Slashing Up The Legend

A topic concerning the new series of Robin Hood that has been hit upon by several forums/blogs is the notion of Much's love for his master (i.e. Robin) being more than just a mix of loyalty and respect - even extending it into the romance/sexual end of the spectrum. I'm pretty sure that this was a deliberate move on the part of the writers...

So what do I think of it?

Well, in general, I'm all for it. As it stands it's been treated quite light-heartedly with only odd hints and suggestions (the most blatently obvious being when Much declares his love for Robin in the middle of a fight with the Sheriff - but even this can be taken either way). I like this ambiguity. The little looks, the little turns of the head, the slight clingyness of servant to master. Whether I'd want it to develop into anything more serious... I really couldn't say. My gut reaction is no. Not because I dislike the idea of the relationship but because I can't see it fitting into any of the other segments of the story. Robin is already competing with Guy of Gisbourne for Marian's attention, adding any serious developments with Much in would only make things confusing and a little ridiculous.

I also believe that it was the aim of the writers to keep it at the lighter end, more as a reference to the times that we live in rather than as a major new twist to the legend. Perhaps it was even a reference to the kind of fan culture that is developing more and more nowadays (particularly since the internet came about) and that has for many years and for many different series been 'twisting' certain relationships and creating from them vast archives of slash-fanfiction and websites, coupling up male characters (in general, I'm sure there are female couplings too) and declaring them gay. Suggesting this themselves before fans had a chance to is certainly an interesting way for the writers to keep one step ahead.

Also, on a more personal note, I would like to argue that Much is not 'gay' but more likely 'bisexual' - as it's my belief that everyone is bisexual to a degree and it's only a matter of chance and circumstance that defines who we end up with. I also hate all sexual definitions, they seem utterly fake. But that's only my opinion on the matter that I had to add in whilst I had the opportunity.

Moving back to Much and Robin, I should probably back up the argument by mentioning a few of the scenes that have got fans wondering. As I said before, I'm sure the hints are entirely light-hearted and so none of these scenes are 'conclusive' as such - each could be taken simply as everyday signs of friendship - but some would argue that a deeper feeling is there:

Episode 1

*Much declaring that he loves his master when Robin agrees to let them work for food.
*Much's expression when he sees Robin kissing a peasant girl a few yards away.
*A long bath scene moving from Much crying in the bath to him hiding his tears as Robin enters + various expressions exchanged.
*Much's rolling of eyes as Robin talks of Marian not being married.


Episode 2

*Any bit of the scene where Robin and Much are stripped of their clothes and tied to trees can be taken the 'wrong' way - especially all the discussion of perfumes.
*Much's devestation as Robin gives himself up and is dragged away.
*Much's anger at Marian and her father when they will not help free Robin followed by a slightly bitter tone as he tells Marian how Robin dreamt of her in the Holy Land.
*Much explaining how he would die of grief if Robin did not come back followed by Robin saying that this was why he loved him.
*Much's hurt look as Robin asks Roy to help him rather than Much.
*Much mentioning how he has no family or wife... but doesn't mind.


Episode 3

*Much questioning Robin as to why he'll feed the villagers who hate him but not Much who loves him.
*Much's face when he rounds the corner and sees that Robin has caught Marian out as the Nightwatchman.
*Robin turning from laughing with Marian to see Much staring at him - followed by a slightly guilty look from Robin.


Episode 4

*Several scenes in the forest showing Much's extreme dislike and jealousy over Roy - especially in regards to the praise and attention he gets from Robin - building up to the point where he embaresses himself in front of the Outlaws by wrongly accusing Roy of leading the Sheriff to them.
*Much's extreme reaction to Roy's attempts to stab Robin.

I'm certain that there will be many more to come.

