colleendoran: To those who are freaking out: yes GALAAD in the CHIVALRY graphic novel is CORRECT, th
colleendoran: To those who are freaking out: yes GALAAD in the CHIVALRY graphic novel is CORRECT, the original spelling of the name in the 1st appearance of Sir Galahad in The Vulgate. It was changed in later legends to Galahad. Neil chose to use the original GALAAD spelling in Chivalry.No, it is not a big scary typo we made throughout the book because we don’t know anything about King Arthur. Both Galahad and Galaad are correct and are both used in canonical Arthurian texts.If you really knew all that and the chips about King Arthur, you’d be complaining the hero of the book wasn’t named Perlesvaus…just kidding.The earliest Grail legends did not feature Galahad at all: he doesn’t appear until the 12-13th centuries. Sir Percival (Perlesvaus) was the original Grail knight, and in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival, the Grail is a Stone, an aside in CHIVALRY everyone misses.French poet Robert de Boron cemented the Grail in Christian myth and legend by adding Joseph of Arimathea and the Crucifixion to the tale, but he returned Percival to his place as Grail knight. Mallory borrowed from Boron, and then replaced Percival with Galahad again.I think we’re going to have to subtitle this book “Where’s the ‘H’?”He lost it in the 13th century. Hardehar.So anyway, remember in an early version of the tale the Grail is a stone. And no spoilers here, but think about that for a minute when you read CHIVALRY. It will make you smile.There are so many clever, subtle moments in Neil’s writing, but this one is my favorite.Also, “I could OF gone for him,” is also correct, and in Neil’s original manuscript. It is a colloquialism because Marie doesn’t use proper English. It’s on purpose. That’s how she speaks. -- source link