Log in

No account? Create an account
Negotiating the Boundaries of Legend, or, yes Merlin pays close attention to Arthurian Legend - Icarus [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Painfully perky

[ website | Icarus.Slash.Fiction ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Icarus Fanfiction| Harry Potter . Stargate SG-1 . Stargate Atlantis . ]
[Archive Of Our Own| Icarus (log in for all fics) ]
[Other| Essays on Writing Magic, Battles, and Other Oddities . Fanfiction Recs . The SGA Project: "Flavor of the Year 2006" ]

Negotiating the Boundaries of Legend, or, yes Merlin pays close attention to Arthurian Legend [Dec. 8th, 2008|12:12 pm]
Painfully perky
[Tags|, ]
[mood |chipperchipper]
[music |Musica Irlandesa - celtic - celtic guitar]

I've been hearing all over the Merlin fandom how Merlin tramples the Arthurian legend into dust -- "but we don't care! We love it anyway!"

Well. Ahem. I just finished my Arthurian Lit class.

I'd like to call into question first the idea that there's "one" Arthurian legend. Second, certainly the BBC's Merlin tramples Malory's popular Morte d'Arthur, yes, but it returns to a 10th 1100s, i.e., the 12th century (Sigh. I do this all the time with dates.) Arthurian text, Geoffrey of Monmouth, where Uther raises Arthur, and then runs from there. The BBC's writers show a familiarity with a breadth of Arthurian texts as they remake the legend.

If you're going to depart from the legend, you'd better know what you're doing. And they do.

The Cliff's Notes version:

- There are lots of versions of Arthur, going back to the 5th century or so.
- Malory is getting flattened here, no doubt. That's the one we know.
- The writers have gone back to an earlier (and historically more influential) version of the legend: Geoffrey of Monmouth, 10th 1100s, i.e., the 12th century. Sigh. I do this all the time with dates.
- From there they take off from a discrepancy between Malory and Geoffrey: did Uther raise his son or was Arthur orphaned? Malory says orphaned. Geoffrey says Uther raised him till age 15.
- Then they mix together all the gazillions of versions of Arthur in a soup and serve it up every week.
- Why do this? The element of surprise. (And they may be showing off. ;)

Negotiating the Boundaries of Legend

Every storyteller runs into a snag when they attempt to retell a well-known legend: the reader already knows the ending. Narrative tension is lost. For Geoffrey of Monmouth, Wace, and La3aman this posed no difficulty. Familiarity helped create plausibility for their histories and translations of histories. Storytellers like Marie de France, Chretien, and the Gawaine poet avoid the problem by setting their narratives in Arthur's court, drawing in the reader, while focusing on Gawaine or Yvain or Erec as the hero. The reader can genuinely fear for Gawaine's life in Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight as the ax descends since he is not the once and future king (Gawaine 2260). Most modern interpretations rely on the popularity of the name "King Arthur" combined with a fuzzy familiarity with the legend. The 1981 film Excalibur returns to Malory's grotesquerie to shock viewers who vaguely expect chivalry of the round table. T. H. White adds an entire book on the youth of the orphaned Arthur, fills it with modern concerns, before returning to the legend. Likewise Bradley's The Mists of Avalon shifts to a woman's perspective for a modern feminist view, while also following Malory's accepted plot.

The BBC's new series Merlin takes a whimsical new tack: the writers cut the legs out from under the legend altogether so the audience no longer knows where they stand.

Within the first episode, Merlin is the same age as Arthur, Uther is alive during Prince Arthur's youth, Guinevere is a blacksmith's daughter and servant to Morgana—who is not Arthur's sister at all but Uther Pendragon's ward. Who knows? Perhaps Arthur won't even become king. Through such radical changes, five key touchstones of Malory's Morte d' Arthur, 1) kingship through drawing the sword from the stone, 2) Arthur establishing the round table, 3) marrying Guinevere and being cuckolded with Lancelot, 4) the treason of Mordred, and 5) Arthur's departure for Avalon, are undermined within a few episodes. Even if all five still occur, the story must unfold differently. Far from ignoring the popular Malory version, the writers count on its familiarity, toying with audience expectations. Essential foreshadowing in the series—such as the unexpected identity of Mordred as a druid whose people have been executed by Uther—couldn't be as effective if the viewer didn't know the original plot.

