robin hood 3x10 redux; or, yes, it works (maybe even the bow), part 2
--The post with Part 1 (which handles the introductory scenes between Robin and Guy, and Robin and Isabella) is here, if you've missed it and are interested.--
Okay, Part 2 of matching "Bad Blood" in with the previous canon will mainly involve 1x02 - "Sheriff Got Your Tongue?" The central focus here is the conversation between Guy and Marian at Knighton Hall [26:44].
"I have ambitions which are greater, of course; you know that," Guy says. "But, for now, to have land once more in the Gisborne name... my father would be proud."
"I am very glad for you," Marian replies neutrally.
"Some of my men, I know this for a fact, used to laugh at my title," he admits with a sniff. "'Guy of Gisborne,' when there was no Gisborne."
"And Locksley is your Gisborne?" she challenges.
"Yes, actually. I am intent on changing its name," he declares.
"Does changing a name really make a difference?" she queries.
"When a woman marries, she changes her name," he points out. "It makes a difference."
Firstly, while I'd been under the impression that Guy's father was rather hard, and was therefore (pleasantly) surprised by the Roger we saw in 3x10, Guy's words do seem to imply a tribute to his father or a fulfilling of something he felt his father was owed. Often, when a character in something thinks their parent would be pleased with an action or accomplishment, it's an overarcing trait-- constantly trying to earn/make up for/et cetera that parent's regard. Here, it seems a specific thing, tied to the land.
As he continues, the suggestion that in Part 1 about him being fixated on Locksley, and most aspects of Robin's life, really, is strengthened. He stresses the word "intent" in such a way that it's nearly a vow-- he is INTENT on seeing Locksley renamed Gisborne.
This brings me back to, Why Robin? Why Locksley? It feels like something Guy has taken personally, beyond merely being told off in front of the villagers. The sheriff tells him off in front of people constantly; granted, he serves under the sheriff and Robin is now an outlaw, raising Guy above him on a social level, but it seems to me that it's more than simply exercising power to take revenge.
Now, one of the questions which has popped up in my head-- and I know I'm not alone-- is why nobody else has ever mentioned any of this. The other day, I addressed my theory that Much did know, because Robin's talked to him of it. Marian, it seems, would also have been privy to the story, and therefore wouldn't be asking Guy why he was so keen on the name change. I have a couple of ideas there.
My first thought is akin to what corrielle brought up in a comment on Part 1; that Marian might not remember the details from that long ago. She's at least a few years younger than Robin, and I'd put her at no more than five when it all went down, since I didn't think he was more than eight, really. Plus, she wasn't present in any of the scenes, which leads me to a second notion-- she and Edward weren't in the area yet. It's entirely possible that they moved there after the fact, probably heard some gossip when they arrived, but if sufficient time had passed since the incident, it wouldn't be at the forefront of everyone's minds. But no matter where she was living, I doubt that anyone would've told Marian outright because she was a child, meaning that maybe she only got the story from other kids who wouldn't grasp all of the implications-- and neither would she have done. Added to Robin's reticence and that she and Guy aren't exactly confidantes at the beginning of S1, chances are good that she only has the barest of ideas concerning what happened.
Fast-forward to 1x13 - "A Clue? No." when Robin and Marian are talking about her intentions to marry Guy [25:10].
"Why can't you apply your charitable principles to somebody who's been deprived in a different way?" Marian asks. "Deprived of love?"
"Deprived of love," Robin repeats quietly, a disbelieving smile playing on his face as he shakes his head, walking by her.
I'll stress that I'm not claiming some vast conspiracy. ;) That said, this could be seen as Robin thinking of his parents, whom it's likely Marian never met-- especially if she and Edward didn't move to the area until a little later.
Also-- I've had a thought about the question of why Guy wouldn't use this backstory to gain Marian's favor. There are two possible ways of looking at that: one, that he's playing more on her idea of his needing love (which is working!!); or two, that he doesn't want her to see that side of him, that he wants her to see him only as a strong, protector-type. That is actually pretty fitting with the character.
That's most of what I have for the moment; I watch an episode almost daily, if not more than one in a day, and I'm now listening for bits that pertain to background of any of the characters-- or that could be seen to fit with 3x10. If I come across anything more, I'll pop it up.
As to the bow, I offered my (admittedly flimsy and weak) way of explaining that in the Part 1 comments, and altered it slightly when chatting with
roh_wyn about it there. What it comes down to is Luke was quite young when Robin left, and chances are they didn't have a whole lot of personal contact. Therefore, at first I put the possibility that Luke wasn't familiar with the weapon, and was curious; I also offer the idea that, while he was familiar with it, he was asking about the mechanics of it. He shows Robin his bow, that Dan made; then he gestures to Robin's and asks, "But why does yours got those curves in it?" Which could be something he'd have been too young and/or unfamiliar to notice or ask about before. (Yes, it is so weak it's nearly boneless, I know. :D)
Also, as to Gisborne/Locksley, which is something else that's caused a lot of confusion. After the first viewing, I came away with the understanding that Gisborne had been made from a part of Locksley lands, which had been awarded to Roger by the king, with or without Malcolm's consent. (The reason I note that, and think that it was at least partially voluntary, is that he didn't seem put out at all, and didn't jump at the chance to regain them. Although, that could be because he was shagging Ghislaine.) Gisborne Manor, despite being completely fairly identical to Locksley Manor, was not the same building. Figure, though, that Dan Scarlett "built half this village," as Robin points out about Locksley-- chances are very good that he would've built, or been involved in the building, of a house on lands that had been attached to Locksley. Probably the lordship bestowed on Roger was specific to his family; as long as they were there, the land was theirs, but would revert to Locksley if there was no one overseeing it-- which could explain how signing it over to Baliff Longthorne was legal/legitimate.
I wasn't sure why I thought that, so listened for it specifically yesterday. And actually, I got confused by it for the first time up until the end. I did notice that the reason I thought it wasn't just a gifting of the whole of Locksley to Roger because everyone was still referring and deferring to Malcolm as his lordship-- not something that would have happened if he'd been stripped of his holdings. Also, he and Robin were still very well-dressed, and probably wouldn't have been so if they'd been reduced to living in the village. But it did seem as if Gisborne was Locksley.
But the real answer came nearly at the end, when the priest says, "The village will become part of the Locksley estate again." There it is! :)
Robin still should've given it to Guy, but he could be excused as being a kid then, and they hated each other so much later on that it wasn't going to happen.
Now, there's a lovely merlot awaiting my attention, so if you'll excuse me... :)