Tennyson's Morte D'Arthur
Moved from Poetry Reviews as general seemed a better forum for it:
Hello. I'm writing in regard to a line that greatly confuses me in the poem, where the author describes how the character of Sir Bevidere looks at Arthur "remorsefully thro' tears." This is due to his having hurled the sword Excalibur into the lake, resulting in premonitions of Arthur's death. But he only did this on the third time of asking, and only because Arthur was absolutely adamant that he ought to, having literally threatened to kill him if he didn't. In what sense could it possibly be Bevidere's fault that the act yielded such results? Why does he feel remorse?
Hello. I'm writing in regard to a line that greatly confuses me in the poem, where the author describes how the character of Sir Bevidere looks at Arthur "remorsefully thro' tears." This is due to his having hurled the sword Excalibur into the lake, resulting in premonitions of Arthur's death. But he only did this on the third time of asking, and only because Arthur was absolutely adamant that he ought to, having literally threatened to kill him if he didn't. In what sense could it possibly be Bevidere's fault that the act yielded such results? Why does he feel remorse?
4 hours ago
All I can think is that the meaning of the word has gradually altered, and that in Victorian England it simply meant general regret or sorrow, rather than self blame?
4 hours ago
I read on another forum that his remorse is for disobeying the first two times, but that doesn't make any more sense, as he obeyed the third time.
4 hours ago
Here is process of thought that taps into the deep emotional currents of Tennyson’s Morte d’Arthur. Sir Bedivere’s remorse could be less about culpability and more about the emotional reckoning that follows the dynamic of his disobedience/obedience.
He does, as you note, obey Arthur—eventually. But it’s the delay that may have weighed heavily on him. He hesitates twice, not out of defiance, but out of reverence: Excalibur is sacred, and hurling it away would feel like discarding the last relic of a world ending before his eyes. By the time he finally obeys, the act has become symbolic of finality; of Arthur's inevitable death, of the kingdom’s collapse, of the passing of an entire age of chivalry.
So when Bedivere looks “remorsefully thro’ tears,” it’s probably not guilt in the legal or moral sense but perhaps an almost maudlin grief twisted with helplessness. Could he be mourning the loss of Arthur, yes, but also mourning his own powerlessness: he couldn’t save Arthur, couldn’t stop time, couldn’t protect the blade that meant so much. The remorse is here more an ache, rather than a confession.
In that sense, his tears may be a rare and very human response: he has done everything right, and still, everything is lost. Would this view make more sense?
He does, as you note, obey Arthur—eventually. But it’s the delay that may have weighed heavily on him. He hesitates twice, not out of defiance, but out of reverence: Excalibur is sacred, and hurling it away would feel like discarding the last relic of a world ending before his eyes. By the time he finally obeys, the act has become symbolic of finality; of Arthur's inevitable death, of the kingdom’s collapse, of the passing of an entire age of chivalry.
So when Bedivere looks “remorsefully thro’ tears,” it’s probably not guilt in the legal or moral sense but perhaps an almost maudlin grief twisted with helplessness. Could he be mourning the loss of Arthur, yes, but also mourning his own powerlessness: he couldn’t save Arthur, couldn’t stop time, couldn’t protect the blade that meant so much. The remorse is here more an ache, rather than a confession.
In that sense, his tears may be a rare and very human response: he has done everything right, and still, everything is lost. Would this view make more sense?
2 hours ago