Our cover image comes from Anna, which she calls  'Byronic Robin Hood'.  A pen and ink drawing which has been slightly digitally enhanced. Question to you all, can you tell what episode it is from?  Email your suggestions to trhas@hotmail.com.  If you were also as intrigued as I was why she had called it 'Byronic Robin Hood', then check out Letters To The Editors.

This issue also includes feedback on our recent 50th Anniversary survey.

Great news, Network plan to release the second series in March 2004.  Hopefully this will not be delayed to the same degree as the first.  However, keep an eye on the message board for the latest details.

To Steve Winders’ “Childhood Heroes: Robin Hood”, Part 1

It would be an understatement to say that I read “Childhood Heroes” with interest.  Not much has been written about “The Adventures”, and it was exciting to discover Steve’s valuable contribution.  But I soon realised that, as much as I enjoyed reading Steve’s articles, I could not agree with everything he wrote!  So I decided to write a reply to “Childhood Heroes”, and to present some observations of my own. (And I hope that our readers would like to contribute theirs).

I have seen the Richard Todd film only recently, and I believe that it is an excellent and very enjoyable Robin Hood movie.  But I also believe that the Richard Greene series was a lot more than that – a political and social commentary with references to current events, a satire, tense drama alternating with comedy (or even farce), with intelligent, witty dialogue, and at times romantic, and at times humorous mood.

I cannot deny that I am prejudiced in favour of “The Adventures”. Can anyone be completely impartial when writing about their childhood hero?  And mine was not just any Robin Hood, but the one played – and to a large extent created – by Richard Greene.

Did the Richard Todd film have significant influence on “The Adventures”? There are some (mostly comic) scenes in both films that may seem similar, but the extent of the influence is impossible to determine. I believe that the similarities between the two films are superficial. The stories had a common source, after all – the Robin Hood myth in its many forms.

Steve compares how the men of Sherwood are depicted in the Errol Flynn and the Richard Todd versions.  The band from “The Adventures” would probably fall somewhere between the two: a very diverse group of men, with differing abilities and intelligence, made into a well-trained fighting unit by their leader.

Elton Hayes in the Richard Todd version is a very charming minstrel, but it is quite likely that his appearance owes more to the interest in folk music in the 1950s than to any attempts at recreating medieval ballads. But the various songs in “The Adventures” should not be overlooked, either.  A number of them can be heard in different episodes (apart from the introductory ballads).  Some are performed by minstrels, and some – by the outlaws themselves, and most of them are not medieval...      

I certainly agree with Steve’s assessment of the portrayal of Marian as an independent woman in the Richard Todd version, and its influence on the later films.  Lady Marian in “The Adventures” was even more independent – she was left in charge of the estate in her father’s absence, while Richard Todd’s Marian was sent away to stay at Queen Eleanor’s court.  And the Nanny’s character in “The Adventures” was practically borrowed from the Richard Todd version.

Perhaps, as Steve says, there are no romantic links between Robin and Marian in the beginning of the Richard Todd film, but it is plain to see that there is mutual attraction. (Do only women notice such things?)

As to the egalitarian message in the film, I believe that it is even stronger in “The Adventures”. Richard Todd’s Robin was certainly “middle class”, but his men addressed him as “Master Robin”.  They never called Richard Greene’s Robin that! In the first episode he introduced himself as “Robin of… nothing”.  Although a nobleman (and with a suitably aristocratic appearance and manner, at least in the beginning of the series), Richard Greene’s Robin had very egalitarian ideals. It was probably because he became acquainted with different cultures and customs in the Holy Land, or perhaps because the experience of war had taught him that on the battlefield, when faced with danger, suffering and death, all men are indeed equal.

Part two of “Childhood Heroes: Robin Hood” appears in this issue, and I hope to include my reply to it in the next one.  Writing it is going to be even more exciting, because it deals with a subject that particularly interests me – personalities of the characters in the film.  And I am grateful to Steve for the opportunity to disagree! (A.F.)

