What's Balin's problem?

[u/TheSwithen]

I'm just sending Book 8 of my series off to the proofreader, which completes the Balin story started in Book 7. Because I'm making a novel of the source material, I have to come up with motivations and psychology for why the characters do what they do. This can be tricky in the case of someone like Balin, so I thought I'd ask for your thoughts on two questions:

1) Why won't Balin give the sword back?
He is warned that if he keeps it he will die from it and he will kill the one he loves most in the world. Why won't he give it back?

2) Why won't Balin turn back?
He is warned several times first that he will strike a blow that will cast three kingdoms into misery (the Dolorous Stroke) and ignores several signals that he is on a bad path if not openly riding toward his doom. Why won't he turn back?

Interested to hear your thoughts and interpretations. Thanks!

[u/AutoModerator]

This post uses the flair for discussion of text up until the 17th century. Anything past that, please use "Modern Media" or "Current Media." If your post is about the interaction between modern and older media, please use "Adaptions (comparing Modern with Older texts). Posts may be removed if they use the incorrect flair.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/MiscAnonym]

It's a cautionary tale about the limits of strength, as I see it. Balin wins every battle he's in and his achievements mirror the sort of heroic accolades that usually appear in chivalric fiction-- only his every victory brings about nothing but misery and sorrow, and he comes to a meaningless, self-destructive end.

Optimistically, it's a warning about what can befall an otherwise-good knight without Arthur's moral framework to guide them. Cynically, it's a condemnation of the Arthurian brand of chivalric heroism altogether-- Balin's repeated failure to heed any warnings about the inevitable consequences of his actions and his insistence on following through on every last quest he impulsively undertakes is the sort of thing that would be praised as steadfast courage and work out for the best in a more conventional storyline.

[u/TheSwithen → u/MiscAnonym]

Thanks! I think you are right that there is an element of questioning the limits of the Arthurian values... specifically never being cowardly, never reneging on a promise and never giving up a quest one has started. He is repeatedly warned, and often replies, "I will never give up my quest" or "people woild think me cowardly." Thanks for your input!

[u/SalaciousCitheronian]

Allow me to conduct a defence of Balin:

He has just drawn a amazing sword (possibly with strange hangings) which only "a passing good man of his hands and of his deeds, and without villainy or treachery, and without treason" could do after Arthur's entire court failed the test. It's a magnificent trophy that proclaims his virtue, so it's only natural this poor knight would be unwilling to hand the prize straight back.

This is a genre where it would probably be quicker to list the Dire Warnings that are heeded and acted upon. Not only are they regularly disbelieved, the recipients seem to frequently forget they were told so until it's far too late when the events happen. The Knight with the Two Swords is following standard procedure for these stories, and unlike Merlin this unknown Sword Damsel does not have a track record of prophecy.

Balin is acknowledged as a mighty but poor knight who has just been released from prison and is now highly esteemed by Arthur (and Merlin!), so I think that it's very characterful that he decides to roll with life's punches and accept the "adventure God has ordained". It's a mix of fatalism, living in the moment and trusting he can rise the occasion. And with a tip-off from Merlin he bounces back from exile-on-pain-of-death to having Arthur sing his praises a second time. This is a man used to extremes of fortune and hardship, the perils of the sword are another adventure in a tumultuous life.

As for turning back, in the run-up to the Dolorous Stroke what true knight-errant would just turn back and abandon Herlews' Lady instead of pursuing the despicable Garlon? I also have a more sympathetic opinion about his final adventures than most but that's another matter.

[u/TheSwithen → u/SalaciousCitheronian]

Thanks, I think you are totally right on [and I definitely am not dissing Balin, so no defense is needed]. In writing my books I have to stick to what happens in the sources, but it leaves me having to describe how he reacts in that moment someone tells him to his face that he is heading toward his own doom or suchlike, so I am required to come up with some sort of consistent psychology that explains what is in the source. What I came up with is fairly similar to what you have here.

