“Arthur and Guinevere isn’t really a classic love story. It’s not Romeo and Juiliet. It’s destined to be an absolute mess of a relationship. So it would be wrong to define Arthur by that, I think. I don’t think as a character he does. As he says, his first commitment is to Camelot.”
—
- Bradley James
(via wholove)
And this is totally true. Arthur is all about Camelot above every other individual, including himself. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t love Gwen but Camelot should always come first in the end.
(via doylefan22)
Hmm… Well, I’ll give Bradley the kudos on suggesting Arthur shouldn’t be defined by his romance with Guinevere.
However. Where is the equal-opposite quote about Guinevere? That perhaps Gwen loves Camelot just as much as Arthur; that her romance with him stems from her love of the kingdom first and foremost? That she is just as invested in Camelot’s success as he is - if not moreso, after all its failure serves to harm her peers more than Arthur and his.
I admit I haven’t really looked for one, but I’m assuming there isn’t one. Partly because Angel isn’t interviewed as much, and when she is, she isn’t given the space to comment in this way upon her romance with Arthur or Lancelot. The question, after all, is most often “Who is better for Gwen, Lancelot or Arthur?” “Who’s the better snog, Bradley or Santiago?” Both of which don’t particularly offer much space for a discussion about Gwen.
But also because the show has now decided this isn’t true. It disregards that Gwen’s character had always been about her peers above all else, and that her romance with Arthur was inspired by her faith that he could do amazing things for the kingdom - these things which she challenges him to do, in her capacity as trusted. Indeed, this was still happening at the beginning of this series, in her challenge to Agravaine about shutting the city gates. But these things don’t come into account in the telling of Gwen’s story: no, the narrative and her words are all about her need of Arthur. Because a strong, self-respecting lass will always ultimately fall mindlessly head over heels for a prince, right? That’s every girl’s dream, right?
There’s a part of me that wants to side-eye Bradley for not mentioning these things as well, but realistically it’s not his job to do so and maybe he hasn’t thought about it. It just seems to me that it’d be nice if someone else were to mention these things, since Angel isn’t getting the chance.
(via shallitellyouastory)
I can’t remember if we talked about the story where Gwen chooses Arthur (over Lancelot, I guess) because she feels he will be a better king with her as his queen, not because her love for him is this all-encompassing thing. In my head, she and Lancelot have this whole conversation about how they love each other, but they also love Camelot and realize that their duty is to the greater good.
Of course, people would read that story and criticize Gwen for *not* loving Arthur like she should, even though she’d be doing exactly what Bradley says Arthur’s doing here. But women are always so much more defined by who they’re sleeping with than men ever are.
(via theopensea)
ahaha the subtlety (except not, because dialogue.) of that story would be so far over lots of people’s heads that I would stand in awe if they could recognise dedication from betrayal.
Even so, I don’t know how much I care about those people, to be honest. Because that is a story which is novel and weighty and beautiful in its own way. And also, how great would it be to celebrate a woman who recognizes her own worth and influence and takes steps to act upon it - and not only she herself, but also the man (men) she loves recognizing it also. In a popular-culture narrative, that is.
Mostly though I’m reblogging this once again for commentary and specifically this line: “But women are always so much more defined by who they’re sleeping with than men ever are.”
Truer words, oldest trope, etc.
(via shallitellyouastory)
