becomes, like the wounded King Pelles, another ectype of the Divine King [Christ] wounded on Calvary" (Williams and the Arthuriad 150).
Lewis called "privatism" (Williams and the Arthuriad 188).
his various references to Williams's perfect marriage), thought one poem autobiographical, calling "The Founding of the Company" (RSS 34-38) "the most autobiographical element in the cycle" (Williams and the Arthuriad 141)--and, incidentally, using it as his model for the community at St.
20) The failure of Williams's Arthuriad lies not just in factors like its inversion of the Arthurian story to move the Grail from the periphery to its core or its remote and unsatisfactory Arthur but in precisely this: characters do things in the cycle not because that furthers the story Williams is purportedly trying to tell (and which Lewis was so diligent in trying to extract from the published poems) but because they are thus acting out their appointed roles in his private myth, recreating the events of his life as they should have been.
Judged by these criteria, he believes that Williams's Arthuriad "abounds and even excels" in the first category, 'Wisdom' (193); that although marred by too much sprung rhythm Williams "produced word music equalled by only two or three in this century and surpassed by none" (194-195); and that he excels at 'Strength of Incantation,' so much so that like it or not, his explicitly Christian, Grail-centric Arthurian world is like a taste you can't get out of your mouth (198)--an unfortunate analogy, I think, but Lewis's point is that Williams's conception of the grail is so compelling that even atheists reading these poems would find themselves deeply moved by Williams's inclusive vision of Christianity therein.
Second, I strongly recommend you not follow Lewis's advice in Williams & the Arthuriad (96), where he advocated interweaving poems from the two main books (Taliessin through Logres and The Region of the Summer Stars) into the sequence of events in Arthur's reign, its internal chronology.