Have you ever blown a bubble within another soap bubble? It is a delicate task to build a story within another story, touching at certain junctures while ignoring others. Ignore too many and the believability for the audience will collapse. Keep too many, and the new story will be absorbed into the old. The tension between the two stories will be lost. More than just a new narrative, an additional subtle layer of tension between the old and the new story is created. This tension develops from expectations fulfilled, deviated from, and unfulfilled.

It is this tension between a master narrative and a sub narrative that marks the difference between a simple singular story (or novel), and an epic. Epics are not one story, although one version might take hold of the popular imagination: epics are a multiplicity. As the many variations of Arthur's legend attest, such master narrative-subnarrative tension is by no means new. Tolkien called it the "web of story," not a surprising perspective from a student of epics.

Thus the myriad versions of Arthurian myth are only deviations from an original if viewed (inappropriately) with the novelist's eye, seeking one Writer (or perhaps, Writer) for one Definitive Text (Definitive Text). These settle like a happy snowflake on Malory as the Definitive Text by virtue of his popularity, or perhaps skip back to Geoffrey of Monmouth as the Original Writer, missing the point of epics altogether. Does one imagine that Arthurian storytellers repeated their tales by rote, only altering them through faulty memory and happenstance? The very fact that variation continues to breed demonstrates the legend of King Arthur is still a living epic.

Whether the listeners, readers, or viewers accept the new variation, however, is a matter of skill. Marie de France's technique of exploring new narratives within Arthur's court is far less dangerous than breaking with the original plot. By departing from the story, the Merlin series first must find new touchstones to tie it to Arthurian myth for it to ring true.

Ringing True

The BBC's Merlin situates itself in Arthurian canon by returning to Geoffrey of Monmouth's version. In Geoffrey, Arthur is raised by Uther until age fifteen (Monmouth 208, 212). This narrative strategy opens fertile new ground (since Geoffrey tells us nothing of Arthur's childhood), wipes the slate clean of Malory's orphaned Arthur (Malory 13), while reminding purists of drastic differences between existing canonical texts. Checkmate. Merlin consciously signals its source by placing Geoffrey as a character, an historian, within the series.

Geoffrey's themes furthermore flavor and underpin Merlin. Prophesy and destiny is the overarching theme, quite unlike Arthur's deserved fall as written by the fallen knight, Malory, or the theme of courtly love found in Marie de France. The dragon under Vortigern's castle (Uther's castle in Merlin) is still the source of prophesy, but rather than a portent read by the boy Merlin (Monmouth 171), Geoffrey's version is inverted, and a dragon gives prophecies to the boy Merlin. Geoffrey's repeated concern for the people (particularly the Britons) permeates the new series, leaving behind Chretien and Malory's fixation on knights and aventure. In texts like Chretien's, the peasants only appear as "rough common folk," a "mob" that is forced to retreat by a count's switch (Chretien, Erec 11). The series rings true to the populist spirit of Geoffrey while lending a new flavor for those used to Malory's knights errant.

Multivalent details from a variety of Arthurian sources then knit the series into the myth. Some are lifted directly, others mixed and rewritten. A poisoned well in the second episode is right out of Geoffrey, where a poisoned well kills Uther (Monmouth 211). In Merlin, the faeries of La3man (La3man 247) who bestow tecosca (blessings) and gessi (curses), abide in Avalon, where they can bestow immortality, for a price. Their attempted ritual sacrifice of Arthur reformulates the attempted sacrifice of Merlin in Geoffrey (Monmouth 167) and the Historia Brittonum (Historia Brittonum 30). A poisoned silver chalice from Malory that nearly kills the young Tristan makes an appearance in episode three, where it nearly kills the young Arthur. In Geoffrey, an assassin disguised as a physician kills Aurelius (Monmouth 200), while in the sixth episode of Merlin, a dangerous sorcerer, Myrddin (the name itself a reference to Welsh versions of Merlin) disguised as a physician attempts to kill Uther. Throughout the series, Merlin himself hides as an assistant to the court physician who is also a former sorcerer. Merlin's writers toy with the audience's knowledge that Uther dies young, dangling possible deaths by poison and by sorcery, then drawing him back from the brink.

