Shan writes...

This has both an apology and a question. Apparently you answered my recently posted question previously, to Aaron, some time ago. The problem is that I did not see Thailog's archive (somehow my eye missed it that time) and only one for the Clones. The answer I wanted was in Thailog's archive but not in the Clones archive. Therefore, I thought I was asking a new question.

But I've also figured out what bothers me about Goliath's "he is my son" response. If, as you said in your response to Aaron, Goliath feels responsible and wants to bring Thailog into the fold -- where he told Angela she should see the clan as her parents -- should Goliath have said instead "he is the clan's son" or "he is our son" (though THAT would have been odd, since he's talking to Elisa!).

Is that taking it personal attributable to Goliath's personality then? Would most Gargs have said "Thailog is the clan's son" or "He is of my blood. He is one of the clan"???

Shan writes...

I just got done watching "Double Jeapordy," and in it Goliath emphasizes to Elisa that he must stay on the rig and talk to/rescue Thailog because "he is (of?) my blood. He is my son."

However, later on he meets his daughter Angela, but doesn't realize the connection at first. After Sevarius clues her in about her biological parents (Goliath and Demona) and Angela starts pressing the point with Goliath, Goliath responds with something to the effect that children belong to the whole clan. It is not until Elisa's mother and Goliath have the heart to heart about children sometimes needing special attention that Goliath and Angela begin to bond more directly, if I'm not mistaken.

But with Thailog, Goliath wants to reach out and make a bond almost from the outset.

Is it the circumstances of Thailog's creation that make Goliath take more responsibility for Thailog from the get-go versus Angela, or is it (though certaintly not her fault) that the fact Angela is also Demona's child somehow alienates Goliath more at first? Is it something else entirely? I found the difference in attitudes striking.

KW Keller writes...

Well, I'm not Todd, but in response to the history of Excalibur, Geoffrey of Monmouth's "Caliburn" is thought by some to be derived from the Welsh "Caledfwlch" (Breton "Kaledvoulc'h"), or from the Irish "Caladbolg" or "Caladcholg." Caledfwlch appears in several Welsh Arthurian stories, especially "Culhwch ac Olwen." Caladbolg, "hard dinter," was the lightning sword of Fergus Mac Roth. Caladcholg was a similar sword owned by Fergus Mac Leti. Various people have argued at one time or another that the modern idea of Excalibur was taken from one of these sources.

Anonymous writes...

Who are Morgana's parents?
How can she beat Merlin? I mean Merlin is the son of Oberon who is one of the most powerful fay. Does that mean she also has a unique parentage like Merlin?

Anonymous writes...

What class of fay is Lady of the Lake? Power class?

Anonymous writes...

Does the Lady of the Lake have any biological children? Have you mentioned the name of any of her children on Askgreg?

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

Don't let the death of Team Atlantis get you down, true brilliance is never recognized in its own time.

Anyway, I was wondering about your personal opinion on something: pop Arthurian Legend. First there was the "Merlin" miniseries, now there's another one on TNT called "The Mists of Avalon." Both take the traditional story of King Arthur and try to present its elements of magic to contemporary TV audiences in the guise of religion. Instead of accepting magic as a part of the legend, which I guess TV execs think is too "silly" or maybe even "controversial," they turn the Arthur legend into a morality tale about the old verse the new, Paganism verse Christianity, imagination verse logic, etc... take your pick.

What's your take? Do you think this is a constructive and innovative approach to telling the story, or a distracting and childish one?

Todd Jensen writes...

One question which I'll confess I've occasionally found myself asking about Arthur's quest for Merlin. Why does Arthur feel that he really needs Merlin by his side again? After all, in the traditional legends, he spent the majority of his reign without Merlin being there (Merlin's departure in the "Arthurian canon" took place almost directly after Arthur married Guinevere and set up the knights of the Round Table), and fared well enough on his own (not to mention that I don't think that Merlin could have seriously prevented the fall of Camelot even if he had been there, seeing that it was brought about through the one thing that his magic could not overcome, the human heart, as Macbeth pointed out in "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time"). Furthermore, at least some versions of the legend (including T. H. White and Roger Lancelyn Green) indicate that part of the reason why Merlin left Arthur's court (ultimately to wind up in the Crystal Cave) was because Arthur needed to stand on his own rather than constantly leaning on the wizard for help.

So why does Arthur feel that he still needs Merlin's help? (Admittedly, he does seem in a rather vulnerable situation at present, given that he's now in a world that's unfamiliar to him and very different from 6th century Britain - and he hasn't had the advantage that Macbeth had of being able to watch it change gradually and adjust accordingly - it's all been thrown upon him at once, just the way that it was on Goliath and his clan).

Greg "Xanatos" Bishansky writes...

DrFaust> Oh come ON! You don't think Greg is going to say anything about that episode until it actually airs, do you?