Merlin! and thoughts about Uther and heroes

[darlingfox]

I didn't have much to do this evening so I've watched four episodes of Merlin. To quote chatona, it's "very pretty and witty and gay": even the dragon ships Arthur/Merlin. As long as I don't pay too much attention to little things like historical accuracy (windows! clothes! the castle! people reading all around!), I can watch it just fine. It's shiny and fantasy and man, Arthur sure is pretty.

I was very surprised to find myself liking Uther Pendragon, and not only because he's played by Giles Anthony Head. They do really clever things with him and I hope it's intentional. We're supposed to assume that he's evil-ish and the point of view of the show only strengthens that belief. The POV characters are Merlin, Arthur and the other young people who pretty much try to rebel against the older ones. Not always intentionally and not really in the sense of rebelling, but still. Uther is portrayed as a serious and occasinally somewhat ruthless man, and as the one who tries to stop the heroes from doing their heroic deeds.

The thing is, Uther is absolutely right. He has every reason to stop Arthur, his only heir, from sacrificing himself for a mere servant. Apart from Merlin and Gaius, all the witches (and why are only women using evil magic?) are hurting people. So far the only reason we should think that banning magic and killing witches is evil, is that Merlin is a wizard and we obviously don't want him to die.

I hope that Uther doesn't turn out to be a complete bastard (only four episodes: he has plenty of time to start kicking puppies) because I really like the character. He's doing what I always think when the heroes are idiots and narrow-sighted: it just isn't right for the only prince/ss to run around challenging dangerous monsters. Fine, you may save a friend/innocent child/a small town, but what if you get killed? Who's going to inherit the throne then?

...Actually, I'm always annoyed when there's only one heir. Couldn't the parents have a spare child or two just in case? If I'll ever write a story using a royal hero, s/he'll damn well have several siblings.

Comments

[fujiko1601.livejournal.com]

That sounds like an interesting interpretation of the legends. You are absolutely right about the only heir doing stupid things. Now if only the storytellers could see the point... my royal princess (and I've kind of lost hope that I ever really write the damn story) has only one younger sister, but once you look back a generation or two, you find a lot of royal relatives ready to claim the throne when needed (and when not needed, but that's besides the point.

Lately I've craved for less morally righteous heroes. I know you have to be careful what you show to people as it can lead to them taking it the wrong way, but always having such ridiculously noble ones is starting to get on my nerves. Things don't work that way.

[darlingfox.livejournal.com]

My royal princess* would never inherit the throne. She could, technically, but there are too many cousins (some even biological children of the queen, not that it really matters) and she's a sort of an intermediary between her people and the elf-like lot.

* We all have one, don't we? :) Even if she'll never live outside our imaginations because we're too lazy to write the damn story...

Same here. I wish there'd be more morally ambigous heroes. Not evil but... I don't know, sensible? Flawed? Heroes who really get what "for the greater good" means and would sacrifice one village if it'd save the country. It's a shame that so few authors are willing to risk it: nine times out of ten there's a "surprising" third option that saves both the village and the country.

Actually, now that I think about it, various manga series do it a lot better than novels. To mention few, there's Saiyuki and the Sanzo-ikkou, and Naruto's ninjas aren't exactly the shining examples of high morality either. Fullmetal Alchemist has plenty of flawed heroes, and PetShop of Horrors is a whole category of its own. From novels, all I can think off the top of my head are Robin Hobb's Farseer & Tawny Man trilogies, and Margaret Weis & Tracy Hickman's Death Gate Cycle.

[fujiko1601.livejournal.com]

I called mine princess, but actually she is the queen for the major part of the story, which isn't an easy task. I don't have any elves though.

Argh, the stupid "surprising" third option kills all the drama. I've noticed that eastern productions often do good, human villains, who aren't exactly evil. Naruto's ninja in general are not that moral, but on the other hand they often lack ruthlessness. Speaking of eastern productions, I really liked how they handled the topic of greater good, prophesies and human villains in the Korean drama Legend (Tae Wang Sa Shin Gi). The main character deserving to rule just because of a prophesy gets old real soon.

I loved Robin Hobb's books, although the main character has been accused to be what a female sees as morally ambiguous, yet lovable character and that real men don't think like that. I don't think I've heard of Death Gate Cycle. What's it about?

[darlingfox.livejournal.com]

The third option is a bit like "and they all found suitabale spouses and lived happily ever after". That happens in almost ever book, too. Is it really so bad for people to not end up with someone? Eddings is especially guilty of this in his Garion-novels. :/

Really? I hadn't heard that. I liked Fitz a lot (and the Fool. The last novel almost broke my heart...) and thought that he acted like a human being. Then again, I'm not a man so I don't know how they see his character.

To quote Wikipedia on the Death Gate Cycle:

The main conflict is between two powerful races, the Sartan and the Patryns, which branched off from humans following a nuclear holocaust. Centuries prior to the events of the series, the Sartan attempted to end the conflict by sundering the earth into four elemental realms, and imprisoning the Patryn in a fifth prison world, the Labyrinth. The Sartan took up stewardship of the elemental realms, but soon mysteriously lost contact with each other and disappeared. Centuries later, a Patryn known as Xar escaped the Labyrinth, and started returning to the Labyrinth to rescue others. He learned how to access the other worlds and dreamed of freeing all his people from the Labyrinth and conquering the other worlds. The books follow the fiercely independent Haplo, a Patryn agent sent to scout the elemental worlds and throw them into chaos in preparation for his Lord's conquest of them.

...That makes it sound bit like the series is mostly about a war, but it isn't. It's about growing up. It's one of my favourite series because it's interesting in almost every way. The worlds and different cultures are well-made, no one is all good or all bad, people do die, and the protagonists really aren't shining paragons of virtue. Of course, opinions may differ and not all like the series, but I'd definitely recommend everyone to give it a try.

[fujiko1601.livejournal.com]

It all depends on what kind of world we are talking about. If it is a world where everybody is expected to marry and produce heirs, I can buy it. Whether the spouses are suitable, is another story entirely.

A friend of mine was especially bugged by the way he refused to sleep with Starling when he learned that she was married. It didn't bug me, but I don't claim to know men. The last novel was great and made the dragging first fool book all worth it.

I've made a rule to myself not to take recs for a while, so not going to listen to you now, but I might someday.