Michael Reuel's Blog - Posts Tagged "adventure"
Finding the real Robin Hood
The earliest Robin Hood ballads (which existed in oral form for many decades before being written down in the mid-fifteenth century) are an unappreciated insight into medieval England. Historians prefer to write them off as fiction, often dismissing them by pointing to possible sources of inspiration from other legends or tales of outlawry, like that of Finn MacCool or Eustace the Monk and, in doing so, completely overlook their many unique qualities.
I first approached the ballads from an interest in folklore when, because I became conscious of key misinterpretations, I soon decided to start studying the history as well. I was curious to discover whether certain misconceptions might lead to a reconsideration of his existence.
At first this research was a casual, slow burner carried out for personal interest. Eventually, however, when I began to see a more complete and convincing picture, I realised I had to condense my findings into a publication.
The result of my research is Robin Hood Existed, in which I argue for firmly establishing everyone’s favourite outlaw as a historical figure, rather than one of legend.
I’m now firmly convinced that he existed beyond any reasonable doubt.
My books explores the reasons for which we have so many misconceptions about Robin Hood, which have largely come about because the first historians to try and explain who he was ended up writing a heap of nonsense that has waylaid historians ever since – though a prominent place in popular culture has also, inevitably, had its impact.
These historians, writing in the sixteenth century, would dismiss many of the key elements of the ballads because of class prejudice. They were writing histories for the nobility and did not think very much of the Robin Hood stories, looking down upon his reputation as a hero of the common man. Some tried to re-characterise him as a villain, others to recast him completely as a disinherited noble – just as he remains in most modern film depictions.
The truth was that he was always a yeoman and the yeomanry are notoriously difficult for historians to study. Their deeds are not recorded by scholars, so it is fortunate that we have the ballads at all, which attest to Robin’s popularity and also his heroism.
Indeed, it is these two crucial factors that I found to most require a thorough re-examination in order to understand him better, as Robin’s heroism and popularity have also been re-characterised. Many have found his behaviour and actions in the earliest ballads to be unsatisfying for their notions of heroism, as his actions have been interpreted as silly and playful, but this is a wildly inaccurate reading of what is going on.
For example, Robin is often said to be disappointing in that he challenges many people to fights and loses. But, firstly, this only ever happens once, in the ballad Robin Hood and the Potter (though it became retold as the famous Friar Tuck story). And, secondly, those who have depicted the ballad in this context have completely overlooked who the Potter in question is. Although we are never given a name for him, the Potter is clearly described as a fearsome individual who pays tolls to no one and may have even once bettered Little John in a fight.
In going up against him, Robin is trying to impress his men and almost pays a heavy price for attempt. However, with the exception of the Death ballad in which he is tricked and murdered, this is the only example of Robin being clearly beaten, excepting one occasion where fellow Merry Man, Gilbert with the white hand, comes first in an archery contest. Robin still comes second however, though competing against many skilled bowmen. Elsewhere he kills twelve of the sheriff’s men and wounds many more, when cornered in a church; he leads his men out of an ambush when the sheriff tricks them into attending a tournament; and, perhaps most notably, he slays Guy of Gisborne without the help of anyone else, though Gisborne is also described as a feared and formidable individual. In addition, the strength and physical prowess of his Merry Men are frequently referred to throughout the ballads.
His popularity and heroism are not in question after all, though understanding his place in the hearts of the yeomanry has proven problematic. By providing a more accurate reading of the ballads, therefore, I hope that we can clear up the many aspects of his reputation that are seen as murky. While, in doing so, and by rendering him in a clearer historical context, we can reach a confident conclusion that the ballads were certainly based on the exploits of a remarkable but also a very plausible hero.
I first approached the ballads from an interest in folklore when, because I became conscious of key misinterpretations, I soon decided to start studying the history as well. I was curious to discover whether certain misconceptions might lead to a reconsideration of his existence.
At first this research was a casual, slow burner carried out for personal interest. Eventually, however, when I began to see a more complete and convincing picture, I realised I had to condense my findings into a publication.
The result of my research is Robin Hood Existed, in which I argue for firmly establishing everyone’s favourite outlaw as a historical figure, rather than one of legend.