Borrowed details are not enough to create a convincing Arthurian atmosphere, as they could easily seem superficial, a "triteness" of appropriation tacked on like glitter (Tolkien 58). Merlin helps convince the reader by borrowing details with attention to their original context.

Broader patterns in medieval legend, such as the three tests of a warrior's mettle, appear in Merlin's eleventh episode. Arthur is tested three times for knightly virtues such as generosity, mercy, and self-sacrifice. He fails the test of humility and nearly fails the quest. In episode nine the knight Tristan, who appears in Malory if not Geoffrey, is brought back from the dead. He rides into the castle to challenge Uther's knights -- much as the Green Knight does in Sir Gawaine and the Green Night. Like the Green Knight, he cannot be killed (Gawaine 444).

Both the undead Tristan in Merlin and the magical Green Knight in Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight represent penance for past mistakes and failings (Gawaine 2392). Gawaine must pay for his overconfidence in dealing the deadly blow to the Green Knight and for cheating to save his own life. Teasing out one element, the knight in Merlin who accepts the challenge is overconfident. But the deeper ethical context of Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight regarding the relationship between honor and pragmatism – can a knight be chivalrous when he greedily protects his own life at cost to his principles? (Gawaine 2374) – also appear in the Merlin episode. Uther must pay for having killed his brother-in-law Tristan although Tristan challenged him, blaming Uther for the death of his sister Ygerna. Uther's victory is bitter and unjust, because ultimately his selfish desire for a son was responsible for his wife's death. But is Uther responsible for either death? Arguing for Gawaine-esque pragmatism, Uther insists he was forced to fight Tristan or else die himself, and that he did not know the sorcery used to guarantee a son would kill his wife. Yet Uther cheated his fate and like Gawaine, must face the ignoble truth.

The combination of Uther and wrongful sorcery reaches deep into Arthurian myth, reminding the audience of the sorcery that led to Arthur's conception in Geoffrey, Geoffrey's translators, and Malory (Malory 13), when Uther disguised himself as Gorlois, Ygerna's husband, in order to sleep with her (Monmouth 207). Although the story of Arthur's conception is different, Uther and Uther's motivations, his passionate pursuit of his own desires at the expense of others and willingness to dismiss the consequences as necessary pragmatism, remains intact. Unlike Gawaine (Gawaine 2375), Uther blames others for his mistakes and sets out to destroy the very sorcerers who helped him bring about his downfall. By the end of the season Uther is almost universally hated.

To What End?

For a new Arthurian narrative to avoid seeming spurious, it must fill (one might say exploit) a gap in the existing story. Not add something new and out of place but draw out what is suggested already. One might say Wace's round table (Wace 245) was already present in the equality of the nobles of King Arthur's court. Arthur's even-handed generosity is essential to his characterization since Geoffrey (Monmouth 212). The symbol merely needed to be revealed.

Buried in the subtext of Monmouth is a question: how is it that Arthur, raised by Uther Pendragon, is so different from his father? Geoffrey of Monmouth does not account for the radical differences between a man who pursued the wife of his Duke, remorselessly starting a war, and the young man who unites the kingdom. For Geoffrey, and the BBC's dragon in Merlin, it's a matter of Arthur's destiny. For the modern reader, fate is an insufficient explanation. People are not created in the image of Aristotle's pure forms but have some hand in shaping their fate.

Thus the most radical departure of Merlin: the character Merlin himself, who vacillates between fate, personal ethics, and human failings. In no prior variation is Merlin a contemporary of Arthur. In Geoffrey, Merlin gives prophesies to Vortigern, helps Aurelius then Uther, and appears no more. Here the series draws upon Malory's Merlin who remains by Arthur's side throughout his life, while melding him with the boy prodigy Merlin who appears in Geoffrey (Monmouth 167). Yet changes to Merlin make little difference because Merlin everywhere is used as machinae. He fulfills Uther's desires (Monmouth 207), resolves Arthur's heritage (Malory 13), and in Merlin, saves Arthur's life time and again. Yet the BBC's Merlin is young, his magic not yet reliable, and right or wrong, he makes decisions of his own. This characterization strikes a balance between the wild Welsh Myrddin Monmouth drew upon (as referenced by the town of "Kaermerdin," Monmouth 167) and the unearthly prophet of "The Prophecies of Merlin" (Monmouth 171-185) by reimagining Merlin as a boy growing into wisdom.

