I would be a bit disappointed if they abandoned this part of the legends, because they wanted a happy end. They change a lot, but it's always inconsequential things, IMO. When they made Merlin and Arthur about the same age, it still worked, it may be even better like this. In a bigger picture it does not matter if Merlin was Arthur's mentor or he had to gain his respect step by step as his manservant. The same age allows a different dynamics, with the old Merlin it would probably feel like an old Doctor Who Giving Guinevere and Arthur a happy end would not feel right, because 'everybody knows' it did not end well. So far they seem to respect the popular version of the legends. Sticking to it brings familiarity, it does not feel like the authors decided to improve the stories and changed everything. They still have enough freedom to play with details, new angles and motivations. Little deviations from the known are fun, big ones may make one lose interest. Because if everything goes why call them Merlin, Morgana, or Arthur.
I think anyone who expects Arthur and Gwen to have a happy ending is indulging in some wishful thinking, tbh.
It was abundantly clear last year that she loved Lancelot when they met last year and she was very upset when he left. I think her reaction in the finale was very well played - she wasn't comfortable with Arthur kissing her in front of the others but I also got the impression she was slightly annoyed with Lancelot (for leaving) yet at the same time there was some awkwardness due to her feelings.
I definitely think she loves them both but I always get the impression somehow that part of her love for Arthur is for what he is - the noble king she keeps trying to make him in to. Her love for Lancelot strikes me as more personal somehow.
To me it seems rather obvious that they're going down the route of Gwen makes Arthur a good king, but that doesn't make him a good husband hence she can't eventually resist the feelings she still holds for Lancelot. For his part, he'll be all noble about it right up until the point when they give in.
I don't agree with this at all.
I think it's too early to know/predict what they're going to do with Gwen/Arthur/Lancelot.
Of course I'd love them to not go down the affair route, but they've certainly put all the key elements in there to make that happen further down the road...that's not to say that it will.
IMO, there's absolutely no point in arguing that it will be this way or it will be that way. Right now I think only the writers know what they're going to be doing with this particular story line!
Little deviations from the known are fun, big ones may make one lose interest. Because if everything goes why call them Merlin, Morgana, or Arthur.
Everything has gone except the names. Uther died when arthur was 2 years old. Gauis has taken the role of the legendry Merlin. Morgause should be Arthurs half sister but in childrens tv I don't think we will see her seduce Arthur to produce Modred. Morgana is another name for Morgan Le Fay. The series has to be taken for what it is. Jolly good adventure story for children.
Fantastic finale, I loved every minute of it. By far the best programme on a Saturday night and I can't believe we're going to have to wait until 2012 for a new series.
I'd forgotten that Lancelot knew about Merlin's secret and it will be interesting to see how many of the others know but are frightened to say anything in case it gets him killed. Since the episode with the Fisher King I think Gwain has guessed and to be honest it wouldn't surprise me if Arthur has an "inkling".
The round table scene, the knights riding in at the end, the acknowledgement of Guinevere, the trust and loyalty between Arthur and Merlin, the dragon finally confirming his allegience to Merlin, Guias showing us that he can do magic as good as the most powerful, and of course THE sword in the stone. Everything about that episode was fantastic.
Well done to all concerned. This is really what good Saturday night family entertainment is really all about.
couldnt agree with you more! Saturday entertainment for both adults and the kids its fantastic and ive loved every episode since it first started -
Everything has gone except the names. Uther died when arthur was 2 years old. Gauis has taken the role of the legendry Merlin. Morgause should be Arthurs half sister but in childrens tv I don't think we will see her seduce Arthur to produce Modred. Morgana is another name for Morgan Le Fay. The series has to be taken for what it is. Jolly good adventure story for children.
But the writers have always said that we know where these characters end up - they're just showing another version of how.
she wasn't comfortable with Arthur kissing her in front of the others but I also got the impression she was slightly annoyed with Lancelot (for leaving) yet at the same time there was some awkwardness due to her feelings.
I didn't get that impression at all, I saw her being a bit embarrassed at his open demonstration in front of the knights simply because she's a servant and he's the Prince and she had no idea how they were going to react.
When she gets off that horse at the end and they kiss and embrace there's nothing there other than utter relief he's alive and complete love no matter who is watching.
Whilst I have read several of those, and many more besdes including The Mabinogion, I would personally recommend The Warlord Chronicles (The Winter king, Enemy of God & Excalibur) by Bernard Cornwell (he of Sharpe fame).