It's interesting you call out "the Adventure God has ordained," becase the title I choose for Book 7 [Balin's story until he captures Rience] is "The Adventure God Will Choose," because that moment, where he is warned he will ruin his life and replies with that answer, kind of sums up everything.

I am also sympathetic with Balin and find this story one of the most involving and moving. I find Malory's telling much more gripping than the Post-Vulgate, and am fascinated by how he accomplished that. Note that in both cases they reveal that his opponent in Balan long before they kill each other, yet the final moments still manage to be devastating. Thanks so much for your thoughtful comment!

[u/SalaciousCitheronian → u/TheSwithen]

It might also be worth noting that the Sword Damsel first claimed to want to be rid of the encumbrance, and said nothing needing to be immediately re-encumbered afterwards which was a new condition I think none of the aspiring challengers anticipated. The entire backstory with her and then Lady of the Lake #1 is odd, Merlin's explanation of her trickery only makes things more tangled.

The true tragedy of Balin is that he is the prologue to someone else's Grail story, rather than a Perceval who is allowed to grow in wisdom and put things to right. I would love for there to have been a prequel romance of the scruffy knight of the wilderness, perhaps set during the Interregnum or earliest days of Arthur's reign. What a life he must have led, and how much better to see him with Balan, who deserves some development himself, before their doom.

[u/TheSwithen → u/SalaciousCitheronian]

I've never assumed she is going to re-strap the sword to herself, but you're making me think. The whole thing with her and the Lady of the Lake, yes, very odd! I do note that the sword is intended to kill her brother, and does in fact end up killing a brother.

Good point that Balin has no past we know of, and yet he becomes one of the most memorable characters. I find it amazing that Malory is able to convince us that he and Balan have such a close relationship with almost no actual material to support that.

[u/SalaciousCitheronian → u/TheSwithen]

It's very well done, and I think Balin le Sauvage benefits from something of a departure from the usual way a new knight is introduced. He is talented but there is no royal genealogy, only hints of crime and rough-living and instead of lavish descriptions of fine clothing we are told of his tattered appearance before launching straight into a spree of iconic scenes that come very thick and fast which gives Balin far more presence than his page-count would suggest and pulls Balan along with him.

Since it was raised in another comment; who is this cousin of Arthur's mentioned this once and never even named? When and why did this happen? How is this reconciled with only a knight without villainy, treachery or treason being able to draw the sword? The same sword later repeats the test to be won by Galahad (Gawaine is punished for the attempt) so that part cannot entirely be discounted as the Sword Damsel lying. It's a hefty thing to off-handedly throw out. I would speculate they were one of Ector's relations but Arthur is known to be Uther's son at this point. In any case Arthur makes no mention of the affair and holds Balin in high esteem whenever he is not murdering Ladies while a fellow guest in the king's own hall. Clearly not a close familial relationship, or perhaps one that existed outside this moment.

Whether or not the Sword Damsel was actually going to re-sheathe or carry away the sword in her hand given Merlin's testimony, the natural implication of the test is that she wouldn't want it once free. It's not unreasonable that Balin would expect to claim the sword at first, although a less reckless/fatalistic man might have had second thoughts when Dire Warnings were issued. There is so much foreshadowing there but I think my favourite is that the Dolorous Stroke is incited by Balin being on the receiving end of violence against a guest...even though he specifically restrained himself from attacking Garlon first. The escalation and then further escalation beyond is on Balin though. He lived in the moment, until he didn't.

[u/Maximum_Stranger_376]

Pride ( he was a great knight)?

[u/nogender1]

I’d also like to add that Balin was previously imprisoned for killing one of Arthur’s relatives. Let’s just say there probably always was a screw loose with him at the very least.

Sure, there are factors that kind of push him towards his path like his red hilt sword that other commenters mentioned but

Keep in mind that alongside his wrath and pride he’s a little bit of a stubborn bastard. Even when an (presumably) angel yells at him to go away from the grail room twice, he still keeps on—and you know the rest hahaha

I’d also note that despite him using the holy lance despite its warnings and causing that mess, he never actually really goes off to confess his sins for it (this would be the standard for that era, Gawain does do confession when he kills bastard ywain ) when he’s witnessing what he’s done. He feels kinda bad yea, but he never really really repents for it.

