A review by smuds2
Lancelot by Percy, Walker Percy

slow-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? Character
• Strong character development? No
• Loveable characters? No
• Diverse cast of characters? No
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

I liked The Moviegoer significantly more than this one, and at least Lover in the Ruins had a certain sci-fi-esque vibe going for it as an interesting setting for intrigue.

I liked the framing scenes of the inner story. I thought that as a device was, at least, gripping. Referring to Percival as "you" as if talking to us, the reader, seems a simple trick for engagement but it worked.

Maybe it's the Ace in me, but Walker Percy using sex relations as the basis of depravity just feels so... old-man-book to me. It's just so un-interesting of a point IMO to use sexual ambiguity as a way of saying "the 60's left us with no black and white, and only gray! It's horrible and leads to mans loss of meaning!" or something. Like ugh.

Also, the categorization of Anna as "pure by way of being broken" is screwed on so many levels.

I think it's a bit difficult framing Lancelot - is he a soap box for Percy? Almost certainly not. But it doesn't quite feel right to say that Lancelot is the unfortunate inevitable side project of the imperfect liberal gains of the 60's. Like, are we supposed to take it to say "It sure is sad that we are all going to be forced to look at the world the same way lance does"? I'm not sure.

I think the best way to view Lancelot is to see him as like, photo-jam Dipper. He's kind of this weird mutant creature created by the half-promises, stifled gains, and excesses of his time. I just find it so difficult to think that Lancelot is the inevitable end-goal, and if he's not inevitable, what lessons can we learn from him

Overall, I would not read this again.