anyone here love arthur?

[King Hippo]

I mean the actual man. If someone ever besmirches the King's good name, I
scream, "DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE KING?" and slay them on the spot. I consider
him my own king.

[solitaire]

Post by King Hippo
I mean the actual man. If someone ever besmirches the King's good name, I
scream, "DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE KING?" and slay them on the spot. I consider
him my own king.

Son, no-one here is interesting in the real history of the time, much
less the real man. They like fairy tales and mystical bullshit.

And Arthur never ruled New York state, son.

[Sir Fauntleroy]

Post by King Hippo
I mean the actual man. If someone ever besmirches the King's good name, I
scream, "DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE KING?" and slay them on the spot. I
consider him my own king.

Son, no-one here is interesting in the real history of the time, much less
the real man. They like fairy tales and mystical bullshit.
And Arthur never ruled New York state, son.

INFAMY! Stand back by a sword's length so that I may strike thee!
Pray you the great Arthur samples naught your seditious tongue!

[PAUL GADZIKOWSKI]

solitaire <***@verizon.net> wrote:
: King Hippo wrote:
:> I mean the actual man. If someone ever besmirches the King's good name, I
:> scream, "DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE KING?" and slay them on the spot. I consider
:> him my own king.
:
: Son, no-one here is interesting in the real history of the time, much
: less the real man. They like fairy tales and mystical bullshit.

How does that mean we can't love the man? Rather it suggests quite the
opposite, for isn't the glamorization of a legendary figure usually a
prettier picture than the hard facts?


Paul Gadzikowski, ***@iglou.com since 1995
http://members.iglou.com/scarfman/new.htm Fanfiction stories and cartoons.
http://www.arthurkingoftimeandspace.com New cartoons daily.

The problem is, intractability is so common in fandom that enthusiasm is
mistaken for intractability.

[Diane L. Schirf]

Post by PAUL GADZIKOWSKI
Rather it suggests quite the
opposite, for isn't the glamorization of a legendary figure usually a
prettier picture than the hard facts?

If there were any. ;)

[John Sefton]

Post by Diane L. Schirf

Post by PAUL GADZIKOWSKI
Rather it suggests quite the
opposite, for isn't the glamorization of a legendary figure usually a
prettier picture than the hard facts?

If there were any. ;)

Hmmm, an unbeliever. Artheist!!

[Ian Weir]

Actually, I like Medieval literature. Son.

Ian

[Malcolm Martin]

Post by solitaire
Son, no-one here is interesting in the real history of the time, much
less the real man. They like fairy tales and mystical bullshit.
And Arthur never ruled New York state, son.

Maybe not, but the real history of the time is interesting for one or two
here, as well as teh stories that may have developed from those times.

Of course, Arthur never ruled New York State. He ruled some 1,276 years
before the Colonials rebelled, and some 1,126 before there was even a
possibility of there being a New York. But as for the question as to
whether he ever ruled over Eburacum - an interesting one for the real
history of the time?

Kind regards

Malcolm Martin
London, UK

[Debs]

Erm, I think most of the people on this list are quite interesting.

And I AM interestED in the history of the time and the real man. Alll
aspects of Arthur interest me.

Besides, what's wrong with fairy tales?

Debra Kemp
2nd rate-hack
"THE HOUSE OF PENDRAGON I: THE FIREBRAND"
Amber Quill Press

[xargon]

Post by Debs
Erm, I think most of the people on this list are quite interesting.
And I AM interestED in the history of the time and the real man. Alll
aspects of Arthur interest me.

If Arthur were alive today, I'd vote for him.