They are certainly more about "greasy, waist-length beards serving as napkins, lambs bloodily sacrificed before festivals, and rampant lice" rather than Bromance and comedy being historically accurate in tone with the tale set in post-Roman Britain where pagans and christians rub against each other badly. They are however a damn fine read, contain some fantastic battle scenes and are his best works in my opinion.
Of course the fact that Lancelot is depicted as an arrogant, cowardly, petty prince whose legend is entirely made up by his bards is a big plus point (as he has never been my favourite in the legends). Also Merlin appears as a lecherous, driven, mischievous and irreverent druid.
Bernard Cornwall's telling of the Arthurian legends is epic, I would recommend Laura reads those after she's got a bit more familiar with the stories though as they're quite a bit more realistic if you see what I mean?
Everything has gone except the names. Uther died when arthur was 2 years old. Gauis has taken the role of the legendry Merlin. Morgause should be Arthurs half sister but in childrens tv I don't think we will see her seduce Arthur to produce Modred. Morgana is another name for Morgan Le Fay. The series has to be taken for what it is. Jolly good adventure story for children.
Exactly so. Apart from the names and the vaguest of connections to the legends, so far nothing that the BBC version of Merlin has portrayed is anywhere near "accurate" in the loosest sense of the word.
But the writers have always said that we know where these characters end up - they're just showing another version of how.
But, as has been said, there's absolutely nothing that says they have to show it in this current production of Merlin. They could, quite easily, finish the series completely with Arthur marrying Gwen and Merlin taking his place as Arthur's trusted advisor in all things magical with Lancelot as the Commander of the Knights of Camelot (although poor Sir Leon would have to have got injured - cos I won't have him die!) and the future looks bright and rosy.
But, as has been said, there's absolutely nothing that says they have to show it in this current production of Merlin. They could, quite easily, finish the series completely with Arthur marrying Gwen and Merlin taking his place as Arthur's trusted advisor in all things magical with Lancelot as the Commander of the Knights of Camelot (although poor Sir Leon would have to have got injured - cos I won't have him die!) and the future looks bright and rosy.
I suspect that's what they will do. I also suspect there'll be a 'nudge nudge, wink wink' look of longing between Gwen and Lancelot to signal where that's going.
I thought this too, especially now after Gauis has revealed his magical strength.
Also think that Arthur generally feels quite lonely and his relationship with Merlin is getting quite brotherly. Albeit that Arthur feels like the older, stronger more favoured brother . He sometimes looks shocked when he realises how much he values/cares about his 'servant' - and I don't mean in any way that I think it's a gay relationship because I don't!
Its a Fake tale the writers will do what they want with it. Its not the writers fault if Bradley and Angel cant act. The writer clearly intend for there to be sexual tension between Arthur and Gwen. If it is not coming across on screen then you have to blame Angel and Bradley for they are not doing the job properly. Some people have to work out that Merlin is not real life Gwen and Arthur are played by actors and for all we know they may hate each other off set and it comes across on screen when its not ment too. who knows.
But we all know Gwen will become queen and will regin with arthur for a very long time
But we all know Gwen will become queen and will regin with arthur for a very long time
Eh? We know no such thing.
And we're all aware Bradley and Angel are actors and not attracted to each other in real life. I've said befire thatI think Bradley's discomfort with kissing her comes through on screen. But I think it works in the context of the show because we all know that ultimately Gwen and Arthur don't work out and the awkwardness kinda foreshadows this.
For all we know Bradley and Angel are playing it this way deliberately.
And we're all aware Bradley and Angel are actors and not attracted to each other in real life. I've said befire thatI think Bradley's discomfort with kissing her comes through on screen. But I think it works in the context of the show because we all know that ultimately Gwen and Arthur don't work out and the awkwardness kinda foreshadows this.
For all we know Bradley and Angel are playing it this way deliberately.
You think Bradley looks uncomfortable kissing Angel, I think it looks perfectly natural and in keeping with the way the story is portraying their relationship.
Their first kiss in Gwen's house was very tender the way it was shot.
Have just ordered some of the book recommendations from Amazon as a pre-Christmas gift for myself!
Thanks to those who posted reading ideas from yet another sad forty-something with a hopeless crush on Arthur.. and Gwaine... and Lancelot.. and (probably a carry over from my Buffy-watching days)...Uther
Well I went into WH Smith and Waterstones today and couldn't find ANY of the recommendations. I've ordered the box sets though because I want to re-watch all three series from the beginning.