Supported by American funding, the television series ‘The Adventures of Robin Hood’ was made in England by Sapphire Films with a British cast and crew. The programme was a huge success on both sides of the Atlantic, running to 143 half hour episodes in four series. It starred Richard Greene as Robin Hood. 

Greene was a British actor who had starred in several Hollywood films, including the 1939 ‘Hound of the Baskervilles’, in which he received top billing as Sir Henry Baskerville, above Basil Rathbone, who was making his first appearance as Sherlock Holmes. Coincidentally the previous year Rathbone had been a huge success as the villainous Sir Guy of Gisborne in the famous Errol Flynn ‘Robin Hood’ film. Greene never established himself as a top Hollywood leading man, but in the 1950s he had starred in ‘Lorna Doone’ and ‘Captain Scarlet’, which were both historical swashbuckling adventures and so his background for playing Robin Hood was good. 

Richard Greene also bore a close resemblance to Richard Todd, who had played Robin in the successful Disney film ‘The Story of Robin Hood and His Merrie Men’ three years earlier, in 1952. This resemblance was enhanced by the fact that both actors played Robin as short haired and clean shaven, giving him a literally ‘clean cut’ image. Clean cut heroes were still the order of the day in the 1950s, just a decade after a generation of clean cut heroes had won the Second World War. Previous versions of Robin in all media had been depicted with longer hair and beards.

Greene’s portrayal of Robin Hood was quite close to Todd’s, but there were several significant differences. Greene was clearly anxious to stamp his own interpretation on the part right from the start and in this he was most successful. He was about a year older than Todd and given that there was a three or four year gap between the making of the film and the first TV series, this gave an age difference of about four years. Greene used this to his advantage, playing Robin as an experienced and self assured character who viewers could readily accept as inspiring and leading a band of outlaws along a noble path.

An interesting divergence from both the 1938 and 1952 films was that at the start of the series Greene’s Robin is returning home from the Third Crusade, whereas in other versions Robin stays behind in England when the Crusade, led by King Richard, leaves for the Holy Land and is outlawed when a new and villainous regime led by Prince John takes over. This gives more credence to Greene’s performance as a more experienced Robin. He has already fought in the Crusades – he is a seasoned campaigner. By 1955, Britain’s real life heroes, the men who had fought in the Second World War, were no longer such young men. They had now for the most part settled down with families. Surely it is not just a coincidence that an older actor was cast as Robin and played him as a father or favourite uncle figure. Greene was thirty seven when he was cast as Robin Hood.

The television Robin Hood was a nobleman and not a commoner as portrayed by Richard Todd, but this was used in the series to give him an easy rapport with both the aristocracy and the common people and not to emphasise a social and intellectual superiority over his men. As in Disney’s ‘Robin Hood’, the television merry men were never seen to be large in number and the principal characters often showed resourcefulness, courage and initiative to match their leader. Unfortunately the demands of a long running TV series for plot lines occasionally obliged various main characters to behave irrationally for the purpose of a story. In one episode, Little John left the band following a ridiculous misunderstanding, which made him appear childish and petulant. On other occasions, individual members of the band could cause problems for the rest by acts of naivete, selfishness or plain stupidity, but these were usually one appearance characters. However, apart from these irritating occasions, the senior merry men were shown to be fairly consistent, strong and able characters.

Little John was played by Archie Duncan as a reliable second in command. Friar Tuck, played by Alexander Gauge, was a pious and sometimes almost sanctimonious figure with a heart of gold, a considerable appetite and a keen intelligence. He provided much of the programme’s humour. Other members of the band were less significant than these two. Alfie Bass played a character called Edgar in the early episodes and Victor Woolf played a minor character called Derwent, who appeared in many episodes over the four series run. Will Scarlett made only two appearances before Paul Eddington took on the role at the start of the fourth series and Alan A’Dale made infrequent appearances. However each episode of the series was introduced by a rhyming couplet sung by an off screen minstrel, which was probably inspired by Alan A’Dale’s linking role in the 1952 Disney film.