Navigating Modern Politics

The BBC's boy Merlin negotiates the differences between the modern world and the medieval. Much as Geoffrey in the tenth twelfth century revisualized the fifth century Arthurian culture from tales like Culhwch and Olwen, where Arthur is a chieftain of a large band of warriors (Culhwch and Olwen 34), Merlin bridges tenth twelfth and twenty-first century sensibilities.

Characters are drawn with complexities familiar from the "realism" of the novel. Arthur struggles to balance his own sense of justice with his father's vendetta against sorcery. Merlin takes Geoffrey's plea on behalf of his Britons a step further as a plea for modern democratic equality, emphasizing the gulf between the noble and peasant when Lancelot is not permitted to join Uther's knights due to his peasant birth. Themes of prejudice (against sorcerers and the like) are added to the mix and emphasized by casting a black actress as Guinevere, while a feminist reading is also taken into account when the audience learns that Morgana used to defeat Arthur in weapons practice.

However, the most notably modern element is an elision. Christianity, so central in the Arthurian legend with Malory's rendition of the grail quest and ever-present monks and bishops in Geoffrey, is markedly absent in the BBC series. A bishop isn't even found in the background of Arthur's coronation as heir apparent. It's a perplexing absence until one realizes that the Archibishop of Canterbury would have side with Uther in the prejudiced vendetta against sorcery. This would pit the church against both the protagonist, Merlin, and the hero, Arthur, an awkward and politically fraught position. The current Pope has already decried Harry Potter. Far safer to pit Merlin and Arthur against a beloved but ruthlessly pragmatic king. While an essential flavor of authentic medieval society is sadly missing—a lack more anachronistic than the presence of tomatoes—Merlin has deftly navigated the shoals of a modern interpretation.

Works Cited

Chretien de Troyes. Erec and Enide.
La3amon. Brut.
Malory, Sir Thomas. Le Morte d'Arthur.
Marie de France. The Lais, translated by Robert Hanning and Joan Ferrante, Baker Academic, (c) 1978.
Monmouth, Geoffrey. The History of the Kings of Britain, translated by Lewis Thorpe, Penguin Books, (c) 1966.
Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight, edited and translated by James Winny, Broadview, (c) 1992.
The Romance of Arthur, edited by James J. Wilhelm, Garland Publishing, Inc., (c) 1994.
Tolkien, J. R. R. The Tolkien Reader, Curtis Publishing Co., (c) 1966.
Wace. Le Roman de Brut.

My apologies for not being available for much comment. Of course I write this sort of thing when I'm hopelessly busy. I hope it's not too dry. Also, forgive that I haven't italicized all the text names. I'm in the middle of finals and probably shouldn't be posting this at all.

ETA: Sorry about the dates. I'm forever calling the 1100s the "tenth" century. It's the twelfth, yes, yes it is. (And to think I've a history minor.)

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
[User Picture]From: ras_elased
2008-12-08 08:10 pm (UTC)
I am ridiculously excited that you've just finished an Arthurian lit class and used your newfound knowledge to talk about the Arthurian legend in Merlin, and I REALLY want to read it, but it'll have to wait until I'm not frantically cramming for finals (and taking 5 minute breathers on LJ to preserve my sanity) but I will definitely come back to check this out later!!!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:33 pm (UTC)
It would be great to knock out a few misconceptions about Merlin early.

To boil it down:

- There are lots of versions of Arthur.

- Malory is getting flattened here, no doubt, and that's the one we know.

- The writers have gone back to an earlier (and historically more influential) version of the legend: Geoffrey of Monmouth, 10th century.

- From there they're taking off from a discrepancy between Malory and Geoffrey: did Uther raise his son, or was Arthur orphaned? Malory says orphaned. Geoffrey says Uther raised him till age 15.

- Then they mix together all the versions of Arthur in a soup and serve it.

- Why do this? The element of surprise.

I think that's it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: acari
2008-12-08 08:16 pm (UTC)
Hi. I just stumbled across this. I don't have time to comment really, but would you mind me linking to this in merlin_meta? This post is exactly the stuff I created the community for.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:22 pm (UTC)
Oh, that's point of the essay. Please do.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: linaerys
2008-12-08 08:30 pm (UTC)
This makes some excellent points--the very tension that annoys some people because it's not the "real" legend, is what is going to keep this story interesting for people who know the legends well. On the other hand, people who say it "tramples all over established legend" aren't wrong, but it's the reason the show works, not a flaw.

