Rating: 
Summary: soemwhat flat knightly novel
Review: a somewhat flat novel from steinbeck---not accustomed to this subject matter from steinbeck--i anticipated subject matter similar to his other novels so i was somewhat disappointed here.
Rating: 
Summary: Enjoyable retelling of a classic
Review: I had been looking for a readable rendition of Malory's Morte d'Arthur and my husband suggested reading Steinbeck's version. Yes, the same Steinbeck as in the Grapes of Wrath. At the time, I honestly didn't even know that Steinbeck had written a "translation" of the original Malory text. From what is explained in the introduction, Steinbeck not only used the Winchester Manuscripts of Malory's works but also a number of other sources as well in creating this modern rendition of the book. What was nice is that he kept a lot of it in the same type of structure as the original Malory and just updated some of the words and sentence structures to help make it more enjoyable for the 20th century reader.I truly did enjoy Steinbecks version and it looks like he kept not only the spirit of Malory alive and well but also made it much easier and enjoyable to read (I tried reading the Malory version...ugh!...I wanted to bang my head on the table). Unfortunately, though, this isn't a complete reworking of Malory's work. He covers the early stories of Arthur, Merlin, Lancelot and the earlier knights, but doesn't cover the Grail Quest nor the death of Arthur. Steinbeck just never completed the work and nobody knows why. What he did finish was published in this version. I wish Steinbeck did finish the tale because he did a fantastic job.
Rating:
Summary: contains some surprises
Review: I tend to agree with most of the other reviewers here -- an impressively ambitious project that is not always successful; towards the beginning he is *so* reverential of Malory's work that he seems to be unable to forge his own story, and replicates most of Malory's most unreadable attributes. There is a clear and gradual increase in the quality of the stories, however, particularly once he begins developing the relationship between Lancelot and the king; he even manages to turn Lancelot's nephew, Lionel, into a somewhat intriguing character. The real gold here, though, is not the stories themselves, which would not have held up if not written by Steinbeck; this book contains his correspondence with his editors *about* the stories, and this, this is wonderful stuff. He is truly passionate and knowledgable about Malory, and his insights are unique and clearly expressed. It almost breaks one's heart to read this section, since it offers so much promise for the parts of the book that were never completed. The book itself is for die-hard Steinbeck or Arthur fans only; the correspondence is for everyone.
Rating: 
Summary: Sir Thomas Mallory for Dummies...
Review: I've never read the original Mallory version of the tales of King Arthur and all of the stories of his noble knights. And neither had I much exposure to any other form of media on the matter, so this whole subject was pretty new to me. From what I gather of various sources, the impatient reader may get lost in the Old English prose and grammatical acrobatics that exist in the original manuscripts. Steinbeck has written his take on the stories, somewhat paraphrasing and interpreting the tales for those who would be overwhelmed with the real thing. This unfinished work was a great idea and I hope that maybe someday another brave soul with the patience for Old English will consider tackling the task. King Arthur, a mere boy when he took the throne was chosen by the prophecy that only the person strong enough to remove a sword from a stone would also have the strength to lead a kingdom. As any good leader knows, the ability to lead comes with the respect of those willing to follow and assist. King Arthur surrounds himself with the help of many a valiant knight who pledge not only to keep him from harm, but to protect his kingdom from those who wish to overthrow him. The stories are broken up into sections that describe King Arthur's reign over a period of years. There are stories of dragons, invisible knights, fair princesses and evil witches. Nearly two thirds of the book is filled with an assortment of violence and gore and dear reader will be astonished over the number of people who seem to literally lose their heads as a result. Overall, it was fun to wade through the stories for the first time without being hampered by foreign script. It's as though Steinbeck intended to develop a sort of 'Cliffs Notes' for the tales and I think had he lived long enough to finish the task it would have made for a spectacular achievement.
Rating:
Summary: Imperfect but entertaining
Review: John Steinbeck has always been one of my favorite "classic" authors, and books of his like East of Eden and Grapes of Wrath are among the greatest in American literature. I have also had a fascination with the Arthurian tales. I should have found a combination of Steinbeck and King Arthur to be great; instead, I found only a passably good book (a little over three-and-a-half stars). As is obvious from the letters Steinbeck wrote on the subject, he had a fascination with King Arthur too. The book he wrote is largely a translation of older works, especially Malory. While entertaining enough, it suffers from two principal flaws: it is an incomplete work (the book was published posthumously) and it is not what Steinbeck does best. This book is best for Steinbeck (or Camelot) completists only. For those who want a proper introduction to either the author or this subject, there is plenty of better places to start.