I’m now firmly convinced that he existed beyond any reasonable doubt.
My books explores the reasons for which we have so many misconceptions about Robin Hood, which have largely come about because the first historians to try and explain who he was ended up writing a heap of nonsense that has waylaid historians ever since – though a prominent place in popular culture has also, inevitably, had its impact.
These historians, writing in the sixteenth century, would dismiss many of the key elements of the ballads because of class prejudice. They were writing histories for the nobility and did not think very much of the Robin Hood stories, looking down upon his reputation as a hero of the common man. Some tried to re-characterise him as a villain, others to recast him completely as a disinherited noble – just as he remains in most modern film depictions.
The truth was that he was always a yeoman and the yeomanry are notoriously difficult for historians to study. Their deeds are not recorded by scholars, so it is fortunate that we have the ballads at all, which attest to Robin’s popularity and also his heroism.
Indeed, it is these two crucial factors that I found to most require a thorough re-examination in order to understand him better, as Robin’s heroism and popularity have also been re-characterised. Many have found his behaviour and actions in the earliest ballads to be unsatisfying for their notions of heroism, as his actions have been interpreted as silly and playful, but this is a wildly inaccurate reading of what is going on.
For example, Robin is often said to be disappointing in that he challenges many people to fights and loses. But, firstly, this only ever happens once, in the ballad Robin Hood and the Potter (though it became retold as the famous Friar Tuck story). And, secondly, those who have depicted the ballad in this context have completely overlooked who the Potter in question is. Although we are never given a name for him, the Potter is clearly described as a fearsome individual who pays tolls to no one and may have even once bettered Little John in a fight.
In going up against him, Robin is trying to impress his men and almost pays a heavy price for attempt. However, with the exception of the Death ballad in which he is tricked and murdered, this is the only example of Robin being clearly beaten, excepting one occasion where fellow Merry Man, Gilbert with the white hand, comes first in an archery contest. Robin still comes second however, though competing against many skilled bowmen. Elsewhere he kills twelve of the sheriff’s men and wounds many more, when cornered in a church; he leads his men out of an ambush when the sheriff tricks them into attending a tournament; and, perhaps most notably, he slays Guy of Gisborne without the help of anyone else, though Gisborne is also described as a feared and formidable individual. In addition, the strength and physical prowess of his Merry Men are frequently referred to throughout the ballads.
His popularity and heroism are not in question after all, though understanding his place in the hearts of the yeomanry has proven problematic. By providing a more accurate reading of the ballads, therefore, I hope that we can clear up the many aspects of his reputation that are seen as murky. While, in doing so, and by rendering him in a clearer historical context, we can reach a confident conclusion that the ballads were certainly based on the exploits of a remarkable but also a very plausible hero.
Lots of new Robin Hood films coming our way
Within ‘Robin Hood Existed’ I happened to mention that there are currently no less than six Hollywood productions in the works all keen to surf popular culture’s obsession with this most famous of outlaws. But what are these films going to be like and why so many? Why not take a look at what we know so far and find out if the legend – I mean history – is in good hands, and whether we might get a Robin Hood with a certain sense of authenticity?
Robin Hood Origins
This is probably the one we know most about. Produced by Leonardo di Caprio and Lionsgate, this would seem to be attempting a similar feat to the much-criticised Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood (2010) in making a play for the root of Robin’s story, rather than the height of his fame. As with the Scott version, this would suggest a desire to produce something of a franchise with numerous follow-up tales, though they will need to produce something a bit more engaging in order to also produce an audience that demands a sequel.
Surprisingly, considering it is being described as gritty and down-to-earth, it would appear to be something of a contradiction that they have cast Jamie Foxx as Little John. Does this mean the film is not actually concerned with looking that realistic, or will a backstory be written in order to suggest that Little John accompanied Robin (Morgan Freeman-style) from the Holy Land (where the real Robin never went, by the way)? Only time will tell.
The film is being shot early next year, with no current release date, so we can’t be sure as yet when we will find out. Another curious decision is to shoot the film in Dubrovnik. Apparently a stunning location – though whether it will look like Sherwood Forest remains to be seen – but apparently there were some nice tax incentives that Star Wars: Episode VIII has benefitted from, so I’m a little suspicious that money might be the real motivation.