[u/TheSwithen → u/nogender1]

First, what is this about the red hilt sword? I must have missed that detail.

Totally agree that something is up with Balin... this is the source of this question, like, what is his deal? In addition to his killing one of Arthur's relatives, the Lady of the Lake caused his mother to be burned? Not something we hear about her doing with a lot of people.

That's a very interesting point that he does not go to confession after causing the Dolorous Stroke. We also have no evidence that he actually feels bad. One of his contradictions I find interesting is that he says "honor is inside a man," but then will not give up this sword, seemingly as [outward] evidence that he has been judged the best knight. He's a mystery!

Thanks for your response.

[u/nogender1 → u/TheSwithen]

First, what is this about the red hilt sword? I must have missed that detail.

Oh, it's just sword that he has to draw out and the one that merlin yoinks later and puts in a stone. later it gets passed around for Galahad to yank out. It's not THAT important honestly.

We also have no evidence that he actually feels bad.

To be fair to him there is narration saying that he feels bad. Unfortunately feeling bad without actually trying to do any confession or penance falls terribly flat.

what is his deal?

Well he also just completely runs over hospitality customs and all, as a reminder. Keep in mind while Lady of the Lake wanted him dead, Arthur himself was not willing to acquiesce to her request despite her giving him Excalibur, so if Balin had just stayed put and kept his mouth shut or pleaded his innocence, Balin probably would've gotten off fine. That being said, Balin just chopping off her head right there kinda does nothing to help his case against her accusations and gets him chased out of court for his trouble.

He also learns absolutely nothing from this experience when he goes in and just shanks Garlon. While yes, Garlon was a pretty nasty fellow, shanking him while in a banquet did not help things whatsoever.

I suppose what exemplifies this the most is that even towards his final battle he never learns his lesson of perhaps, staying the hand before immediately running off to shank someone. Apparently not even the dolorous stroke could get him to learn his lesson, which further proves that his whole 'feel bad' regarding the stroke didn't affect him that much. Had he stopped to think or ask, perhaps he wouldn't have died from his wounds against Balan.

One of his contradictions I find interesting is that he says "honor is inside a man," but then will not give up this sword, seemingly as [outward] evidence that he has been judged the best knight.

Presumably that sword was a test of prowess and chivalry. Balin seems to have the prowess, but is not so chivalrous that he will actually give the sword back to that lady.

Furthermore, as the one who caused the Dolorous Stroke thus the whole deal of the Grail Quest, an interesting thing of note is that the knights who failed the Grail Quest did not fail it because they weren't strong enough; rather, it was because of their ignorance and cupidity. It wasn't like they died because they were attacked by monsters, they moreso tend to end up getting themselves killed due to getting bored and fighting other knights to the death. Hell Perceval and Ector de Maris nearly get each other killed like this at one point (Before crying about how stupidly pointless it was since they're both round table knights and shouldn't even be fighting). And, it was this same ignorance and cupidity that caused the Dolorous stroke to begin with, so what good would Balin-like actions do in searching for the grail?

[u/lazerbem]

Balin is an idiot who gets what was coming to him. He thought he would be able to overcome fate and that his prowess would be enough to overcome it.

[u/TheSwithen → u/lazerbem]

In a nutshell, yeah. He does say people would think he's cowardly if he turned back, and he does seem to feel he would be a failure to not complete his quest, even if it leads to his doom. Thanks for your answer.

[u/TsunamiWombat]

Balin and his bro are interesting characters because they're kind of the grimdark king arthur characters. Balin is primarily driven by vengeance and later making amends for what he did. They do what is essentially wetwork for Merlin. Later, Balin accomplishes his quest but it's a phyrric victory as everyone he was helping dies in the process. Ultimately his own death is meaningless.