I have to say I hope people don't become too precious about the legend, and just take the programme for what it is. A darn good yarn based on mythical characters which we all have heard about. After all when reading the posts from people who do know a lot about the legends it's clear to me that story tellers have been re-writing the myths throughout the centuries so, it's really unfair to criticise "our" writers for bringing the characters up-to-date in a way that will interest people (like myself) to such an extent that they will want to find out more. Surely that has to be a good thing?
I really look forward to series 4 and as long as the writers keep up the high standards I won't be complaining.
Well I went into WH Smith and Waterstones today and couldn't find ANY of the recommendations. I've ordered the box sets though because I want to re-watch all three series from the beginning.
I have to say I hope people don't become too precious about the legend, and just take the programme for what it is. A darn good yarn based on mythical characters which we all have heard about. After all when reading the posts from people who do know a lot about the legends it's clear to me that story tellers have been re-writing the myths throughout the centuries so, it's really unfair to criticise "our" writers for bringing the characters up-to-date in a way that will interest people (like myself) to such an extent that they will want to find out more. Surely that has to be a good thing?
I really look forward to series 4 and as long as the writers keep up the high standards I won't be complaining.
Exactly so Laura, something I said a while ago. There is no definitive Arthurian legend, they have all been written and rewritten a hundred times over and are continuing to be so.
Exactly so Laura, something I said a while ago. There is no definitive Arthurian legend, they have all been written and rewritten a hundred times over and are continuing to be so.
No, but there are certain elements that are very well known and that's what these writers have always said they're aiming for - Exalibur, the Lady in the Lake, the Holy Grail, sword in the stone, Mordred as Arthur's nemesis, Lancelot and Guinevere...
Arthurian legend is certainly not fluffy and there aren't exactly any happy endings! The closest anyone probably gets is Morgana because she's off in Avalon with her fellow priestesses as she would have wanted.
No, but there are certain elements that are very well known and that's what these writers have always said they're aiming for - Exalibur, the Lady in the Lake, the Holy Grail, sword in the stone, Mordred as Arthur's nemesis, Lancelot and Guinevere...
Arthurian legend is certainly not fluffy and there aren't exactly any happy endings! The closest anyone probably gets is Morgana because she's off in Avalon with her fellow priestesses as she would have wanted.
Yes, but look at how they have so far treated every one of those you have quoted:
Excalibur - not removed from the Stone by Arthur but put in it by Merlin.
The Lady in the Lake - often the mother of Lancelot, often the sister of Igraine and Morgause, always the keeper of Excalibur (rather than it being created by the Great Dragon).
The Holy Grail - the Holy Cup they had didn't really resemble anything like it as the Fisher King or Percival's sister are usually the keepers of it and it is supposed to be the cup Jesus drank from at the Last Supper and Camelot has Christian religion.
Mordred - the illegitimate offspring of an unknowing (or sometimes calculated) affair between Arthur and his half-sister Morgan le Fay.
Lancelot - not even appearing in the original Arthurian legends but a nobleman dreamt up by a Frenchman to cause trouble some two centuries later
So, as I said before, they can do whatever they like with the legends so long as they have something which uses the same name and connects in a vague way to Camelot.
They haven't stuck to the "correct" version of any of the myths yet with the single exception of Arthur and Gwen.
Yes, but look at how they have so far treated every one of those you have quoted:
You're not really listening to what I'm saying here. The producers have made it clear that this is before the legend we know. There's no point in going on about different versions of the legend - if they were using a different version they could have had Morgana as a benevolent healer as she originally was. They're using the most well known Mallory version.
They're showing a different way of getting there but we're still going to the same place. Sorry if that disappoints you because you're invested in the Arthur/Gwen romance but that's the way it is. Looking on the bright side, this version is far more sympathetic with Gwen's character than most although I think that will make her affair with Lancelot all the more angst filled and tragic.
They're showing a different way of getting there but we're still going to the same place. Sorry if that disappoints you because you're invested in the Arthur/Gwen romance but that's the way it is. Looking on the bright side, this version is far more sympathetic with Gwen's character than most although I think that will make her affair with Lancelot all the more angst filled and tragic.
This is childrens episodic television they are not going to have affairs just as they have avoided killing any main characters off. It is the most politically correct series on TV not offending anyone except for deaths of minor knights, serfs, and magical creatures. This is not Spooks.
