Greg responds...

First off, Todd, thanks for the kind words.

There are certain themes that interest me, and so you'll see them revisited in my work (probably ad nauseum) over and over. The theme of, well, let's call it "What Profit Vengeance?" is one of my favorites. So I wasn't deliberately trying to echo "Hunter's Moon" so much as I was servicing a set of ideas that seemed apropos to both series.

As for the Theseus-as-Batman stuff. Well, that's a no-brainer. The Superman/Batman dynamic -- that is the teaming of a hero possessing superhuman abilities with a hero who merely makes the best possible use of his human abilities -- originated with Herakles and Theseus. (Or at any rate, it goes back that far.) So the notion of flipping that, and playing Herc/Theseus as Superman/Batman seemed wonderfully ironic and a fertile place to find comedy.

In high school, I acted in a play called THE WARRIOR'S HUSBAND. I played Theseus, and I've had a real affinity for the character ever since. In that play, Hercules was kind of a mope. (Very strong, but a mope.) The Greeks were waging war against the Amazons. Hercules was in charge, but Theseus was the real brains of the operation. Yet he's also the guy who really falls hard in love for Antiope, sister to Queen Hyppolyta. So instead of conquering -- as he had originally intended -- Theseus winds up manipulating everyone into a compromise. I like that in a hero.

Theseus is part of a sub-genre of archetypes, (an off-shoot of Trickster figures like Puck, Coyote or Odysseus/Ulysses). He's the primary example of the Archetype of "THE BASTARD", which includes such diverse characters as Shakespeare's Edmund from KING LEAR, Joan of Arc's ally Dunois and multiple characters from Arthurian legend (including Merlin, Arthur, Percival, Galahad and Mordred). There are so many parallels between Arthur and Theseus that reading Mary Stewart and Mary Renault seemed almost redundant. (Not really.)

In fact, Luach (or Lulach) is also a prime candidate for that archetype. When he was born, Gruoch was still married to Gillecomgain. But gossip around the castle hinted that the babe's true father was Macbeth. After Macbeth and Gruoch married, Macbeth adopted the boy as his own. At which point the gossip shifted to insist that Gillecomgain was the boy's father. (You can't win.) Pre-DNA testing, there would be no way for Luach to ever be certain of the truth. Maybe Macbeth didn't even know. Hell, Gruoch might not know.

Life's a bitch when you're a bastard.