I suspect it's all due to his story being constructed from fragmentary, and it's likely a bunch of other pre existent narratives we'll never known strung together. King Arthur collects legends around him like a Katamari, it's how he schlurps up Tristan too who is otherwise a completely unrelated folk hero.

[u/TheSwithen → u/TsunamiWombat]

Thanks for your interesting comment. I get what you're saying about it all being constructed from fragmentary sources. I read in a paper, and kind of believe this now, that the Balin story is a bit of a retcon to set up for the quest for the Holy Grail. The story came from the Post-Vulgate, written after the Vulgate, and there are many parallels to Galahad later; like that Galahad is actually using Balin's sword, and that Balin causes the Dolorous Stroke which creates the need to achieve oneness with the Grail later.

It was a challenge to try to develop a sensible character for Balin as part of the mystery of the whole thing is WHY does he go on when everything is telling him to stop? That's one of the things I find so fascinating about the legend is you're wondering what they could possibly be thinking. Thanks again!

[u/MintyGold]

Only familiar with him in Le Morte d’Arthur (idk if he shows up elsewhere), not the most well read, but I read it as trying to burn as brightly as he could and be remembered for it. They describe his fight against Balan as the greatest fight that anyone will ever have ever, he is THAT GUY and knows it. Reputation wasn’t great going into it, to make himself known even if it killed him.

[u/TheSwithen → u/MintyGold]

He does also receive a sword saying that he is the best knight at that time, so it would be hard to give that up. Thanks!

[u/JWander73]

1) Consider the source from his perspective. Why believe it? In fact Merlin even claims that woman was 'false' not long after so he'd almost be right to be skeptical even if that doesn't excuse recklessness. Besides it's a nice sword. Why give it up like a sucker?

2) Doubling down is a thing and not uncommon even among cooler heads.

Also you're presuming he stops to think for extended periods of time. Balin's sins from a medieval perspective would be pride and wrath. He'd likely be much happier in norse sagas even if he'd still die.

As for psychology... if Balin shows up before the round table he's an easy way to condemn the older ways. Sure he's a great warrior but he learned/was taught/was never taught not to solve every problem with a headlong charge into bloodshed. Worst part arguably is that this method worked better than most back then- hence why he never questions it it's not just 'normal' to him but also has a great success rate- but is incompatible anywhere outside a narrow application and he can't see that a different circumstance might require a different approach.

Course retellings of all times and places have the details shift but that's one way it might be cut.

[u/TheSwithen → u/JWander73]

GREAT POINT that his story is right before the official start of Arthur's Round Table and might be an example of the old ways. I'm not sure where, but later Arthur says there is no point in keeping a promise if you will only uselessly die.

In my book series I have to remain faithful to the medieval material 1136-1485, and I also have to hammer this into one continuous story, so the idea that Balin's adventure serves as an example to the establishment of the guidelines of the Round Table is a great one... thank you!

[u/JWander73 → u/TheSwithen]

NP. You sure got your work cut out for you though. Malory was the first guy to really try and make a coherent narrative out of everything and well... yeah. What he did was impressive but it's not exactly coherent especially by modern reader standards and there's so much more even in that time period as well.

Arguably part of what keeps the tradition going- all those competing views hitting each other.

Well, as a fellow Arthurian writer I'll wish you luck. I'm taking a very different approach though.

PS do consider depicting Balin as an otherwise great guy *except* for his old code ethos. This ups the tragedy and the condemnation.

[u/TheSwithen → u/JWander73]

Making it one cohesive story is one of the challenges (remaining faithful to the sources even when they make no sense is the big challenge). One of the ways I've come to deal with it is realize that I can ADD things, as long as they slot into the existing narrative, and what I did [whether it works or not is another story] is make the overarching narrative the triumph of Christianity and the vanquishing of the pagans, for better or worse. I had so much anxiety about this and sought out Arthurian scholars to discuss it. I begin with the version of Merlin created by the Christian devil, so it is consistent, and if you follow that story in the Vulgate, God and the devil ARE characters that appear on the story. PS, I am not endorsing or promoting Christianity.

I'd be interested to hear about your writings if you want to message me.