New (to the U. S.) Merlin series???

[Bert Olton]

Has anyone caught any of the episodes?

I've been so out of touch I didn't even know it was on TV here in the
States, but this past weekend I viewed re re runs of episodes 2 and 3.

Very different and, as the producers say, only loosely based on
Arthurian legend.

I haven't taken the time to read up on the series on line yet, but what
I gather from the little I've seen is that Uther evidently either built
or inherited Camelot, magic is outlawed, Merlin and Arthur are young
contemporaries with Merlin placed as a castle servant, yet under the
tutelage of an older wizard with a Roman name. Gwenevere is an
Afro-European (?), daughter of Camelot's blacksmith...

Looks to me like a sort of witch craft, soap opera costume piece aimed
at very young teenagers.

Years ago I used to argue that anything produced with even a whisper of
Arthurian content would ultimately be of value in that it might
stimulate interest and therefor research into the original versions.
With this show, I'm not so sure I was right.

Bert

[John W Kennedy]

Post by Bert Olton
Has anyone caught any of the episodes?
I've been so out of touch I didn't even know it was on TV here in the
States, but this past weekend I viewed re re runs of episodes 2 and 3.
Very different and, as the producers say, only loosely based on
Arthurian legend.
I haven't taken the time to read up on the series on line yet, but what
I gather from the little I've seen is that Uther evidently either built
or inherited Camelot, magic is outlawed, Merlin and Arthur are young
contemporaries with Merlin placed as a castle servant, yet under the
tutelage of an older wizard with a Roman name. Gwenevere is an
Afro-European (?), daughter of Camelot's blacksmith...
Looks to me like a sort of witch craft, soap opera costume piece aimed
at very young teenagers.
Years ago I used to argue that anything produced with even a whisper of
Arthurian content would ultimately be of value in that it might
stimulate interest and therefor research into the original versions.
With this show, I'm not so sure I was right.

Oh, it's mostly harmless. I actually find it less annoying than White or
Tennyson or Dryden.

[Bert Olton]

Post by John W Kennedy
Oh, it's mostly harmless. I actually find it less annoying than White or
Tennyson or Dryden.

Superficially, I agree. However, so many folks, kids in particular,
take what they see on television as gospel without bothering to look
further. I just think that it's a shame that a British production has
chosen to play so fast and loose with the legends that they become
nearly unrecognizable.

Best regards,
Bert

[Penner Theologius Pott]

Not that I necessarily disagree with your underlying point, but surely
the vast bulk of the Arthurian tradition has consisted of authors
playing fast and loose with their source material?

I haven't caught the show yet, but according to IMDB, they have
Geoffrey of Monmouth as a character. Weird.

-pabl

Post by John W Kennedy
Oh, it's mostly harmless. I actually find it less annoying than White or
Tennyson or Dryden.

Superficially, I agree.  However, so many folks, kids in particular,
take what they see on television as gospel without bothering to look
further.  I just think that it's a shame that a British production has
chosen to play so fast and loose with the legends that they become
nearly unrecognizable.
Best regards,
Bert
--
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
To all who have served or are serving the cause of freedom, whether in
peace or in war, at home or abroad, thank you.  "Let's roll!", Todd
Beamer, United Airlines Flight 93, September 11, 2001.

[Bert Olton]

Post by Penner Theologius Pott
Not that I necessarily disagree with your underlying point, but surely
the vast bulk of the Arthurian tradition has consisted of authors
playing fast and loose with their source material?
I haven't caught the show yet, but according to IMDB, they have
Geoffrey of Monmouth as a character. Weird.

Hmmm...not sure where to jump off on this one. It's kind of a
philosophical ramble, I guess.

Yes, of course the bulk of extant Arthurian literature departs radically
from anything gathered through sources like the Mabinogian, etc.
Chretien was hardly a conveyor of original Celtic/British legend.

However, there is a core set of structures to the Arthurian story which
have become accepted...certain characters, certain events, certain
ideas. This television show seems to completely ignore most of those
and re write the story into a form that is not Arthurian.

I think it less weird that a Geoffrey of Monmouth is present, than that
Nennius is not.

The film "Dragonheart" did more credit to the Arthurian legends than
this soap opera format offering seems to be doing....granted I've only
watched two episodes. But at least in "Dragonheart", there was a
genuine effort to hark back to some of the original story.

I don't know...I may be begging the point here. Sorry.

Bert