Camparin' & Contrastin'

Sir Launcelot du Lake. What a name..It is a really strong name, that was given to a courageous night, who was made the head night of the Round Table by King Arthur. There are various legends, and different authors have laid them for us to read in their own different ways. Sir Launcelot's character is shown differently in the two different prospectuses of the legends; Sir Launcelot du Lake and from the Acts of King Arthur and his Noble Knights, written by Sir Thomas Malory and John Steinbeck respectively. The two images that these writers worked on to portray are extremely different from each other. In Sir Thomas's version, Launcelot's character is explained dramatically, in a very exagerated manner. For example: "Sir Launcelot took another spear and unhorsed sixteen more of the King or North Galys's knights and, with his next, unhorsed another twelve; and in each case with such violence that none of the knights ever fully recovered"(Sir Launcelot.Pg:1078). Many events, just like this one, were described with much fantasy, hence, seemed unrealistic. Istead of being wowed by his brave battles, I was more like "yeah right kido."
On the other hand, Steinbeck's version ilustrates a totally different picture. His version consisted of detailed discriptions and figurative language, which made his writing seem like a emotional story. For Example: "Lancelot exhausted the theme of his hands and squinted down the long hall and watched the movement with eyes so nearly closed that he could not see faces...The knights in long full floor-brushing robes walked lightly or thought their feet barely touched the ground because their bodies were released rom their crushing boxes of iron" (The Acts King. Pg:1094). Through this example, we can see how Steinbeck manages to create a delicate sympathy towards Launcelot. The discriptions for what he thinks, and what he observes are a great way to gain the reader's sympathy. Both the authors did a great job, developing the different images of Sir Launcelot. Where, one was an honorable, courageous, undefeatable knight, the ohter was an emotional, delicate, yet honorable knight with deep feelings. The interesting thing about both the pieces were, that both the writings had a power, that dug out two completely different responses from its audience. Good job writers!