Oxford and Robin Hood

[ladyofastolat]

(...which, boringly, are two unrelated topics.)

Day off today, since I'm working on Saturday and Sunday, and, for some strange reason, didn't fancy working 12 days without a break. I can't really afford today off, since I have a tonne of things to get ready for the weekend, but, hey... Why on earth does Family Learning Week, Children's Book Week, Bookstart Day, and Family-friendly libraries day all happen in the same week?

Anyway...



Yesterday was a bit of an Oxfordy day. A conversation at work made me realise that I've not actually gone to Oxford for 3 or 4 years. We really must spend a day or two there soon. I also realised that, in all the five years I spent there, I never went to any Oxford museum, except for the Ashmolean. This is very shocking. I must go to the Pitt-Rivers museum, even if nothing else.

Then, after dinner, I stumbled on a TV programme about Oxford architecture, presented by the most annoying sneery man imaginable. Although he was talking about buildings, he made a point of detouring into the Eagle and Child just so he could sneer about Tolkien and CS Lewis. It was "ghastly", he said, to imagine Tolkien and Lewis talking about the drivel that was their books, and enough to put one of your pint. He also sneered at lots of Colleges on the grounds that frivolous people like Hugh Grant went to them. He even sneered mightily at half the buildings. He derided the Sheldonian, despite the valiant attempt of Allan Chapman (our senior member in History Alive) to be enthusiastic and positive about it. Nasty man. I hate this habit the media has of sneering at anything and everything.

Then, in the evening, I got a phone call from Merton. I vaguely remember them writing to me a few weeks ago to warn me that I was going to get a phone call from a bright and keen young student. Of course, the phone call was just to get money. I've been donating to Merton by direct debit for three years, and it needed renewing, so they were just trying to ensure that I carried on. But she started by interrogating me about my career, about what I did in Oxford - what activities I did, how I socialised. "Outside Merton, mostly," I told her, so she interrogated me about what societies I was in, and so on. It made me feel quite uncomfortable, and a bit patronised. I expect she had a script - "remember to pretend to be interested in their lives before asking them for money." I didn't like it.



I'm very much in two minds about the new Robin Hood. Part of me is looking forward to it very much. This is the part of me that looks at pictures of Guy of Gisbourne, and others, and turns into a shallow, swoony girlie. But the other part of me looks at the ridiculous costumes, knitted armour and stupid weapons, and wants to run a mile. It's worse than the worst of the 1950s swashbucklers. It's clear from the pictures that they've not remotely tried to be historically accurate. The costumes are modern casual with a faintly fantasy-medieval theme.

But, then, Robin Hood isn't history, but folk tale. Folk tales, like folk songs, exist to be interpreted differently by each teller. When Chretien de Troyes did his Arthurian stories, no-one wrote angry letters into the Troubadour Times about the historical accuracy. Older stories were automatically updated and cast in the clothes of the day, reflecting the values of the day. So an entirely modern Robin Hood would be entirely in keeping with the folk tradition.

But, yet, this Robin Hood version is set at a clear time in history. Richard I is away on Crusade. Robin Hood (according to the Radio Times) has just returned from Crusades. So they're taking it out of the realm of folk tale and into history. I think this means that requires them to take more effort at historical accuracy than if they were setting it in a vague medieval never-never land of folklore.

But, then, I love "A Knight's Tale", and that takes huge liberties with history, too...

*is torn*

Ah well. Maybe I should wait until it's been shown before agonising over whether to like it or not.

And, talking TV, when is Torchwood starting?

Comments

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

I watched the Oxford architecture programme too. What a narrow-minded man Gavin Stamp is. Still, he's a media don and that kind of performance makes easy television. There were a few brief detours into St John's but when he came to discuss Canterbury Quad I don't think he actually said where it was.

I have yet to be patronized by anyone from St John's, although they do have an alumni operation now. I'm more likely to donate to the History Faculty at the moment than my college, I have to say, but that's because my Oxford experience has been longer (is indeed still ongoing in a patchy way) and I know which of the two needs the money more.

I've seen the Robin Hood trailer with Jonas Armstrong speaking in character, and I wasn't greatly taken by his performance or the uber-cool characterization - everything I find irritating about David Tennant's Doctor magnified. I hope that my reaction won't be to alacritously put on a Robin of Sherwood episode.

Torchwood is in pre-teaser stage, with occasional floating 'T's fizzing and crackling between programmes on BBC channels for a couple of seconds. Press launch next week; debut rumoured to be either 21 or 28 October.

[ladyofastolat.livejournal.com]

I missed the start of the Oxford thing, and only switched on when he was doing New College, so I don't know if he sneered at Merton, too. I very much dislike TV presenters who pass off their own subjective opinions as fact. I like presenters who are experts in their fields, but not when they sneer at anyone and everything that doesn't match their own narrow definition of what is worthy.

How do I donate to the History Faculty? If they're in need of it, I'll happily donate.

Oh dear... I hope Robin Hood isn't like David Tennant's Doctor. While I enjoyed the episodes in the last season of Doctor Who, I always wanted to slap the silly grin off his face whenever he appeared.

Thanks for the Torchwood info. I'm looking forward to that one. It's pure Captain Jack shallowness, I'm afraid.

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

He didn't sneer at Merton, as I recall, but praised it as the 'first Oxford college' (skordh? Neuromancer?) and discussed the innovation that was Mob Quad.

Do the Faculty send you 'The Oxford Historian'? I think that there were details about donating there; but I left my last copy in the office, I think, perhaps as a slight to them for making me redundant (though it wasn't their fault, but the Fell Press's, and their decision that TGW should be governed by market forces). The History Faculty alumni website doesn't have 'The Oxford Historian' online, though it thinks it does.

You'd appreciate the following, from a mock-up of a Personals page on the back of the latest issue of the Canadian Doctor Who fanzine 'Enlightenment':

FLYBOY GOES IN ANY DIRECTION. Dashing and gorgeous Captain seeks guy or gal or... well anything really, to ride his tribophysical waveform macrokinetic extrapolator to the stars and back. Must be breathing with a pulse and, er, that's pretty much all that's necessary. Box 21135.

[ladyofastolat.livejournal.com]

I did get "The Oxford Historian", issue 2 (but not 1.) I know I've received another one since then, but can't remember what issue number it was. It arrived probably at least 9 months, or longer, after the previous one. I expect it has long since gone out for recycling. I'll look up donation details when they consent to send me another issue.

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Factual correction: I wasn't made redundant; my contract came to an end. However, as the law now stands someone who has been on a fixed-term contract is entitled to severance pay, so the university still needs to go through the redundancy formalities.

Irrelevant to your post, but I was being historically irresponsible.