I'll just tackle this head on. Let's see if I can write my way out of this one.

This image (and others like it) from the anime Fate/Zero are what rekindled a love of Arthuriana in me that I'd once considered dead. I looked at the King of Knights and saw Arthur shining through her, and believed again. I believe still.

But I do not wish merely to be dazzled by belief—and, believe me when I say that I do feel dazzled right now. In my mind's eye, that image shines almost too bright for me to endure. And that's a problem, because I'd like Arturia to be a friend and not an idol. Hence I try to apply what analytical skills I can.

The central question: how has the Fate/ franchise managed so effectively to tap into the power of the ancient "Matter of Britain"? There's been numerous cash-ins on Arthuriana, including one of the biggest Vegas casino complexes, but Fate/ manages to find a believable and powerful emotional center. Oh of course it's "problematical", but if I started listing my problems with the "Fate/" franchise we'd be here all night. The point is: for me anyway it's worked spectacularly, to the point that I regard Arturia Pendragon as more or less equivalent to King Arthur in my head. It's like I regard this particular fictional depiction of Arthur as the prevailing one for this era of entertainment, much as Nigel Terry's or Richard Harris's depictions of Arthur were once regarded as definitive for some years.

So. What's actually going on here? Let's break it down.

"The Matter of Britain" can be said to be "historical" in a very loose sense. At least we're reasonably certain about a few of the battles that are mentioned in Arthuriana, such as the Battle of Badon and the Battle of Camlann, which are thought to have occurred in the late 5th or early 6th century C.E. Various historical figures have been proposed as models for Arthur, and various "Camelots" have been proposed. But the legend of Arthur has grown too gigantic and multitudinous for any plausible era of known history. Much of the best lore has come from French and Italian romances written many centuries after the time of the historical Arthur, if any such person ever existed.

If they did, they must have seemed like an unusually powerful and forcible warlord in the chaotic landscape of post-Roman Britain, before the Saxons et alii completely overran her. Even a decade or two of unexpected peace and stability would have seemed a golden age at a time when everything certain had crumbled. But it seems unlikely that the historical Arthur, or indeed the historical Arturia Pendragon (if I may make so bold), could have ruled over a court of miracles and magic, as Camelot has come to be depicted in the more fanciful romances about the Knights of the Round Table.

But we may perhaps imagine, running parallel to the heroic but unglamorous story of the historical Arthur (or Arturia Pendragon), the "real life" timeline, another thread: the idealized timeline, in which all the legends had miraculously been given a chance to come true, and Arturia really was the undefeated King, an eternal symbol of ideally humble monarchy. There is power in this alternate Past, this Past that never was but which could have been if the Creator had been able to realize Their vision fully (I hope you'll forgive the theism). And I suggest that this is the power we perceive in an image of King Arthur, if we're inclined to regard Arthur as a powerful symbol.

And then there's the counterbalancing alternate timeline, the negative ideal: Arthur as tyrant. But I've run out of time to write.

~Chara of Pnictogen

if only we could tap into Peridot's superior media-analysis skills (q.v. https://youtu.be/DL6sc11sgLk) ~Chara

we have a sort of fundamental problem in the Pnictogen Wing. er, that makes it sound like we only have the one problem. but this one's been a source of general trouble.

for the sake of convenience and simplicity we refer to Kris Dreemurr as our system's host, but really we're more like a human, or human-ish, trinity. The KFC gang, as it's been called. There's Kris, my older sibling Frisk (who is my literal sibling, I should add, factive and fictive both) and myself. we have been a "scalene trinity" to use Dorothy Sayers's insightful phrase, an unbalanced trio. attempting to find a better balance among each other's strengths and weaknesses is a work in progress. that, in itself, is not the "general trouble" to which I referred.

so what's wrong? generally? it's something like this: not a one of us in the KFC gang feels as though we should have any friends, certainly not friends like we've somehow managed to acquire. in our various ways I guess we all decided we weren't fit for anyone's company. I have no idea why King Arthur would condescend to us, or her son, or anyone else we admire.

~Chara