One of the archetypes and subtexts of classic English Language folk history is that of the "noble outlaw." But what drives this mythic archetype? The answer is that this archetype of the "noble" outlaw is driven by the archetype of the noble who acts like an outlaw, or to be more universal, of the rich and powerful who act as outlaws under the cover of the law.
In each story of a Robin Hood type person; Al Capone, Robin Hood, Jesse James, others, there is always a "Guy of Gisborne" and other corrupt characters lurking in the background, who are using the law to achieve corrupt ends and who are oppressing people with ruinous taxes, legal theft, cronyism, and other forms of injustice. Robin Hood gets in trouble for betting with a Forester that his arrow could travel further and more accurately than that of the forrester. He represented the "Yeomanry", free men who owned little land and who were always subject to class warfare by the Norman Nobles of England. The nobles needed money to fight in the Holy land, they got that money either through borrowing from Jews who they later killed (the Story of Robin Hood is set around the time that the Jews of England were expelled for Usery after allegations of the "blood libel") -- or by userous taxes.
Userous taxes were also seen as an excuse for the kind of brutality that could be used to keep corrupt and theiving individuals in power. Robin Hood was a hero to the people because the people who were running the country were alien and corrupt. And sure enough the archetype is reinforced when he "comes out of the woods" to serve the "Good King Richard." You don't get a Robin Hood without kleptocrats. Robin Hood and Guy of Gisborne represent a mated pair of archetypes.
Now this archetype doesn't require reality to be activated. Both Hamas and Hezbollah have developed the Robin Hood Archetype despite the brutal reality of their actions. Moreover, insurgency groups have a way of becoming what they criticize when they get to power themselves. The Robin Hood archetype is actually often a dishonest distortion of reality. Al Capone and Jesse James were not heroic individuals. The very Anglified Normans who Robin Hood was pitted against actually started as pirates and invaders who converted to Christianity learned French and became what they had once opposed. In fact much of the older lines of European nobility are descended from pirates, bands of thieves, and other extraordinary individuals because the Visigoths, the Ostragoths, the Vandals and the Alans, etceteras... all got their start as insurgent bands who gained power by opposing a corrupt government.
Nobility world wide often gets its start by hiding behind the Robin Hood type myth. The metaphor of Animal House is older than Communism, but Communism embodies this mythic tool in action. "Vanguard of the proletariat?" My eye. Nobody breaks free of oppression by giving away their power to such people. When people take power, when the Robin Hood's become the Nobles, all that happens is that power transfers to new bosses. It seems a universal desire to control other people, and whether it is a giant Klepto-Military-Industrial complex or Bureaucrats the results start looking the same after a while.
Ultimately the reality of Robin Hood, and of those who foment revolution in the name of "the people", is usually that of thieves marketing their thievery with slogans like "merry yeomen of Sherwood Forest," and "rob from the rich and give to the poor" [with a 90% cut for the thieves]. Sometimes a group of insurgents really are "Robin Hoods" but more often they are simply wanna-be King Johns putting on a pretense of caring about the "People" while putting those same people's lives in jeapardy, so they can gain fame, power, glory and loot.
Chris
Posted by cholte at July 28, 2006 08:51 PM