Maid Marian, Robin’s romantic interest, was played by two actresses during the long run of the series. Bernadette O’Farrell played her for the first two series and Patricia Driscoll, who introduced the ‘Watch With Mother’ programme ‘Picture Book’ on B.B.C. Television, took over at the start of the third series. Both Marians played the part as a spirited and confident girl, who was equally comfortable as the noble lady of the castle or dashing about the forest wearing the lincoln green tunic of the outlaws, with Robin and his men. In this regard the television Marians followed the pattern set by Joan Rice as Marian in the Richard Todd film, who had played her as a courageous and determined character, who was a match for the men. These pro–active Marians contrasted strongly with Olivia De Havilland’s 1938 version, who while showing compassion and intelligence was a much more passive figure, confined throughout the film to full length dresses and head-dresses. This change of emphasis in the fifties obviously reflected the active role of women in the Second World War and their growing independence.

The television series also featured a regular villain in the Sheriff of Nottingham, played by Alan Wheatley. The Sheriff was a suave and charming villain, who developed a grudging respect for Robin Hood over the course of the four series. Although he was a greedy villain, out for his own gain, the Sheriff was a popular character in the programme. He developed some sense of honour and showed much logic in his actions, occasionally appearing to be the most sensible character in an episode! Alan Wheatley’s performance was excellent and matched that given by Richard Greene as his opponent. 

At the end of the third series a Deputy Sheriff was introduced to share some of the Sheriff’s workload. He was played by John Arnatt and was charming to the point of obsequiousness. He was also more flamboyant than his superior and a little less active, often shown lounging on his chair stroking or feeding his pet hunting dogs, while devising another plan to catch Robin Hood.

Prince John also featured in several episodes over the four year run of the programme. He was played at first by Donald Pleasance and later by Hubert Gregg, who had played him in the 1952 film! He was not presented as a weak or misguided figure as later films would depict him, but as a wily villain who was determined to snatch power from his absent brother Richard. 

  In addition to the principal players, many other actors appeared regularly in the series, playing a variety of different parts. Paul Eddington played more than thirty roles in the programme in the second and third series, before becoming Will Scarlett for the fourth. John Dearth played at least as many parts. Often actors would appear in successive episodes in widely contrasting roles. In his autobiography ‘So Far, So Good’, Paul Eddington explains that the reason for this unusual arrangement was to save the producers money. It was cheaper to engage actors on contracts and use them for a variety of parts than to hire actors episode by episode on a casual basis.

Many familiar faces and voices appeared in the series. As well as Alfie Bass from the famous radio series ‘Journey Into Space’, its star Andrew Faulds also appeared in an early episode. Both Jane Asher and Richard O’Sullivan appeared as child actors and Patrick Troughton, a future Doctor Who, appeared in several parts. Troughton was actually the first television Robin Hood, having appeared in a B.B.C. adaptation of the legend in 1953! Other well known actors to appear included Wilfred Brambell, Harry H. Corbett, Sidney James, Thora Hird, Leslie Phillips, Joan Sims, Bill Owen, Nicholas Parsons, Nigel Davenport and Ian Bannen.

Ian Hunter made several appearances as Sir Richard of the Lea, an  acquaintance of Robin who actually appears in one of the earliest ballads of Robin Hood. Hunter had played an even more significant Richard in the 1938 Errol Flynn film, when he played Richard the Lionheart! Patrick Barr, who played King Richard in the 1952 film, opposite Richard Todd, also played King Richard in the TV series !

The tone of ‘The Adventures of Robin Hood’ was witty and exuberant, but the series often tackled serious issues, which I will explore further in Part Three. A high standard of acting was needed to convey this combination of light heartedness and deeper meaning and it was usually forthcoming. This is quite remarkable in view of the fact that each episode was completed in just four and a half days!