Will Morgana turn out to be Arthur's half sister? Will that role be filled by a Morgause we have yet to meet? Or will they leave that part of the legend behind (quite likely given it's a family show)?

Will Nimueh trap Merlin? Will Nimueh somehow become Merlin's student, or will that be Morgana? Will Morgana go evil, or at least become an opposing force? I sure hope so, but you're right--all these questions is why the show can hold our attention.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:40 pm (UTC)
And something I didn't bring out in the essay:

It's what the Arthurian legends already do. They are wildly different from each other. And not even remotely historically accurate. Really, there were no knights in full armor during the period the hero "Arthur" would have lived.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: lexstar29
2008-12-08 08:35 pm (UTC)
Thanks for posting this. I found it very interesting.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:46 pm (UTC)
Oh, good. Thank you.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sarka
2008-12-08 08:38 pm (UTC)
I haven't read it yet, but I will. I'm doing an MA on European culture, including collective memory and myths, and while the historical anachronisms occasionally bug me, the notion that there's any such thing as a "real legend" or a "common legend" makes me want to descend into hysterical laughter :)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:42 pm (UTC)
And the Arthurian legend is already anachronistic because it portrays a 5th century Arthur as if he lived in the 10th century. :)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lexstar29
2008-12-08 08:40 pm (UTC)
Also, have you ever read the trilogy of Merlin books written by Mary Stewart? They lean more heavily on the Geoffrey of Monmouth version and are well worth a read if you haven't done so. The first one is 'Merlin of the Crystal Hills'
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:42 pm (UTC)
Oh yes, but it's been at least fifteen years.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: katekat1010
2008-12-08 08:42 pm (UTC)
brilliantly fun and fascinating to read. Thank you for putting this up.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:47 pm (UTC)
Was it fun? Oh, great. I worried that it was dry.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: wellifnotwisely
2008-12-08 08:44 pm (UTC)
Not the least bit dry. Fascinating and informative and shot through with a gifted writer's love of storytelling. I especially liked your point that the BBC series posits Merlin as the answer to the question buried in Monmouth's subtext: how is it that Arthur, raised by Uther Pendragon, is so different from his father?

If the mods give me permission, would you mind my linking to this is merlinxarthur?

Good luck with the finals.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:46 pm (UTC)
Not dry? Oh, good.

Oh, absolutely. Please do spread it everywhere. I don't want our fandom to put down their show when in fact it's being quite clever and demonstrating a great deal of knowledge of the source texts.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: wildestranger
2008-12-08 08:44 pm (UTC)
Most interesting, and I really like your take on the various legends.

However, the most notably modern element is an elision. Christianity, so central in the Arthurian legend with Malory's rendition of the grail quest and ever-present monks and bishops in Geoffrey, is markedly absent in the BBC series. A bishop isn't even found in the background of Arthur's coronation as heir apparent. It's a perplexing absence until one realizes that the Archibishop of Canterbury would have side with Uther in the prejudiced vendetta against sorcery. This would pit the church against both the protagonist, Merlin, and the hero, Arthur, an awkward and politically fraught position.

Yes, but I would think that including the (a?) Christian church even in a positive light would have massively detracted from the show's popularity in the UK - especially for the BBC, and in the Saturday night family slot. Pretending that Christianity (or any religion) does not exist in Camelot can be historically problematic, but it does make the show more palatable for contemporary British audiences.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:49 pm (UTC)
Christianity is a very touchy subject right now. When you consider that medieval Christianity is the now "Catholic" Christianity and the U.K.'s Protestant history, plus multi-culturalism... oh, yes. A sticky subject indeed.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: violetknights
2008-12-08 08:47 pm (UTC)
Wow - a lovley, thought provoking meta. I was really interested in the point that you made regarding the abcence of the church which was something I had noticed. The political angle had not occurred to me but it makes sense the way you have put it. Thanks for sharing xx
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 09:02 pm (UTC)
Oh, read the comment above. She has a great point about the popularity of the medieval Christian/Catholic church and the BBC's audience.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 09:07 pm (UTC)
Thank you!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: aleathiel
2008-12-08 08:54 pm (UTC)
Thanks so much for writing this!