I think it's a good move on the part of the writers as - because it is done in such a tongue-in-cheek manner - it adds a little comedy, a little romance (IF you choose to see it that way) and a little support for gay/bisexual views without it seeming like some kind of badly done propaganda (like, for instance, some of their references to modern politics are...). Also, as a fan, it opens up all sorts of possibilities for new twists within the story and within any fanfiction that springs from it (some more ridiculous than others, just see the RobinHood2006 forum if you don't believe me).

What does it do to the original legend though?

Well it changes it. But that's not a new thing - the Robin Hood legend has changed a hundred times over and will probably change a hundred times over still. Even now there are places that are contradicting the popular legend that his home is Nottingham and claiming that Robin Hood was actually their outlaw, their hero. Or sometimes even their villain. Out now is a book claiming that Robin Hood was a guerilla-style outlaw from Wales who never went near the Sheriff and Nottingham. My argument to this would be in two parts: 1) I'm pretty sure Robin never existed, he certainly never existed in the way that we make him out to exist, so the argument is redundant. 2) If he did exist and he was in Wales and never saw Nottingham/The Sheriff/Sherwood or any of the other elements we know and love - then is he really Robin Hood? He would be Hood in name only, because the legend is not just the man himself. All the places and characters connected to him are very, very important.

Hence why I am a bit peeved that they wrote out Friar Tuck from the new series. It's the most major loss for me. All the other changes I can live with but it's my firm belief that every generation should have it's own (full) cast of Robin Hood characters and to take one away deprives them of that.

Though 'full' could of course mean anything now, as so many characters have come and gone throughout history. But there is a certain core (Robin, Little John, Marian, The Sheriff, Friar Tuck) that I feel should always be there.

But I digress... I was talking about the changes a gay/bisexual relationship could have on the story of Robin Hood. Taking perhaps a more down to earth or simplistic view, you could make the point (as many have made - jokingly) that they are a gang of young - and in this version very attractive - men, stuck out in the forest with little to no female company. And people can get very lonely. If you do take this perspective then it really isn't surprising if all of the Gang are revealed to have their little crushes on their fellow Outlaws. More so with Robin and Much as they have also been away fighting in the Crusades - even further from female company. Supposedly. Though it has been known, in general, that where an army goes female company of a sort will follow. But that's an historical argument I don't know enough about to argue.

Accepting that they are all suffering from solitude sickness, does this mean that there will be more relationships springing up in unexpected places? (I love how terrible that sounds...)

I'm guessing not, certainly not in the first series. There's too much else going on, too many other stories to tell. Just reading ahead on the episode synopsis' and seeing the amount of twists and turns (especially where Guy and Robin are concerned - and no I don't mean in a romantic sense) I'd be surprised if anyone has time to fall in love. But on a side note there may well be at least one more added piece of character depth from the Sheriff's corner. I lifted this quote out of an interview with Gordon Kennedy from the Daily Record:

"...newcomer Jonas Armstrong takes the lead role, with Cockney lad Keith Allen as a bisexual Sheriff of Nottingham.
Richard Armitage (Macduff in last year's BBC Macbeth remake alongside James McAvoy) plays Guy of Gisbourne..."

A bisexual Sheriff of Nottingham? I maybe being a little dense but I'm fairly sure I haven't read any interviews or reviews that have said that quite so directly. Is it the Daily Record exaggerating? Entirely possible. But then again, I was under the impression that the Sheriff aimed to be a little bit different from previous interpretations. I thought it was just an attempt to 'camp him up' and make him a bit more pantomime villian - but it's not such a far stretch from that to this. And the bedroom scene between him and Robin did have a fair old whack of sexual tension smothered across it - as well as some rather smouldering looks. Or perhaps my brain is getting carried away with itself again. It wouldn't be anything new.

As a closing note, then, I leave you with the thought that a little bit of romance can go a long way and if the writers play it right - and keep any relationships (real or suggested) just on that balancing point between yes and no - then it could really add quite a charming sparkle to this modern retelling. And I love sparkle.

Plus, if it never works out between Much and Robin, at least they aren't the only two lonely Outlaws in Sherwood...