I suspect, and hope, that this version - given that it's going out at tea time (ish) on a Saturday and is aimed at family viewing - is going to have Lancelot having unrequited love for Gwen but she staying firmly in love with Arthur.
I think they may well use Lancelot as a stumbling block / complication between Arthur and Gwen but I agree that, as this is a show watched by children as well as adults, they won't go down the 'Gwen and Lancelot have a steamy, adulterous affair' route. Some people need to remember that this is a FAMILY show!
I prefer to see Gwen's infatuation with Lancelot as a purely sexual thing, whilst she is most definitely in love with Arthur.
For those obsessed with the Lancelot/Guinevere affair, they would do well to remember that it ended precisely because it was born out of lust! So I think your point is entirely valid.
Thanks to those who posted reading ideas from yet another sad forty-something with a hopeless crush on Arthur.. and Gwaine... and Lancelot.. and (probably a carry over from my Buffy-watching days)...Uther
Hey, I'm also in my (early!) 40s and I LOVED Buffy!! Still do, truth be told. Yey Spikey, etc...
I think anyone who expects Arthur and Gwen to have a happy ending is indulging in some wishful thinking, tbh. I think her reaction in the finale was very well played - she wasn't comfortable with Arthur kissing her in front of the others...
Huh?? I didn't get that at ALL! Maybe I was distracted by the fact that she was clutching at his head while snogging his lips off...
But seriously, uncomfortable? I genuinely saw it as her wanting to make sure HE was okay with them all seeing - and I also thought it was interesting that she lumped Lancelot in with everyone else at that moment (as at another couple of key moments). Her entire focus was on Arthur.
No one is, PF! It's only certain people (or, um, person;)) who think they've got a direct connection to Bradley's brain and are able to read his thoughts. Amazing! :cool:
Excalibur - not removed from the Stone by Arthur but put in it by Merlin.
Whether the "sword in the stone" is Excalibur depends upon which version of the legend you read. Also just because Merlin put the sword in the stone doesn't stop Arthur from pulling it out though the time line would not match with most (any?) tellings.
As you say anyone expecting "faithfulness" to any particular version will be disappointed. I think this is a good thing, this is not "Lord of the rings" where there is only one accredited version so making one up fits in well with the whole scheme of things. Maybe in a couple of hundred years time the BBC series will also be used as a reference.;)
There are iconic moments in the legends that people know, but only a few know all the available details. "Sword in the stone" is such an example. People won't know who, where, why, but the image is familiar, writers can and will do what they like with the rest. The same with the Holy Grail, the round table, the Lady of the Lake, etc. I think Guinevere and Lancelot's affair has the same status. Does not matter how exactly they get there, but it should happen.
You're not really listening to what I'm saying here. The producers have made it clear that this is before the legend we know. There's no point in going on about different versions of the legend - if they were using a different version they could have had Morgana as a benevolent healer as she originally was. They're using the most well known Mallory version.
They're showing a different way of getting there but we're still going to the same place. Sorry if that disappoints you because you're invested in the Arthur/Gwen romance but that's the way it is. Looking on the bright side, this version is far more sympathetic with Gwen's character than most although I think that will make her affair with Lancelot all the more angst filled and tragic.
I'm not invested in anything and it's perfectly valid to go on about different versions of the legend because that's exactly what they're doing with this production of Merlin.
They aren't sticking to the Malory version at all, if they were Camelot would be a Christian kingdom. They've waltzed all over the legends taking bits from the original Welsh tribal myths, through parts of Malory, into Chretiene Le Troyes and back out again and even including some of the Irish Celtic mythology (the Sidhe) and some old Druidic stories.
Whether the "sword in the stone" is Excalibur depends upon which version of the legend you read. Also just because Merlin put the sword in the stone doesn't stop Arthur from pulling it out though the time line would not match with most (any?) tellings.
As you say anyone expecting "faithfulness" to any particular version will be disappointed. I think this is a good thing, this is not "Lord of the rings" where there is only one accredited version so making one up fits in well with the whole scheme of things. Maybe in a couple of hundred years time the BBC series will also be used as a reference.;)
There are iconic moments in the legends that people know, but only a few know all the available details. "Sword in the stone" is such an example. People won't know who, where, why, but the image is familiar, writers can and will do what they like with the rest. The same with the Holy Grail, the round table, the Lady of the Lake, etc. I think Guinevere and Lancelot's affair has the same status. Does not matter how exactly they get there, but it should happen.
