A review by cadvalon
King Arthur by Norma Lorre Goodrich

1.0

One of the worst pieces of arthuriana I've ever read, a a hodgepodge of poorly constructed sentences, bad etymology and erratic reasoning. Her theory in the end is based on a totally idiosyncratic reading of Geoffrey of Monmouth and those texts that she can force to fit with her theories, ignoring or despising or ignoring as "wrong" those that do not . When she wants, she eliminates an element of a tale because it is "pure folkloric non sense" but when he is interested she uses those clearly folkloric elements, out of context, as an argument for her theory.