Many film critics recall the 1938 film ‘The Adventures of Robin Hood’ as the ‘definitive’ Robin Hood film, but to millions of children in the late fifties and through the sixties there was only one Robin Hood and that was Richard Greene. We do not know whether there really was a Robin Hood, but when we saw Greene’s confident and convincing performance in our childhoods we were in no doubt.

In the final part of my study of Robin Hood in the Fifties, I will look at some of the significant faces behind the scenes of this ground breaking series and recall some of the merchandise which the popularity of Robin Hood created. I will also explore Richard Greene’s last performance as Robin in a ‘Hammer’ feature film from 1960.

Steve Winders

To demonstrate that might is right

But Robin's band has also proved

That sometimes right is might"

Screenwriter:  Alan Moreland and Basil Dawson

Director:        Terence Fisher

Guest Stars:  

Lionel Jeffries      - Sir Charles de Lauria

Hal Osmond         - Master Ricard

Ronald Hines        - Hereward

Max Faulkner        - Old Martin

Nigel Davenport    - Barty

Graham Stewart    - Town Crier

Robin and Marian are enjoying a romantic stroll in the forest and she comments “ how happy the birds sound”, to which Robin replies “who wouldn’t be happy on such a beautiful spring day.”  Marian’s eyes look sadly down and Robin tenderly takes her aside.  He explains that as long as he is an outlaw he can’t ask her to marry him, but when King Richard returns from the Crusades and there is justice that he (Robin) will be Lord of Locksley Manor and she will be his Lady. Feeling sentimental about Locksley Marian asks if they could visit Locksley, as it will one day be her home, to which Robin replies that Locksley now belongs to Sir Charles deLauria, who would not welcome the rightful heir!  Marian agrees it would be too dangerous, but after a playful exchange Robin insists they will go to Locksley despite Marian’s protest of danger and he teases her to “obey her master.”

Upon arrival at Locksley they discover one of Robin’s tenants' (old Martin) farm burning.  Hereward, a childhood friend explains to them that Sir Charles is trying to drive the tenants off the land so that he doesn’t have to honour Sir Edward's of Locksley (Robin’ s father) will which states that if the Copy Holders perform their duties for 3 years straight, on Lady Day the great bell of Locksley will ring and the tenants will own their own land.

Hereward asks Robin to meet with and help the tenants rise up against Sir Charles.  Robin cautions them that violence is not the answer – he advises them to have their case heard in court, and that he will get a lawyer to defend them.  Robin and Marian journey to Nottingham and Marian gets the case set down for hearing, but no lawyer will represent them because they fear the Sheriff.  Robin rides to Lincoln in search of a lawyer.  At the hearing Sir Ricardo of Lincoln represents the tenants.  Sir Charles tells the Sheriff that the tenants have not completed all their chores, they have not done “Broom Service.”  Master Ricardo replies that the tenants have offered but Sir Charles refused and that the offer should be considered as having done “Broom Service”.  The Sheriff declares that if the “Broom Service” is not completed by Lady Day the terms of the will have not been satisfied.

Robin and Marian devise a plan for her to distract Sir Charles in the Great Hall, while he (Robin) manages to sneak the tenants into Locksley to do their Broom Service, with Master Ricardo along as an independent witness.  All the rooms except the hall are cleaned.  Robins signals to Marian to get Sir Charles out of the hall, so the tenants can finish their work. Upon leaving the hall Sir Charles discovers the rooms are clean, enraged he returns to find the door is locked and he lashes out that he knows what they are doing.  He calls for his guards to break down the door.  As a message to Robin, Marian says she is going for a ride and where the horse will be.  The tenants complete the task, open the door with Robin escaping out on a rope which is attached to the bell, as he jumps down the bell rings signaling the tenants now own their own land.  As Marian and Robin are riding off together they pause for a moment and look back and Marian asks “When will we see Locksley again?” to which Robin replies when we return as Lord and Lady of the Manor as he leans over and kisses her……..

“The Path of True Love” is another favourite of mine.   Lionel Jeffries is wonderful as Sir Charles.  Even though you know he is the villain, he is rather comedic at being the enemy.  The romantic tenderness between Robin and Marian is quite lovely, but also the sadness of realizing that Robin cannot claim what rightfully is his.

