Evaporating the "Mists"

Does "Mists" speak to everyone?

No. I have yet to meet a man who even wants to talk about it. I had an experience similar to that of the businesswoman in the bookstore, when I was skimming some fantasy titles at a library. A twenty-something guy saw me looking at the books for T.A. Barron  one shelf above "Bradley."

"Hi, you uh... thinking about reading that?" he asked.

"No, I thought it stank," I told him frankly.

The floodgates came open then. Ten minutes later, he had told me how he had read the book and disliked it  he couldn't define why  but had feared being labelled sexist and bigoted.

That brief discussion made me think of why this particular "women's retelling" is displeasing to many men. Books such as "Dawnflight" have succeeded without making anyone cringe and shy away  why was "Mists" (and its various ripoffs) different?

The answer seems to be that Arthur and his knights, though hardly sacrosanct, have usually followed a certain pattern. Arthurian legends are brimming with masculinity, and at one point or another I'm sure every young boy has dreamed of slaying the dragon and rescuing the damsel  though there are too many damsels and too few strong heroines, in my opinion. They are manly men, doing manly things.

"Mists" emasculated them. The heroic deeds and rescues of the knights are tossed in favor of court soap-operas. But even this is not as effective as how the lead males are treated. Arthur is an ineffectual wimp; Lancelot is an ineffectual wimp; a homosexual attraction is hinted at. The Merlin is under the thumbs of the priestesses, and has no claim on his own children. And the deeds of these knights are ignored completely.

It's never pleasant to see your heroes gutted and left helpless and ineffectual. And though I don't think many men would be able to define this, the loss of the heroes that they could look up to is painful and disquieting.

I've read books that contained a "woman's POV" of Arthurian legend, and other books that contained an undercurrent of paganism. Both were highly enjoyable, because they neither preached to the reader nor destroyed the characters. Mary Stewart and Kim Headlee show deep knowledge of religion, culture  and the humanity of all their characters, male and female.

Though I can't call "Mists of Avalon" a classic, doubtlessly many others will. Yet it does not possess the traits that a classic must have to endure. It broke no new ground, nor did it capture the imaginations of everyone who read it. Like Harry Potter, it is the center of a fandom  and it is little more.

You can email L.A. Solinas at jsolinas@erols.com.