the portrayal of this iconic female character. He was a man of his time and it's important to remember that when reading work from any author of the past. It doesn't excuse it, but you should always go into expecting it. This is why it loses a star, though.
This is the only story I was assigned. I'm looking forward to reading the others over break.
I enjoyed this one, but White has his issues. He leans toward the sexist in his portrayal of women. I've read worse, but it is there. He tried harder than many of his contemporaries to make his women, particularly Guinevere, well-rounded and human and I give him credit for that. To be fair, making the Guinevere of the medieval texts likable and understandable was no small feat. She is a reflection of the way medieval men viewed women after all, and it must have been difficult to remain faithful to the story and bring her into the light as a more modern figure. The medieval Guinevere is irrational, cruel, jealous, and emotionally unstable. It's hard to blame her, but it's also hard to like her for being so cruel to her devoted knight most of the time. White gives her dimension, but fails to completely eradicate the sexism in the portrayal of this iconic female character. He was a man of his time and it's important to remember that when reading work from any author of the past. It doesn't excuse it, but you should always go into expecting it. This is why it loses a star, though.
This is the only story I was assigned. I'm looking forward to reading the others over break.
July 15, 2024
3.5
Después de la decepción con “La reina del aire y las tinieblas” la saga de Camelot continúa con la historia de Lancelot (o Lanzarote, como venía en mi edición y que resultaba muy raro leerlo así jajaja).
Este libro me gustó más porque sí se concentra en la historia de Lancelot, pero el personaje en sí resultó muy detestable para mí, incluso ya sabiendo algo sobre la leyenda arturiana, la manera en que se presenta ufff, me recordó a los hombres actuales más que a un caballero. Pero como dice el mismo Lancelot, él era malo y por eso sentía que debía esforzarse más en hacer cosas buenas.
Por otra parte me dio pena Arturo, pero la historia más triste es la de Elaine, mientras que con Ginebra tuve sentimientos encontrados.
Después de la decepción con “La reina del aire y las tinieblas” la saga de Camelot continúa con la historia de Lancelot (o Lanzarote, como venía en mi edición y que resultaba muy raro leerlo así jajaja).
Este libro me gustó más porque sí se concentra en la historia de Lancelot, pero el personaje en sí resultó muy detestable para mí, incluso ya sabiendo algo sobre la leyenda arturiana, la manera en que se presenta ufff, me recordó a los hombres actuales más que a un caballero. Pero como dice el mismo Lancelot, él era malo y por eso sentía que debía esforzarse más en hacer cosas buenas.
Por otra parte me dio pena Arturo, pero la historia más triste es la de Elaine, mientras que con Ginebra tuve sentimientos encontrados.
February 8, 2023
3.75⭐️
The trials, errors, and achievements of Lancelot in a nutshell. The number of cricket references will throw you off, but otherwise it's completely readable.
What is it with me and Arthurian Legends? I just love them to bits. Is there a reason? I'm sure there is some deep-seated psychological reasoning behind my anxious attachment to these tales, but this is a review not a therapy session. ... Why the love-triangle trope?? Like I knew that it was coming towards me, okay? But I just wasn't prepared for the amount of love triangle-ness this was going to have.
Seriously speaking: Whenever I read anything related to Arthurian Legends, I always gravitate towards the figure that represents Lancelot. I wish I knew why this is the case, but as I've mentioned before: book review, not therapy session. Never having read Le More D'Arthur or The Once and Future King before, I never realised the negative connotations that Lancelot presented. However, regardless of my disappointments in his character, I still found this novel enjoyable. I'd say, so far, this is my favourite of the series. I connected with it a lot more, however I don't know if this is due to being older and more mature, or plainly because this book is superior. Either way, I'm surprised at how much I liked this novel and I can't wait to move onto the next one in the series.
The trials, errors, and achievements of Lancelot in a nutshell. The number of cricket references will throw you off, but otherwise it's completely readable.
