Merlin the magician: from devil’s son to King Arthur’s trusted advisor | Hacker News Reader

Merlin the magician: from devil’s son to King Arthur’s trusted advisor

blogs.bl.uk

55 pointspepys20 comments

> His character was probably an amalgam of Myrddin Wyllt, a bard and wild man of the Caledonian forest in Welsh tradition

TIL this has a different etymology than the species of bird: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(bird)#Nomenclature

I'll still choose to believe that the town in Oregon is named after the magician because that's more fun :)

I always liked the Merlin from the movie Excalibur 1981, played Nicol Williamson.

He seemed both otherworldly, powerful, and yet befuddled by humanity.

I really liked Merlyn in "The Once and Future King". I feel like the animal metaphors worked as a good teaching tool, and I feel like he sort of worked to push the books theming and philosophy forward.

I like the one from 1998, I think it's a TV movie or miniseries that was turned into a movie. I always ranged Wanted them to reboot it with a bigger budget.

I wasn't aware of this one, but it looks pretty dark, which is how an Arthur tale should be. Thanks for the recommendation -- going to watch this tonight.

You're in for a deeply strange, wild time. Stick with it after the bizarre opening and abrasive dialog; it gets better and is quite affecting by the end.

Boorman depicts the Arthurian myth almost in religious way; it is intentionally solemn, weird, almost painful in its lack in humor, and jarring in its refusal to explore the psyches of its characters, preferring instead to insist its tale itself is transcendent and demand reverence. The closest other film I can think of that makes remotely similar choices is David Lynch's Dune (1985). Dune is seen as odd by the Lynch fanbase, but I've come to view it as fitting perfectly with Lynch's fascination with subjective experience, given what we see is the depiction of the 'Messiah' through the frame of devoted believer Princess Irulan. Dune (1985)'s disinterest in authentic human experience is built into the frame; there's a reason some viewers felt like they'd sat in a 2 hr Sunday school lesson.

And yet...

> it is intentionally solemn, weird

As a plus it has superb evocations of the ancient landscapes of Britain (admittedly filmed in Eire), in a way that I think captures a Tolkien-like view of a young world that is fresh and green

> almost painful in its lack in humor

And there is a subtle humour, especially in Merlin, who is more directly humorous, than say Gandalf (another mythic wizard).

> and jarring in its refusal to explore the psyches of its characters

It surfaces the personalities and drives of multiple distinct characters. If they aren't 'explored' it's perhaps because they represent distinct folk personas and Boorman was more interested in their interactions and responses to each other.

Suburb post, and I have so very little to add.

Supposing a Stewart triple feature, the question remains, how to button-up a trilogy that includes Excalibur and Dune... and in what order (chronological or feature, sequel, prequel)?

> almost painful in its lack in humor

What?!

«You cannot understand, Merlin! You are not a man...»

It's just humour from a different "world" [:grin:]

Oh it's exceptional; the film itself, like Merlin, is almost an artefact from the world that was slipping away. Only some of our most gifted filmmakers could conceive of how to go about this kind of project, let alone pull it off.

Do not miss, in your interpretation of "humour", that a big topic of the movie is, in fact, compassion (interestingly, at the same time a legacy and a radical difference between "the old gods" and "the new gods"). Compassion also involves noting the absurdities of those existences bound to their own nature (of god, of man, of titan). It is subterranean in the movie, and sometimes its side or radical humour (laughter inducing, but not "funny": tragic) emerges more clearly.

Oh my, Bryans, this means you missed the potent revival of the Carmina Burana opening the eighties...¹ Have a good Boorman. Do not miss noticing late twenties Liam Neeson.

(Then, can I recommend Point Blank? And I am sure you heard of Deliverance.)

¹ O Fortuna, velut luna, statu variabilis...

It is dark, bombastic, takes itself very seriously. But it is really well made, an INCREDIBLE cast, and by the end it really comes together.

This also has, IIRC, Geraldine McEwan -- later on much better known for her miss Marple -- as the crazy old witch. (Or maybe that was some other Arthur movie?)

Aha, no, not even a King Arthur movie -- she played "Mortianna" in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. Lots of other big stars from the time in that: https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0102798/fullcredits/cast/

So, sorry, my parent post was irrelevant in this context.

best Merlin in existence is on the Warlord Chronicles by Bernard Cornwell.

If this interests you, I highly recommend you check out a book called The Grail Legend. It is written by Carl Jung's wife, and is essentially her life's work (written over many years but completed by someone else).

[-1] https://archive.org/details/graillegend00jung

Joseph Campbell, a student of Carl Jung (not literally in person, and yet literally in absorbing Jung sources), has also published many worthy reflections on origins and variations of Arthurian Legend, including highlighted selections, if one is interested in that sort of thing.

Experiencing a little synchronicity now as I've recently picked up Hero With A Thousand Faces :)

If you're interested in some of the life and afterlife of Celtic myths, I'd wholeheartedly suggest The Celtic Myths that Shape the Way we Think by Mark Williams. I finished it a few days ago, and it was really good. Went into detail about what we can actually know about Celtic myth (hint: pretty much nothing), what even 'Celtic' means, etc., but also talked about some of the most famous stories, what our sources are, and how they've been adapted since. It was quite an interesting read.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com