Lucy Carpenter.

Take on the most outlandish forms

Until you look again and find

They are simply Leprechauns"

WRITERS:   JAMES CARHARTT and NICHOLAS WINTER

DIRECTOR:  DON CHAFFEY

GUEST STARS:

 BARRY KEEGAN        -  PATRICK NOLAN

PEGGY MARSHALL      -  MAEVE NOLAN

PAUL EDDINGTON      -  CONNOR

COLIN BROADEY        -  BRIAN

CAROLE LORIMER       -  DEIDRE

CLAUDE KINGSTON     - TIM

JOHN DEARTH            - HERMIT

“The Little People” is one of the Robin Hood episodes that I can remember from my childhood.  The way I remember the storyline from back then and the way I viewed the episode now is really quite different.  I remember thinking what fun it was – the idea of Leprechauns – having children in the cast – you relate to other children – and I can still remember thinking how lucky all these children were to be part of “my favourite show”, to actually meet my hero Richard Greene/Robin Hood in person.  These young actors were fortunate, unlike the children they portrayed in the story…..

Who are “The Little People”?   Legend has it that “The Little People” are Leprechauns, mischievous elves of Irish folklore; if farmers don’t leave food out for them they will cast spells on their cows or even burn their houses down.  Passing through Ireland on a very stormy evening, Robin, Marian and Friar are about to discover the Little People, as they attempt to take shelter from the storm in a farmhouse where Patrick Nolan and his wife Maeve live.  Inside they hear the knock on the door – Maeve begs Patrick not to answer the door for fear it is “The Little People”; Patrick - a cynical, suspicious person, someone who seems weary from conflict - shrugs it off as nonsense, saying “There’s no such thing as Little People”, but he gives into Maeve’s fears and doesn’t open the door – Maeve, a small woman, seemingly frightened and timid – fearful of who may be on the other side of the door.   

Robin, Marian and Friar Tuck are forced to spend the evening in the Nolans’ barn; Friar Tuck had discovered a basket of food which was left outside of the farmhouse.  Robin explains that the food was left out for “The Little People”- the Irish call them Leprechauns, the same legend they have in England, only the English legend calls them elves.”  Friar Tuck recalls how King Henry sent his son Prince John to rule Ireland, but the Irish rebelled and Prince John was sent back to England.  Robin sadly recounts how the country is still in turmoil and divided against itself.  Marian replies, “Maybe one day everyone can live their lives in freedom.” Robin agrees, “ Maybe one day even Prince John will let the English live in freedom; I’ll dream that that day is already here”. Robin looks tenderly at Marian and winks and she says,  “As for me, I’ll just dream…….” 

During the evening a lightning storm sets the Nolan house on fire and Robin, Marian and Friar Tuck awaken to the fire and the angry exchange between Nolans as to what caused the fire.  Maeve declares that the “Little People” started the fire, to which Patrick angrily replies, “Little People, I told you there is no such thing as Little People.  It’s drunken English soldiers who started the fire“.  Maeve says, “The Little People started the fire as revenge on you for not believing in them”.  Angrily Patrick replies, “Give me an Englishman at the business end of my hay fork and I’ll give you the Little People”.  Frightened Maeve says, “Someday I’ll be lying next to you with my throat slit from ear to ear, then maybe you’ll believe me”.  Patrick shouts back, “If you have your throat slit from ear to ear, then I’ll listen to you!”.  Robin, Marian and Friar decide they better leave before they are discovered and blamed for the fire.  As Robin jumps down from the barn he spots what appears to be “Little People”, but says nothing to Marian and Friar Tuck.  The next morning they are discovered sleeping in a haystack by Patrick, Maeve and their friends who blame them for the fire and now want to hang them.  Robin convinces the ever frightful and superstitious Maeve that he is a friend of the Little People.  Patrick, still a nonbeliever, gives in to Maeve’s wishes to let Robin and Friar Tuck prove that The Little People exist, and they are given twenty four hours to bring back the proof or Marian will be hanged.  Robin is reluctant to leave Marian, but she tells him she will be alright and he must go.

