Eric Idle Explains How ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’ Was Autobiographical
It’s certainly not uncommon for filmmakers to tell autobiographical stories in their work, such as how Steven Spielberg has used dinosaurs, aliens, ancient Biblical relics and aliens a few more times to process his parents’ divorce.
One movie that most people likely don’t tend to think of as autobiographical is Monty Python and the Holy Grail. After all, it’s not like any of the Pythons ever survived any bovine catapult attacks or bloodthirsty bunny rabbit skirmishes.
But an autobiographical reading of The Holy Grail has just been floated — and not by some unhinged fan, but by Eric Idle.
Don't Miss
In a new interview with The New Yorker, Idle chatted about a number of different topics, including his apparent financial difficulties, and the state of his relationship with fellow Python John Cleese (not so shockingly, it’s “poor”). But much of the discussion was focused on Idle’s upcoming tour, as well as his newest book, The Spamalot Diaries, which is all about the making of his Tony Award-winning musical adaptation of Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
In the book, Idle discusses the process of reconsidering the 1975 film while making Spamalot, which led him to appreciate it from a whole new perspective. “On a positive note, I did realize this morning that (Monty Python and the Holy Grail) is essentially about the Pythons: each knight’s character is a reflection of our own.”
He expanded on this theory during the interview, explaining that each Knight essentially mirrors the personality of the Python playing them: “John Cleese is Lancelot, and he’s violent and keeps smashing people to bits. Michael Palin has got an eye for the girls, but he mustn’t do that. I’m Sir Robin, a friend of the musicians. Terry Jones is Bedevere: a bit batty, with odd theories. And Gilliam’s a kind of daft Patsy.”
Idle makes a good point, each character does seem to encompass exaggerated aspects of each Python member. It’s also probably worth noting that, in a few cases, these personality traits are tested as the Knights attempt to work together toward the common goal of finding the Grail. For instance, Cleese, who has admitted to having a history of Basil Fawlty-like anger issues, plays Lancelot, who unnecessarily massacres the residents of an entire castle.
Expanding on Idle’s theory slightly, the Grail quest could then be seen as a metaphor for the entire Monty Python project. The Knights/Pythons assemble as a team, work together on a project, but it ends prematurely. In The Holy Grail, King Arthur is nabbed by the cops before he can finish his quest. Monty Python’s Flying Circus also ended somewhat anticlimactically: Cleese bailed on the show after the third series wrapped, and the fourth lasted for only six episodes.
Idle didn’t mention Graham Chapman in his explanation, but it’s possibly not a coincidence that Chapman, a severe alcoholic at the time, who famously couldn’t remember any of lines during filming, plays Arthur, who messes up the simple instructions for what to say before throwing the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch.
What all of this says about the Pythons’ feelings about the nation of France is up to interpretation.
You (yes, you) should follow JM on Twitter (if it still exists by the time you’re reading this).