Rating:
Summary: Imperfect but entertaining
Review: John Steinbeck has always been one of my favorite "classic" authors, and books of his like East of Eden and Grapes of Wrath are among the greatest in American literature. I have also had a fascination with the Arthurian tales. I should have found a combination of Steinbeck and King Arthur to be great; instead, I found only a passably good book (a little over three-and-a-half stars). As is obvious from the letters Steinbeck wrote on the subject, he had a fascination with King Arthur too. The book he wrote is largely a translation of older works, especially Malory. While entertaining enough, it suffers from two principal flaws: it is an incomplete work (the book was published posthumously) and it is not what Steinbeck does best. This book is best for Steinbeck (or Camelot) completists only. For those who want a proper introduction to either the author or this subject, there is plenty of better places to start.
Rating: 
Summary: Another return of the king...
Review: John Steinbeck is noted for many things - The Grapes of Wrath, Of Mice and Men, East of Eden, The Pearl, Cannery Row; he won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1962 - most are not familiar with (or are unaware of) his literary life beyond novels. Steinbeck was an avid reader, reviewer, and turned the occasional time to translation. That is where this text comes in - Steinbeck had a long passion for the Arthurian legends. In 1958-59, he began the (still unfinished) task of reworking the tales of Arthur and his knights, spending time in England with the famous Winchester manuscripts of Mallory's 'Le Morte d'Arthur', and continuing his work in various stops and starts until his death in 1968. The text here is unfinished, and for some part unedited by Steinbeck; his literary heirs have kept the project more or less as Steinbeck left it. Hence, only part of the tales of Arthur are included here. Steinbeck began with primary tales that come from the first section of Mallory's text, entitled 'The Tale of King Arthur'. This tale in fact only covers the early part of Arthur's life - the search for the Holy Grail and the final battle of the death of Arthur are not included here, as they were in separate sections of Mallory's text, from which Steinbeck did not live to complete translations. This story includes the tale of Merlin, including Merlin's 'death', Uther Pendragon and the birth of Arthur, the sword-in-the-stone event, the wedding of Arthur and Guinevere, the advent and plotting of Morgan Le Fay, and tales of three knights - Gawain, Ewain, and Marhalt. From another text of Mallory's comes 'The Noble Tale of Sir Lancelot of the Lake', including the beginning part of the love affair of Lancelot and Guinevere. Steinbeck's translation is interesting and full; many renditions of Mallory's text (including the popular standard by Baines) eliminate a lot of the material to make the narrative speed along - Steinbeck does not do this. He keeps to the original in substance while recreating the world of Arthur. Steinbeck said that it was not his intention to out-do Mallory - 'I believe the stories are great enough to survive my tampering'. Choosing the Winchester manuscript over the more common Caxton one also provides a key difference between Steinbeck and Baines. A rare treat for those who enjoy the process of literary production is the appendix to this volume, compiled by his friend Chase Horton, which consists of letters to Horton and to Elizabeth Otis, Steinbeck's literary agent, from late 1956 to 1965, as Steinbeck continued this project (almost 70 pages of the correspondence is printed, including the wonderful final entry in which Steinbeck says that, even though he is excited by the Arthur project, he isn't going to show it to anyone, lest it be badly done, and he might want to destroy it!). Hail Arthur! Hail Mallory! Hail Steinbeck!
Rating:
Summary: Steinbeck's Take on Classic Tales
Review: John Steinbeck tackles Malory's "Morte d'Arthur" in modern prose here. The tales are made somewhat more linear and easy to understand, but it still helps to have a grounding in the original pieces. Many presumptions are made by the author, the most basic of which is that the reader already knows certain things about the characters. One of the minor but noteworthy things about this book is the dedication; Steinbeck dedicates the novel to his sister, whom he avers would have been a splendid knight. Read Malory first, then pick up this volume.
Rating:
Summary: Great book to read for all occasions
Review: One of my favorite John Steinbeck novels, he literally "translates" it from medieval English [middle or King James] to modern English [1930s or 1940s]. The story ends abruptly (because of Steinbeck's death?). Since there are many versions of King Arthur (with and without Merlin) and many books on King Arthur, I shouldn't complain. This book is great for high schoolers needing to do a book report.
Rating:
Summary: Magnificent
Review: The reason I liked the story wasas not just because of the fight scenes but Mr. Steinbeck put some "umph" in his characters. Alot of books based on KIng Arthur are only based on him, int this book he goes on to describe his knights (Gawin, Ewain, Marhalt and Lancelot)and the deeds that not only benifited themselves but also the name of King Arthur. The book goes on to also show what Morgan Le Faywas thinking and why she hated her brother Arthur so much.
The fight scenes in the book were awesome you didnt have to see them to know that Mr. Steinbeck has a great imangination. People being cut inhalf, beheaded and things of that nature are just a little taste of some of the good things in the book. The language was perfect and even though it was kind of difficult to understand once you read on yougot a feeling of what he meant.
I believe this is a very good book and alot of people have doubts about reading a "Fairy Tale" but when you read it and understand it its more real then you would ever believe
| 