What is it with me and Arthurian Legends? I just love them to bits. Is there a reason? I'm sure there is some deep-seated psychological reasoning behind my anxious attachment to these tales, but this is a review not a therapy session. ... Why the love-triangle trope?? Like I knew that it was coming towards me, okay? But I just wasn't prepared for the amount of love triangle-ness this was going to have.
Seriously speaking: Whenever I read anything related to Arthurian Legends, I always gravitate towards the figure that represents Lancelot. I wish I knew why this is the case, but as I've mentioned before: book review, not therapy session. Never having read Le More D'Arthur or The Once and Future King before, I never realised the negative connotations that Lancelot presented. However, regardless of my disappointments in his character, I still found this novel enjoyable. I'd say, so far, this is my favourite of the series. I connected with it a lot more, however I don't know if this is due to being older and more mature, or plainly because this book is superior. Either way, I'm surprised at how much I liked this novel and I can't wait to move onto the next one in the series.
July 1, 2024
The books within the once and future kind keep leaving me with my jaw on the floor, a smile on my face, and a tear in my eye. Lancelot’s journey of self discovery feet at times like watching Boyhood, while also watching a medieval John Wick. Burdened by his own prowess, the greatest knight in the world, Lancelot is just a person trying to discover and live up to his own values that he hasn’t quite figured out yet. I had an awesome time.
Every few pages, TH White will also write an immortal line that I read over and over again. One of those in this book ended with “It is so fatally easy to make young children believe that they are horrible.”
Every few pages, TH White will also write an immortal line that I read over and over again. One of those in this book ended with “It is so fatally easy to make young children believe that they are horrible.”
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 15, 2025
My favourite of the series so far! I'm a sucker for Arthurian retellings which really lean into the love triangle going all ways, and this one threw in an extra pillar with Lancelot's relationship to God too. I just adore the unconventional way TH White tells the tale, directing us to Mallory if we want to read about such-and-such a detail. He also goes on these little asides which demonstrate such a vivid understanding or human nature, posited in an analogy that begins very mundanely. Another thing that was very compelling was seeing the ideal of the court begin to crumble. I do wish we hadn't lost Arthur so much in the tale.
December 19, 2023
12/20/23: 5 stars. I loved this take on Lancelot so much. I found him so much more interesting than he's depicted in lots of other places. Here he is an ugly knight who loves Arthur and wants to be his best knight and strives for it daily. Here, he is extremely spiritual and loves God, but struggles with the sins he finds himself unable to avoid. Here, he is human before he is the greatest knight of legend, and that makes him so lovable. I've never loved Lancelot before, I've always hated him, for he is, in many ways, the villain of Arthurian legend. But what a sympathetic villain.
Read
May 25, 2025The third book in the series focuses on Sir Lancelot, and it might be my favourite thus far.
T.H. White frustrates me at times. Given the original publication of the novels from 1938 to 1940, the racism and sexism should perhaps not come as a surprise, but they still had me grumbling a few times.
But while the second novel had frustrated me to the point where I put it down for a few weeks, the third told the story of Lancelot du Lac in a surprisingly sympathetic way. In this version, Lancelot isn't beautiful - on the contrary, he's regularly described as being ugly. His strength lies in his skill at fighting, and in his faith - the latter of which is considered in a more moving way than I'd read before.
Here's hoping the fourth novel keeps this energy.
T.H. White frustrates me at times. Given the original publication of the novels from 1938 to 1940, the racism and sexism should perhaps not come as a surprise, but they still had me grumbling a few times.
But while the second novel had frustrated me to the point where I put it down for a few weeks, the third told the story of Lancelot du Lac in a surprisingly sympathetic way. In this version, Lancelot isn't beautiful - on the contrary, he's regularly described as being ugly. His strength lies in his skill at fighting, and in his faith - the latter of which is considered in a more moving way than I'd read before.
Here's hoping the fourth novel keeps this energy.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 302 reviews