Yes, but this is the point I'm making. They know of Gwen and Lancelot and they've already seen Gwen and Lancelot in Series One and briefly in Series Two after she's fallen in love with Arthur.
There's nothing which then says they need to continue through the legend fully and actually have them having an affair.
As I've said before, this is family viewing, it's aimed at a Saturday tea time audience so the idea of them actually showing an affair with Gwen and Lancelot is a lot less likely than an inevitability.
Comments
I don't agree with this at all.
I think it's too early to know/predict what they're going to do with Gwen/Arthur/Lancelot.
Of course I'd love them to not go down the affair route, but they've certainly put all the key elements in there to make that happen further down the road...that's not to say that it will.
IMO, there's absolutely no point in arguing that it will be this way or it will be that way. Right now I think only the writers know what they're going to be doing with this particular story line!
Everything has gone except the names. Uther died when arthur was 2 years old. Gauis has taken the role of the legendry Merlin. Morgause should be Arthurs half sister but in childrens tv I don't think we will see her seduce Arthur to produce Modred. Morgana is another name for Morgan Le Fay. The series has to be taken for what it is. Jolly good adventure story for children.
couldnt agree with you more! Saturday entertainment for both adults and the kids its fantastic and ive loved every episode since it first started -
But the writers have always said that we know where these characters end up - they're just showing another version of how.
I didn't get that impression at all, I saw her being a bit embarrassed at his open demonstration in front of the knights simply because she's a servant and he's the Prince and she had no idea how they were going to react.
When she gets off that horse at the end and they kiss and embrace there's nothing there other than utter relief he's alive and complete love no matter who is watching.
Bernard Cornwall's telling of the Arthurian legends is epic, I would recommend Laura reads those after she's got a bit more familiar with the stories though as they're quite a bit more realistic if you see what I mean?
Exactly so. Apart from the names and the vaguest of connections to the legends, so far nothing that the BBC version of Merlin has portrayed is anywhere near "accurate" in the loosest sense of the word.
But, as has been said, there's absolutely nothing that says they have to show it in this current production of Merlin. They could, quite easily, finish the series completely with Arthur marrying Gwen and Merlin taking his place as Arthur's trusted advisor in all things magical with Lancelot as the Commander of the Knights of Camelot (although poor Sir Leon would have to have got injured - cos I won't have him die!) and the future looks bright and rosy.
I suspect that's what they will do. I also suspect there'll be a 'nudge nudge, wink wink' look of longing between Gwen and Lancelot to signal where that's going.
I thought this too, especially now after Gauis has revealed his magical strength.
Also think that Arthur generally feels quite lonely and his relationship with Merlin is getting quite brotherly. Albeit that Arthur feels like the older, stronger more favoured brother
But we all know Gwen will become queen and will regin with arthur for a very long time
Eh? We know no such thing.
And we're all aware Bradley and Angel are actors and not attracted to each other in real life. I've said befire thatI think Bradley's discomfort with kissing her comes through on screen. But I think it works in the context of the show because we all know that ultimately Gwen and Arthur don't work out and the awkwardness kinda foreshadows this.
For all we know Bradley and Angel are playing it this way deliberately.
You think Bradley looks uncomfortable kissing Angel, I think it looks perfectly natural and in keeping with the way the story is portraying their relationship.
Their first kiss in Gwen's house was very tender the way it was shot.
Well I went into WH Smith and Waterstones today and couldn't find ANY of the recommendations. I've ordered the box sets though because I want to re-watch all three series from the beginning.
I have to say I hope people don't become too precious about the legend, and just take the programme for what it is. A darn good yarn based on mythical characters which we all have heard about. After all when reading the posts from people who do know a lot about the legends it's clear to me that story tellers have been re-writing the myths throughout the centuries so, it's really unfair to criticise "our" writers for bringing the characters up-to-date in a way that will interest people (like myself) to such an extent that they will want to find out more. Surely that has to be a good thing?
I really look forward to series 4 and as long as the writers keep up the high standards I won't be complaining.
Exactly so Laura, something I said a while ago. There is no definitive Arthurian legend, they have all been written and rewritten a hundred times over and are continuing to be so.
