Advance reports on the soon to be released Ridley Scott film of Robin Hood here. What I want to talk about is the significance of the chosen origin story in the various versions of Robin Hood. Like all the best hero narratives, Robin often has a point of origin, a decisive event which causes his life to change, and gives a justification for his apparently illegal actions. However, the nature of this origin has changed several times over the centuries of Robin Hood fictions, and this leaves contemporary writers with a wide variety of choices over the backgound, motivation, and nature of their particular Robin Hood.
One of the key choices to be made is Robin's class background. Early versions of the Robin Hood legends always place him as a 'yeoman' - neither an aristocrat, nor a peasant, but somewhere in between. The identification of Robin as minor gentry (Robin of Loxley) or a major landholder (Earl of Huntingdon) came later, and seems to be an attempt to reduce the revolutionary potential of a commoner with a redistributionist habit. Ascribing a personal motivation to Robin - the murder of his father, the seizure of his lands, personal antipathy to the Sherrif of Nottingham, love for Maid Marian, etc. - similarly works to depoliticise the potential rebellion. The relocation of the Robin legends from the time of an unidentified King Edward (anytime between 1272 and 1377) to the earlier reign of Richard I, and particularly in having Robin participating in resistance to John's attempt to overthrow his brother as King of England, makes the standard version of the legend even more supportive of the established order.
The relocation of the Robin Hood legends to the time of King Richard has also led to unavoidable connections to the Crusades. All Robin Hood fictions now seem to have him as a returning crusader, accompanied by a Saracen companion, though the identity of his Muslim friend differs. Most versions of Robin Hood since half-way through the last century seem to carry the symbolic weight of their contemporary or recent wars. The recent BBC series continually referenced the war in Iraq, although its critical stance was somewhat compromised by making Robin both an aristocrat and a bit of a yob - Prince Harry, perhaps.
Most versions of Robin Hood, though, fail to deal with its mythic nature. The tales of Robin Hood are clearly legends - insofar as they lack historical verification, but are located largely within a recognisable version of English history - but the meaning of Robin Hood is more myth than legend. The origins of the name seem to indicate that 'Robin Hood' is a generic term for outlaw, and it's a short step from this to an understanding of Robin Hood as an honorific title, and then to further postulate that Robin is more a social function than a fictional character. Perhaps society needs a figure of prinicpled resistance - someone who fights for the forces of natural justice, not for the established order which has hijacked justice. It is this aspect of Robin Hood that makes him the archetypal bandit, not just a persecuted outlaw from history.
http://www.boldoutlaw.com/
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/rh/rhhome.htm
The picture is from what must be the most sanitised version of the Robin Hood legend. Blyton manages in Tales of Brave Adventure to give the same treatment to King Arthur, though he doesn't seem to have made it onto the cover.
No comments:
Post a Comment