Robin Hood trilogy, by Stephen R. Lawhead

Stephen R. Lawhead is a respected author of fiction, much of it about ancient Britain. I recently read his three books on the story of Robin Hood. See here for the Wikipedia article on Robin Hood. The Wikipedia also has an article on the trilogy, but it is too brief to be very informative.The Amazon pages on the three books are these: Hood, Scarlet and Tuck.

This post is in two parts.

The first part is for those who haven't read previous books, by many different authors, about the story of Robin Hood. There have been many such, telling the story in various ways. If you haven't read such books, this trilogy is a good place to start, but the hero is seldom given that name in the trilogy. He mostly goes by Bran. I will give away the bare bones of the plot, by saying that it is about a bold hero, with a few followers, who fights tyranny, using trickery, woodcraft and skill with the longbow, and, eventually, regains his place in the world. The fighting is mostly done with the longbow.

The characters are well drawn. The story is well-done, well plotted, and the setting is also as realistic as could be expected, considering that it is in medieval Europe. It is mostly realistic, perhaps entirely realistic, depending on your view of faith in God and answered prayer. Although Lawhead's books are often sold as fantasy, there aren't any wizards in the book, and no spells are cast. There is a wise woman, who has a special link to God, and also to the woodland where most of the book takes place. The book has a Christian world-view, which is not out of place in that day and time. The second book won a Christy award. However, the books are not preachy. Some of the characters just have faith and act on it. Not all church officials are motivated by faith, although some of them are.

Lawhead tries for authenticity, in that he gives what he believes to be culture-accurate renderings of many words. One example: The French invaders are Freinc, in these books. There are pronunciation aids. Another adjustment is that the second book is told in the first person, whereas the first and third are not.

For those who have read previous books, the trilogy will take some getting used to. There's no Nottingham, and no Sherwood Forest. The story is moved to Wales, where Lawhead says it belongs. There is a sheriff, and a Guy of Gisbourne, and there is a Friar Tuck, an Alan a Dale, a Will Scarlet, and a Little John (although they all have variations of these names. Little John is called Iwan, with no "little.") There are some important characters, such as the wise woman, an Archbishop, and a Norman nobleman, who are not important, or don't occur at all, in other stories of Robin Hood. Bran is not the heir to an estate, but to a small kingdom.

Lawhead explains the change of location. Perhaps he is right, but I don't think it makes for a better story.

Overall, the books are well written, and held my attention. I'm glad I read them.

Thanks for reading. Read Lawhead.

The Outlaws of Sherwood, by Robin McKinley

I recently read The Outlaws of Sherwood, by Robin McKinley (Ace, 1989). This is a re-telling of the legends of Robin Hood, who is best known for robbing the rich and helping the poor with the takings.

McKinley says that she was influenced by the version of Robin Hood, The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood, written and illustrated by Howard Pyle. I first read that book myself when I was a boy. She also used other sources. In her "Afterword," McKinley says:
Scholars disagree about when the stories were first told; the earliest hints of an historical Robin Hood date about 1260. The first literary reference to him is from the Piers Ploughman in 1377. But the retellings through the centuries have echoed concurrent preoccupations -- not those of a possible historical precedent that existed, and may or may not have been a person called Robin Hood. (p. 277)

So what were McKinley's "current preoccupations"? Well, there seem to have been several. Robin Hood, for her, was a Saxon, fighting Norman oppressors. (There is precedent for this, in some of the old versions of the story.) Another one is that Robin is introspective, and, if not fearful, extremely cautious. In Pyle's version, there are scores of outlaws. McKinley's Robin Hood doesn't seem to ever have more than twenty or so, and sometimes less than that. McKinley's Robin Hood is not the finest archer in his band. In fact, he may be the worst.

An important preoccupation, the most important, I would say, is the emphasis on women in The Outlaws of Sherwood. Marian, who loves Robin -- and the reverse -- does not live in Sherwood Forest, but her role is critical. (Pyle scarcely mentions her.) If there is a Christ figure in the book, she is the one. There is an archery contest, and Robin doesn't attend, because he believes it is a trap (which it is) and because he isn't a superb archer. But Marian believes that belief in Robin Hood's ability, and in his power to evade the Sheriff of Nottingham, is so important that someone must represent him. So she dresses in the costume the outlaws use, disguises herself as a male, and wins the contest. Then she is openly attacked by Guy of Gisbourne, who believes her to be Robin Hood, and nearly dies, for Robin's sake. She does recover.

That's not all Marian does, and she isn't the only woman with a prominent role. Marjorie, a pampered, sheltered young woman, becomes quietly competent in making do in what passes for a kitchen in Sherwood, and even plays a crucial role in the rescue of Robin's band from Guy of Gisbourne. Another woman, Cecily of Norwood, brother to Will Scarlet, becomes as good at woodcraft and fighting as the men around her, and she isn't the only such woman.

Marian, Marjorie, and Cecily all find husbands, life companions. All of them are aware of some flaws in the men they have chosen, but they have chosen well, and they have made the choice themselves. Marian and Marjorie come to the book already in love, but we get to experience Cecily's thoughts (and that of her eventual husband) as they come to realize how they feel about each other. All three of these women have rejected prospective husbands chosen for economic or political reasons by their fathers. Robin Hood's band removes the chosen groom from the wedding ceremony, substituting Marjorie's true love. Marian's father is unable to enforce his choice on her. Cicely runs away and joins Robin Hood's band, disguised as a boy.

Is this a feminist version? Perhaps so. It is a version which emphasizes the common humanness of both men and women. In other words, it is as much, or more, a version about character than about setting or plot. McKinley is good at portraying character.

What about worship, and the role of the church? There are, as in other versions, corrupt Bishops, traveling through Sherwood Forest bearing wealth, ripe for the picking. Friar Tuck is an important character, and he is a good man, but quite a bit is said about his healing ability, and next to nothing about his priestly duties, or his worship habits. Not much is said about anyone else's devotional life.

I enjoyed the book. McKinley's preoccupations are interesting.

Thanks for reading.