Hello all. I realize this is outside the usual scope of my blog, but I feel strongly that this needs to be said.
I have only a few literary passions, and one of them is Robin Hood. Robin is one of those timeless characters in literature, a Everyman who sets his own needs aside in the service of others, who shows us through his actions that the letter of the law and the spirit of the law are sometimes two different things, who demonstrates through his own sacrifices that being a good person is not only possible, it is within everyone’s reach -- and you can have a spanking good time of it too.
So if you're familiar with the
current series on BBC One, you can imagine my horror at it.
This version of Robin Hood has been very deconstructionist in nature; at this juncture, it appears its sole purpose has been to “knock” Robin Hood “down to size”. Certainly this is in keeping with Foz Allen and Dominic Minghella’s original promise that this would be a Robin Hood we had never seen before.
Funny how I thought they’d mean that positively.
This is NOT a post about how awful Guy of Gisborne is, or the terrible things he has or has not done, or how he deserves to pay for his crimes. I’m NOT here to vilify him, or to vilify actors Richard Armitage or Jonas Armstrong. Truthfully by now, both Robin and Gisborne can polka their way to the finale for all I care.
No, my problem is that Gisborne’s redemption is coming at the cost of Robin’s good character. This is wrong. If you are a fan of this series, please step outside the show for a minute and look at the overall issue. You see, I’m unclear on the purpose of a production that focused on the destruction of a cherished hero to millions. Yes, of course it’s new and different – so is arsenic the first time you taste it. That doesn’t make it a decent idea. Frankly it feels to me like I’m stuck in my local pub with that old guy who hates everyone and won’t leave. I don’t understand what reasonable story-purpose there was in destroying Robin this way.
Please let me anticipate you and point out that Guy of Gisborne’s story could have been told, and told well, without making Robin his villain. It is enough, truly heartbreaking enough, to know that he was turned out of his home as a boy and left to fend for himself in a world that would only value him if he held property. That alone is a tremendous backstory, just as knowing he put his sister Isabella into a clearly unsafe marriage just for his own gain. You could have made a series out of those two facts alone. Robin’s destruction is not necessary.
But to make Robin himself the
cause of all this backstory is entirely different. Towards this end this series has made a caricature of Robin, as someone who is only arrogance personified – and nothing else. Gone is the Robin Hood of legend. Instead this series has steadily marginalized Robin Hood, by replacing the real Robin with a self-absorbed thug bent on achieving his own brand of power regardless of the cost to others, as if being outlawed is the easy route to fame, fortune and conquest. Again, it’s new and different, but that alone doesn’t make it a good idea.
It
is true that making Gisborne all bad is poor storytelling and therefore he ought to at least have a chance at redemption, regardless of whether he takes it. That chance can be obvious or subtle, but to balance the scales and make Gisborne human, the chance must be available. Any character who lacks self-discovery through these chances is just poorly drawn.
And thus by the same token, making a one-dimensional character out of Robin Hood – turning him from a man who wrestles with his desires and does for others anyway, into this unrecognizably violent and impulsive brute – is also poor storytelling. Worse, it’s character assassination. Such a serious change requires a clear rationale, but there is none given, as if we are to believe in spite of all we have seen and heard that Robin has always been this way.
Again, step outside the details of this show. The only themes or ideas I can take away from this are that I can’t trust heroes, that people who put themselves in harm’s way for others are actually cynical ego-maniacs, that every man who ever tried to do something nice for another is actually in it for himself, for his own ego gratification or perhaps to assuage his guilt because he’s secretly a thug, and that all great inspirational legends are just a pack of lies.
Why is that old guy at my local pub so threatened by anyone who gives freely of himself? Perhaps he is threatened because he feels he could never be so selfless. Perhaps rather than aspire to the same selfless behavior, he finds it easier to bring down those who can put others first, by denying that they even exist, by spreading lies about their true motives, and by mocking those who would aspire to selfless deeds.
I find this alarming, because it tells me just how many people in this world do not believe
any of us are capable of good. I’m unnerved by how many people are that old man. Please set aside loyalties here – I would be just as disgusted if this had been done to Michael Praed’s Robin, or Kevin Costner’s, or Richard Greene’s. It’s just wrong to do this, to destroy one hero to create another. Two heroes
can exist at the same time – and for God’s sake all of you out there about to tell me they both will be heroes in the final scenes, please don’t. That is simply not what’s happened here. The frightened old men behind this production have dragged Robin Hood through the mud, repeatedly, simply to create a second hero, and this was
never necessary. Were Gisbourne inspired by Robin, instead of allegedly brutalized by him, then the legend would remain heroic. Smearing Robin this way something very ugly about human nature and benefits neither the story nor any of the characters.
This series has turned the entire legend on its ear, turning Robin Hood’s pure motives into the twisted idea that he is only in it for the glory and to assuage his own guilt over actions the real Robin Hood would never have committed in the first place. Robin Hood was never that man, and never needed to be that man, and so I don’t understand why this series felt it had to assassinate his good name this way.