I knew some of it (and could see where they were drawing from other tellings of the legends) but I'm obviously not as familiar with the texts as you are.

(also, did it amuse you that they made Geoffrey of Monmouth a character?)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 08:59 pm (UTC)
Well, in six months I won't be as familiar with Arthurian Legend as am now either. I just completed the class. :)

I thought adding Geoffrey as an historian was a brilliant move to signal their source. If they'd cast him in any other role it wouldn't have worked.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tx_cronopio
2008-12-08 08:55 pm (UTC)
Excellent! And of course Geoffrey was pulling on even older tales from Ninnius and Gildas. Good for you for reminding everyone that myth is called myth for a reason :)

(Here via malnpudl)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 09:05 pm (UTC)

I love Gildas. That description of the Romans training the Saxon peasantry and leaving...

...oh, my goodness. That's where they got the episode where Arthur helps defend Ealdor. It's straight out of Gildas. And here I thought that was a "democracy now!" departure.

It's really quite impressive what they're doing.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 09:07 pm (UTC)
Oh, you got to study the old school Welsh and Breton stuff? You should write an essay for us. We only touched on it in our class, and Merlin is a Welsh legend.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: janne_d
2008-12-08 09:10 pm (UTC)
Wow, this is amazing. I've run across people annoyed that the series is ignoring the 'traditional' material and getting very irritated that there were changes, and I wish I could have pointed them in your direction.

A fascinating read and I really enjoyed it.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-08 09:15 pm (UTC)
That's why I slapped this essay down, ASAP. Six months ago, prior to my class, that would have been my reaction, too. I would have been horrified, I tell you, horrified.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: piplover
2008-12-08 09:24 pm (UTC)
Thank you for this, I always love to read well thought out and informative essays. I've never really studied the Arthurian legends, but I am completely hooked on Merlin. I have no problem with the historical inaccuracies because, well, magic! And Dragons! And evil sorcerers! I love how the show is taking something many people know on at least some level and have turned it on its head. That, I think, is the true legacy of the story, not so much the point A to point B storyline, but the characters and the lessons they shared.
And this is way too long, but I just wanted to say thank you for posting this, and I really enjoyed reading your take on it.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gwendolen
2008-12-08 09:25 pm (UTC)
Very, very interesting! I have to think on a lot of that. It might be

I'm of course always smirking to myself when Geoffrey de Monmouth himself shows up in Merlin. And if they keep things up they way they have been going so far then Arthur won't have any knights left for his round table (so far they've already killed off three of them and refused LAncelot his knighthood).

I also laughed at the nod towards the Prince Valiant comics by having knight Valiant show up. The writers not only know their source-material they also play around with more modern versions and additions to the original myth.

Oh, and what about Nimueh? The Lady of the Lake is suddenly the bad guy, eh girl.

I also was just thinking about the exclusion of the church as they have no problem with hinting at pagan ideas and believes (Druids, Fae, magic) yet avoid everything that even hints at christianity, aside from the "witch-hunts" of course. It's a very interesting take on of the popular story everyone thinks they know.
(Reply) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: stentoriansista
2008-12-08 11:18 pm (UTC)
Epics are not one story, although one version might take hold of the popular imagination: epics are a multiplicity.

Exactly! This really can be expanded beyond epic to all stories that have at some point entered orality. Sometimes it seems like our minds are set in this mode of story ownership. If you look at oral tales, a person may "own" a given performance of a tale, but for the most part the stories themselves are community property. There is no "right" version of a story but rather many versions that share equal weight. I've thought often lately that fanfic writers might recognize the value of retelling a tale more than others might, but it seems not so much. It's like some of them think they invented re-telling, rather than being participants in a cultural tradition spanning millennia. Thanks for a great article and a great reminder about the politics of story.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: aunty_marion
2008-12-08 11:28 pm (UTC)
Very nice! I have been enjoying Merlin, while railing at the historical 'inaccuracies' (as I've been fond of The Matter of Britain from an early age!), but I'd decided by halfway through the first episode to take it as an Alternative History version anyway. But your essay is a very good analysis of what the writers are doing. I honestly hadn't noticed the lack of religious figures at all!