I'm not aware of this
No, but there are certain elements that are very well known and that's what these writers have always said they're aiming for - Exalibur, the Lady in the Lake, the Holy Grail, sword in the stone, Mordred as Arthur's nemesis, Lancelot and Guinevere...
Arthurian legend is certainly not fluffy and there aren't exactly any happy endings! The closest anyone probably gets is Morgana because she's off in Avalon with her fellow priestesses as she would have wanted.
Yes, but look at how they have so far treated every one of those you have quoted:
Excalibur - not removed from the Stone by Arthur but put in it by Merlin.
The Lady in the Lake - often the mother of Lancelot, often the sister of Igraine and Morgause, always the keeper of Excalibur (rather than it being created by the Great Dragon).
The Holy Grail - the Holy Cup they had didn't really resemble anything like it as the Fisher King or Percival's sister are usually the keepers of it and it is supposed to be the cup Jesus drank from at the Last Supper and Camelot has Christian religion.
Mordred - the illegitimate offspring of an unknowing (or sometimes calculated) affair between Arthur and his half-sister Morgan le Fay.
Lancelot - not even appearing in the original Arthurian legends but a nobleman dreamt up by a Frenchman to cause trouble some two centuries later
So, as I said before, they can do whatever they like with the legends so long as they have something which uses the same name and connects in a vague way to Camelot.
They haven't stuck to the "correct" version of any of the myths yet with the single exception of Arthur and Gwen.
You're not really listening to what I'm saying here. The producers have made it clear that this is before the legend we know. There's no point in going on about different versions of the legend - if they were using a different version they could have had Morgana as a benevolent healer as she originally was. They're using the most well known Mallory version.
They're showing a different way of getting there but we're still going to the same place. Sorry if that disappoints you because you're invested in the Arthur/Gwen romance but that's the way it is. Looking on the bright side, this version is far more sympathetic with Gwen's character than most although I think that will make her affair with Lancelot all the more angst filled and tragic.
This is childrens episodic television they are not going to have affairs just as they have avoided killing any main characters off. It is the most politically correct series on TV not offending anyone except for deaths of minor knights, serfs, and magical creatures. This is not Spooks.
Well Bradley's made it explicitly clear he's not.
I think they may well use Lancelot as a stumbling block / complication between Arthur and Gwen but I agree that, as this is a show watched by children as well as adults, they won't go down the 'Gwen and Lancelot have a steamy, adulterous affair' route. Some people need to remember that this is a FAMILY show!
For those obsessed with the Lancelot/Guinevere affair, they would do well to remember that it ended precisely because it was born out of lust! So I think your point is entirely valid.
Hey, I'm also in my (early!) 40s and I LOVED Buffy!! Still do, truth be told. Yey Spikey, etc...
Huh??
But seriously, uncomfortable? I genuinely saw it as her wanting to make sure HE was okay with them all seeing - and I also thought it was interesting that she lumped Lancelot in with everyone else at that moment (as at another couple of key moments). Her entire focus was on Arthur.
No one is, PF! It's only certain people (or, um, person;)) who think they've got a direct connection to Bradley's brain and are able to read his thoughts. Amazing! :cool:
In some versions, Mordred is the child of Arthur and Morgause.
As you say anyone expecting "faithfulness" to any particular version will be disappointed. I think this is a good thing, this is not "Lord of the rings" where there is only one accredited version so making one up fits in well with the whole scheme of things. Maybe in a couple of hundred years time the BBC series will also be used as a reference.;)
I'm not invested in anything and it's perfectly valid to go on about different versions of the legend because that's exactly what they're doing with this production of Merlin.
They aren't sticking to the Malory version at all, if they were Camelot would be a Christian kingdom. They've waltzed all over the legends taking bits from the original Welsh tribal myths, through parts of Malory, into Chretiene Le Troyes and back out again and even including some of the Irish Celtic mythology (the Sidhe) and some old Druidic stories.
Indeed. As I said before, there is no definitive Arthurian legend.
Yes, but this is the point I'm making. They know of Gwen and Lancelot and they've already seen Gwen and Lancelot in Series One and briefly in Series Two after she's fallen in love with Arthur.
There's nothing which then says they need to continue through the legend fully and actually have them having an affair.
As I've said before, this is family viewing, it's aimed at a Saturday tea time audience so the idea of them actually showing an affair with Gwen and Lancelot is a lot less likely than an inevitability.
I meant more the fact they'd actually stuck with the fact Arthur and Gwen were having a relationship and he intended to marry her