Welsh actor Taron Egerton gets the honour of playing England’s most treasured medieval hero and I’m sure he’ll do a better job than some.
Hood
This one from Sony certainly has a touch of the ambitious about it. I had to look up what ‘shared-universe film’ meant, considering I thought we all shared the same universe anyway. But apparently, no. Apparently, unless you make it clear to the audience, all films are presumed to exist in separate fictional universes unless you state it explicitly. Maybe this is an unwritten rule to prevent the Star Wars and Star Trek stories ever colliding and setting off World War III as the fandoms rise up in protest.
Anyway, it seems the great pile of dollars being earned by the Avengers movies is to blame for this approach as, in a shared-universe story, all of the characters can have their own spin-offs and so all do their bit for Hollywood’s dollars.
So, if this one goes well, in a few years we can most likely expect a whole bunch of additional film titles like Will Scarlett and the Forest Demon or Maid Marian and the Viking Curse being green-lit too.
Nottingham & Hood
This is a new Disney film and, yes, also an attempt at a franchise. There might be some grounds for optimism in that they have been attracted by the work of new screenwriter on the block, Brandon Barker, rather than this being the result of a few ideas thrown across the meeting room table. Then again, this Robin Hood is said to be Pirates of the Caribbean-esque, which suggests a tone that harks back to the cheekiness of Errol Flynn’s portrayal, so I guess it kind of depends what kind of Robin you want as to whether you will welcome this one.
Robin Hood 2058
But we don’t always need to worry about authenticity because where better to discard of such baggage than with a Robin Hood sci-fi? This production is still at script writing stage and being delivered by Tony Lee at the request of the team behind Fast and the Furious and 300. This film will be set in a dystopian London, no doubt in one of those attempts to depict the future that turns out to predict the spread of modernity at an extremely fast pace. Why haven’t they just set the film in 2558, and therefore learned from films like 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner’s attempts to predict the future in a rush, only for the film audiences to grow up, watch the film later and realise the storyteller’s got a bit carried away?
Also, considering this is quite clearly a bollocks version of the future, why not just set the film in Nottingham anyway just to keep the people happy? You can even relocate Big Ben if you want it on the horizon and make up some daft subplot about the seat of power being relocated (Parliament is crumbling after all).
Plus, isn’t this plot just Batman? And have the folks behind Fast and the Furious only confused Robin Hood with the little sidekick Robin that no Batman film has been able to make cool yet? If so I will definitely be watching.
No word on who plays Robin yet though. Presumably it will be Vin Diesel.
Mystery Warner Bros project
On this one little is known but have faith because one of the movie’s producers is none other than Dan Lin who was behind The Lego Movie. Maybe keeping quiet about things will work to the studio’s advantage, however, as they can wait to see what the other productions are doing wrong and then pounce. Pretty much all studios are attempting to come up with franchises these days, so perhaps this project was announced just because everyone else seems to be doing a Hood production. In which case, by the time it comes to parts 2 and 3, one shining light will have risen to the surface and we won’t hear from the others again.
Or maybe we’ll hear from none of them again, but that will not stop the name of Robin Hood outlasting them.
So there it is. They all feel a bit rough round the edges in terms of vision and I wonder if the film producers know there are many excellent works of Robin Hood fiction around these days; for example, from Stephen R. Lawhead, Robin McKinley and Steven A. McKay. Then again, Hollywood has always preferred directors to writers, so let us hope that the spirit of the Hood is with them.
What’s that? Oh, yes, I said there were six films in production not five. Well, I think the other one must have been the sequel to Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, which does not appear to be surfacing after all.
So will those that follow learn from its mistakes?
Robin Hood Origins
This is probably the one we know most about. Produced by Leonardo di Caprio and Lionsgate, this would seem to be attempting a similar feat to the much-criticised Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood (2010) in making a play for the root of Robin’s story, rather than the height of his fame. As with the Scott version, this would suggest a desire to produce something of a franchise with numerous follow-up tales, though they will need to produce something a bit more engaging in order to also produce an audience that demands a sequel.