I leapt up and down in glee when they introduced Geoffrey of Monmouth as a historian - perfect opening to slot him in.

Like a previous commenter, I've read the Mary Stewart books (in the UK they were published as The Crystal Cave, The Hollow Hills, and The Last Enchantment, with the Mordred betrayal story tacked on as a fourth book, The Wicked Day. But my own personal 'modern' treatment of the Arthurian story is Rosemary Sutcliff's Sword at Sunset, which places him in the post-Roman period. (And it fits into her YA 'Dolphin Ring' cycle of books, though it's an adult book itself.)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: octavia_b
2008-12-08 11:49 pm (UTC)
Thank you! I did a course in Arthurian Lit a million years ago when I was an undergrad and then did my MA on Malory so I've got a lot of familiarity with Arthurian legend. It's been driving me nuts the way that people are griping that Merlin's not following the 'real' story. WHAT REAL STORY? Unlike you, though, I've not had the energy to put anything together about it.
(Reply) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-09 12:47 am (UTC)
Geoffrey of Monmouth is 12th century not 10th

Oh man, I do that all the time with dates. I should just say 1100s to keep myself from slipping up.

As for your comment on religion, it is a very noticeable absence if you are familiar with the medieval material but I think the show works well without it and I'm not sure if it would have fit with "feel" of the show.

It's telling that people are uncomfortable with even the suggestion of Christianity in connection with the show. Part of that is this is a slash audience, sensitive to Christianity in general.

But part of it is that it's the right call on the part of the show. There is a lot of tension around Christianity. In the medieval era it was just... there... like the color of the sky.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: sobsister
2008-12-09 12:29 am (UTC)
This is so interesting. I'm vaguely familiar with some of the different legends associated with Arthur's court, but I had no idea some of these references were being made. You've really added to my understanding, so thank you!

I think your point that the writers are relying on their audience's familiarity with the story is a very good one; sometimes the change I'm most interested in is the close relationship between Merlin and Gwen, who barely interacts with Arthur, despite their marriage probably being the aspect of the legend people are most familiar with.

It's really neat how you draw the connection between medieval literature and what the show itself is doing. I get the impression that medieval authors were always sticking Arthur or Merlin in new situations (I'm kind of thinking of the Orlando Furioso/Orlando Innamorato, where Merlin randomly appears to prophesy Bradamant's progeny...'cause who else are you going to get to tell the future? Or later, when Arthur shows up all sparkly in the Faerie Queen.) in the same way the show does.

Sorry, this was long. It's just, your post is so exciting!
(Reply) (Thread)
From: suchcuriousity
2008-12-09 12:46 am (UTC)
Your essay and explanations are extremely exciting. I was one of those Arthurian purists that first looked at "Merlin" and was like CRAP what have they done?? But the more I've watched, the more I've seen how they've woven together all of the different legends and tales and stories, and added a whole new layer of brilliance. (I'm going to be crushed if BBC doesn't renew it and allow them to continue adding and fleshing out.)

Out of nerdy curiosity, which legends/books did you read for your Lit class? I'm almost on break here, and really want to get back into the myth and legend side of Merlin. It's been ages since I've read TH Whyte or L'Morte.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: icarusancalion
2008-12-09 01:15 am (UTC)
Thank you. I've also gotten my professor hooked on Merlin. *g*


Historia Brittonum
St. Patrick's Confession
The Gododdin
The Mabinogion
The Welsh Annals
Various saints lives
Geoffrey of Monmouth (obviously)
Wace's Le Roman de Brut
La3aman's Brut
Marie de France
Chretien de Troyes' Yvain, Erec et Enide, (and Lancelot was on the syllabus but we never got to that one)
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur (in brief, it's not our professor's favorite)

My recommendation?

Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight was my favorite, especially the translation by Tolkien.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: birggitt
2008-12-09 01:30 am (UTC)
Wow! This is such a wonderful and enlightening post!
I'm so glad you put your sources, because, seriously, I know a lot less than I thought about Arthurian Legends, and your post let me with a deep hunger for knowledge.
Thanks God my last final this year is December 19th! *takes note of your bibliography*
Thanks a lot for this!
(Reply) (Thread)
Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>