"ROBIN HOOD" MOVIE:

Anglo-Saxon debate about the "author’s rights" for liberty and democracy
Group of documents, which – at a stretch – may be referred to the principal laws
of Great Britain, originates from the very Magna Carta. It has nothing revoluti
onary in it, though. From the legal point of view, the much-talked-about "Yarosl
av’s Justice"1, which was in use in Russia for a long time then, was more "advan
ced" document of its period. English Magna Carta, however, became the sacred myt
h and the "foundation stone of liberty", whatever that word may mean. "Robin Hoo
d" directed by Ridley Scott is the first – may it be the probing one – attempt t
o work with that myth.
Guest from the present
There’s a rather small group of directors, capable of making historical movies.
And it is Ridley Scott, – who created "Gladiator", "Kingdom, of Heaven" and "Rob
in Hood" – who leads this group. It is exactly the "Gladiator" that is considere
d to be the movie that brought the sympathies of the mass audience to the histor
ical movie genre – the one that lost it since the times of "Ben-Hur" and "Cleopa
tra". Not the least of the factors is that in the 80s Ridley Scott with his "Bla
de-Runner" and "Alien" quadrilogy also headed the group of directors who were th
e best at shooting the films about the future. There’s no contradiction here. In
order to understand humanity we have to look where we are going to at first, an
d then – where have we come from.
Such leaps from one epoch to another cannot go without a trace for an honest art
ist. Future is getting to be known with our mind, while the past – with our emot
ions. Ridley Scott managed to succeed at both fields. It happened due to a rathe
r simple artistic trick he used to apply in all the cases. In fact, main hero of
all of his films is the contemporary of ours – who, in an unknown way, fetched
himself in the other period of time and discovers the events that take place aro
und him. He shows the typical reactions of the white Anglo-Saxon man from the 90
s. His position is strictly democratic and anti-clerical. He doesn’t understand
the matters of nobility and sanctity, having preferred to cast them away in disg
ust.
At the "Kingdom of Heaven" he spends a night at Golgotha Hill and in the morning
he throws his cross away. In "Robin Hood" he refuses to accept the accidentally
obtained title and becomes Robin Longstride again, having – we need to add this
– terribly crossed up those surrounding him. Final scenes of these movies are q
uite symptomatic. Having succeeded at their deeds and having, without doubt, inf
luenced the history, heroes suddenly vanish in the fog of an absolute resignatio
n. Gladiator may have tried to become a Roman emperor. Baron of Ibelin, last pro
tector of Jerusalem could have become a living legend of the Crusades era. Sir R
obert Loxley, having rebuffed the French invasion of England, could have acquire
d the marshal’s baton. Instead of that we see the escape from the history, const
raining the field of activity with the village smithery or the clearing in the w
oods.
To wait until the "Mayflower" leaves
What can we do at these locations, lying in the great distance from the historic
al deeds? I will put forth a cautious suggestion – to wait until the "Mayflower"
leaves, having driven the first group of truly free people, willing to build an
actually independent society (quotation marks are implied) away. Any Christian
historian, speaking of the holy history before Christ wouldn’t fail to add that
the real morality became possible only after the embodiment of the Son of God. E
ven the pious Job, who pleased God the most, exclaimed "In grief will I go down
to Abaddon". Every moral deed of a man was colored with an indelible seal of the
original sin. That’s why the "Ecclesiastes"’ eternal grief was considered to be
the most sober attitude: "everything passes and there’s nothing new under the s
un", "the more knowledge, the more grief".
Well, the Christian historians have the right for that, as long as they’re talki
ng about the history of holiness rather than about history in general, but who g
ranted Ridley Scott the right to bring on the thought that true political deed b
ecame possible only after the "Mayflower"? This is a rhetorical issue, and I’m p
retty sure that for Ridley Scott himself and for the common Americans this issue
is out of question. All the world history is a rather protracted prologue for t
he history of America. Just when Greece and Rome have prepared the world for acc
eptance of the progressive democracy, there you go – emperors ascended the thron
e and everything was to be started all over from the very beginning. Just when t
he world was ready for the mutual enrichment of the religions and cultures, brut
e and greedy Crusaders started the Crusades.
Magna Carta
Main theme of the "Robin Hood" movie is concentrated around the event of no smal
l importance for the English history – signing of the Great Charter or Magna Car
ta by the King John. This document limited the king’s power over his vassals. In
order to understand its significance we should know that the British Empire, st
ate with the ancient democratic traditions, has no constitution at all. That’s w
hy recent words of a certain Russian liberal functionary, stating that in Englan
d the elections take place according to the constitution, were met with a sincer
e good-natured laughter. Indeed, what does the man who invented the automobile m
ight need the instruction for? Leave these manuals to those who are willing to u
se this car.