Surprisingly, considering it is being described as gritty and down-to-earth, it would appear to be something of a contradiction that they have cast Jamie Foxx as Little John. Does this mean the film is not actually concerned with looking that realistic, or will a backstory be written in order to suggest that Little John accompanied Robin (Morgan Freeman-style) from the Holy Land (where the real Robin never went, by the way)? Only time will tell.
The film is being shot early next year, with no current release date, so we can’t be sure as yet when we will find out. Another curious decision is to shoot the film in Dubrovnik. Apparently a stunning location – though whether it will look like Sherwood Forest remains to be seen – but apparently there were some nice tax incentives that Star Wars: Episode VIII has benefitted from, so I’m a little suspicious that money might be the real motivation.
Welsh actor Taron Egerton gets the honour of playing England’s most treasured medieval hero and I’m sure he’ll do a better job than some.
Hood
This one from Sony certainly has a touch of the ambitious about it. I had to look up what ‘shared-universe film’ meant, considering I thought we all shared the same universe anyway. But apparently, no. Apparently, unless you make it clear to the audience, all films are presumed to exist in separate fictional universes unless you state it explicitly. Maybe this is an unwritten rule to prevent the Star Wars and Star Trek stories ever colliding and setting off World War III as the fandoms rise up in protest.
Anyway, it seems the great pile of dollars being earned by the Avengers movies is to blame for this approach as, in a shared-universe story, all of the characters can have their own spin-offs and so all do their bit for Hollywood’s dollars.
So, if this one goes well, in a few years we can most likely expect a whole bunch of additional film titles like Will Scarlett and the Forest Demon or Maid Marian and the Viking Curse being green-lit too.
Nottingham & Hood
This is a new Disney film and, yes, also an attempt at a franchise. There might be some grounds for optimism in that they have been attracted by the work of new screenwriter on the block, Brandon Barker, rather than this being the result of a few ideas thrown across the meeting room table. Then again, this Robin Hood is said to be Pirates of the Caribbean-esque, which suggests a tone that harks back to the cheekiness of Errol Flynn’s portrayal, so I guess it kind of depends what kind of Robin you want as to whether you will welcome this one.
Robin Hood 2058
But we don’t always need to worry about authenticity because where better to discard of such baggage than with a Robin Hood sci-fi? This production is still at script writing stage and being delivered by Tony Lee at the request of the team behind Fast and the Furious and 300. This film will be set in a dystopian London, no doubt in one of those attempts to depict the future that turns out to predict the spread of modernity at an extremely fast pace. Why haven’t they just set the film in 2558, and therefore learned from films like 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner’s attempts to predict the future in a rush, only for the film audiences to grow up, watch the film later and realise the storyteller’s got a bit carried away?
Also, considering this is quite clearly a bollocks version of the future, why not just set the film in Nottingham anyway just to keep the people happy? You can even relocate Big Ben if you want it on the horizon and make up some daft subplot about the seat of power being relocated (Parliament is crumbling after all).
Plus, isn’t this plot just Batman? And have the folks behind Fast and the Furious only confused Robin Hood with the little sidekick Robin that no Batman film has been able to make cool yet? If so I will definitely be watching.
No word on who plays Robin yet though. Presumably it will be Vin Diesel.
Mystery Warner Bros project
On this one little is known but have faith because one of the movie’s producers is none other than Dan Lin who was behind The Lego Movie. Maybe keeping quiet about things will work to the studio’s advantage, however, as they can wait to see what the other productions are doing wrong and then pounce. Pretty much all studios are attempting to come up with franchises these days, so perhaps this project was announced just because everyone else seems to be doing a Hood production. In which case, by the time it comes to parts 2 and 3, one shining light will have risen to the surface and we won’t hear from the others again.
Or maybe we’ll hear from none of them again, but that will not stop the name of Robin Hood outlasting them.
So there it is. They all feel a bit rough round the edges in terms of vision and I wonder if the film producers know there are many excellent works of Robin Hood fiction around these days; for example, from Stephen R. Lawhead, Robin McKinley and Steven A. McKay. Then again, Hollywood has always preferred directors to writers, so let us hope that the spirit of the Hood is with them.
What’s that? Oh, yes, I said there were six films in production not five. Well, I think the other one must have been the sequel to Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, which does not appear to be surfacing after all.
So will those that follow learn from its mistakes?