Americans, being very proud of their constitution, at the same time sub-consciou
sly feel the slightest nuance like this one. It may not be perceivable by the co
mmon citizens, but for the "uncommon ones" its significance is clear to its full
extent. That’s why any attempts to write a new contemporary constitution are bl
ocked in the USA – having confined the society with the amendments. There is its
own reasoning here. The time makes the text sacral and transfers it into the co
mpletely different category. It turned out, though, that the contemporary USA is
deprived of this very time.
Group of documents, which – at a stretch – may be referred to the principal laws
of Great Britain, originates from the very Magna Carta. It has nothing revoluti
onary in it, though. From the legal point of view, the much-talked-about "Yarosl
av’s Justice" which was in use in Russia for a long time then, was more "advance
d" document of its period. English Magna Carta, however, became the sacred myth
and the "foundation stone of liberty", whatever that word may mean. "Robin Hood"
directed by Ridley Scott is the first – may it be the probing one – attempt to
work with that myth. As we’ve mentioned – the time presses.
In Ridley Scott’s vision, Magna Carta is a document, the text, first of all. It
is not a half-verbal agreement, based on traditions and representing the result
of the years-long negotiations and mutual give-and-takes by the nobility and kin
g himself. This is rather a text, written without any participation of these per
sons – by a simple mason, father of Robin Hood and a leader of the common folk.
All the barons and the king have to do is to sign this text and go home. History
turns into the theory of conspiracy.
Here we can see nothing more but an analogy with the Bible which – according to
the opinion of Protestants – came down from the sky so we can either accept or d
eny it. It wouldn’t take much effort to notice that such conception gives a too
large field for various speculations. If Bible is a Book of God rather than Book
of Church then we don’t have to pay attention to the Church at all. Quite natur
ally, Protestants claim that Church was mistaken – since about the time of apost
les and until the appearance of Luther. The unchanged text of the Holy Writ play
s the role of the connecting link here – it may be interpreted by absolutely eve
ryone. And why wouldn’t you do that yourself?
While in the past he, who persuaded everyone that it he interpreted the Bible co
rrectly, ruled the world, today it’s the one, capable of convincing everyone tha
t he interprets the democracy and liberty in the utmost right way. Techniques ar
e identical in both cases. Magna Carta text turns into the ashes in the hands of
King John and that means that England denied the democracy. All the free men ha
d to move to the forests and stop participating in the unrighteous political sys
tem. They were to hide in the woods until the group of free men wouldn’t sail aw
ay seeking for the free continent, and the truly words of the previously hidden
Great Charter wouldn’t sound for the first time.
Protestant theology has worked out several apologetic receipts for interpreting
the general history of the Church – getting to know them wouldn’t be out of plac
e. Holy Writ is the source of the Truth, and the common folk are the keepers of
the truth – they haven’t left any written evidences of faith and thus, could hav
e confessed the Protestant faith as well. Priests, bishops, and fathers of the C
hurch are proclaimed to be the persecutors of Truth. There are some gradations h
ere. Some of them erred sincerely, few have enlightened the truth but kept silen
ce, having feared of the suppressions, while the majority of people were carryin
g these very suppressions out. And, finally, heretics like Catarrhs and Waldensi
ans were proclaimed to be the true bearers of the truth who were, naturally, per
secuted. Any actions of the Medieval Church administration were subjects to the
strict analysis from the position of fighting for democracy and, of course, turn
ed out to be monstrous, ridiculous and clearly anti-Christian.
It won’t be hard to recognize the unique style of late Ridley Scott, as well as
the reasons why did the master of the films about future turn into the master of
the films about the past. Lie about future is much more probable to be revealed
. Truth about future says too much about the present. If Martin Luther has got a
cquainted with Margot Käßmann, head of German Lutheran Church in 2010, and heard
her fierce debates concerning the rights of homosexuals and the contraceptives
as the Gift of God, 95 theses would have hardly been nailed to the church gates
in Wittenberg. So just the same, the man who thoroughly watched the "Blade-runne
r" should have few illusions considering the direction the American democracy is
moving in. Nowadays, however, Ridley Scott is remaking the "Blade-runner". I gu
ess, quite a number curios inventions are waiting for us.
By Vadim Bulatov