Friar Tuck is bewildered as to what Robin is trying to find until he explains how he saw “The Little People” outside of the Nolan’s house the previous evening.  He now realizes they are children who because of war have been orphaned or abandoned, and he wants to find these abandoned children.  Robin and Friar are captured by “The Little People”, but while the children are sleeping Robin manages to free himself and take Maeve and Marian to show them his proof of  “The Little People”.  These poor, frightened children are only trying to stay together and survive.  The story has a happy ending, the children are to be given a home by Maeve, and even the ever-sulking Patrick is charmed by the children, who will now live happily ever after.  In a perfect world this is how it should end, unfortunately we don’t live in a perfect world.

The story I remember from my childhood was fun, with Leprechauns and children.  There was comedy, Barry Keegan as Patrick Nolan and Peggy Marshall as Maeve Nolan were delightful.  The contrast of their characters made them both interesting and witty.  The children were enchanting, with the most precious faces and expressions.  “Robin Hood” took place in 1191, but the sad fact is that if you fast forward to today you will probably find these same children in different parts of the world, trying to survive in an environment which they did not create, but are forced to try and survive - but without Robin Hood to rescue them. 

REALISM?

Having read some press articles from the 1950s about the filming of “The Adventures”, I must confess that I was surprised by the efforts of the film makers to ensure that the series appeared realistic, and the extent of historical research undertaken before filming.  Were their efforts successful?  Were they even necessary?

I have never thought of “The Adventures” as realistic, not even as an eleven-year old, when I saw the series for the first time. To me, it was a fantasy world, rather than medieval England. (Perhaps it was the Middle Ages as imagined in the 1950s?)  And I still believe that the unique appeal of the series does not depend on historical accuracy. 

Even if the style of costumes and the weapons had been scrupulously recreated (which is debatable), it did not, in my view, contribute much to the overall impression of realism.  How could it, when outdoor scenes were filmed indoors, the interiors resembled theatrical scenery, and the same actors played different characters?  And, of course, our notion of realism has changed a lot since the 1950s.  What the viewers are most likely to notice now is not the detail of medieval costume, but the absence of medieval mud and dirt.  A young film enthusiast who has seen some episodes of “The Adventures” asked me a question I found difficult to answer: “Why does everything – and everyone – look so clean?”

What made the series memorable was not the historical detail, but realism of a higher order - convincing acting and universal themes.  That, and the timeless message about maintaining moral integrity while fighting evil, and never loosing faith in the victory of a just cause. (A.F.)

The following article is reproduced from a US TV Guide from 1957.  

There is a pub in London called Dirty Dick’s, reputedly the oldest and, by witness, the dirtiest pub in all England.  Its ceiling is soot black and is festooned with stalactites of pure, unblemished dirt.  Its walls are plastered with bits of paper notes, labels, cards of every known description.  Its floor (a generous term) has a permanent sag brought on by generations of stand up drinkers.

In this setting one recent evening, Miss Patricia Driscoll, a 27 year old British actress, shone like one of the crown jewels on temporary leave from the Tower of London.  Miss Driscoll, a native of Cork, Ireland, is the new Maid Marian in England's successful TV film series, Robin Hood, having inherited the role from Bernadette O'Farrell.

Pat Driscoll is blessed with a head of rich, thick brown hair and a pair of deep-set brown eyes that would cause a cocker spaniel to blush for shame.  Like most British actresses, she can wear a low-cut gown in a way that is at once primly dignified and attractively revealing.

Married seven years to British actor Duncan Lamont, Pat is of the opinion that Robin Hood this season may undergo a slight change.  "I believe," she ventured, "they're going to hot it up a bit" - apparently a British way of recording the ascendancy of a love interest in the show.  "It does seem rather thick that Robin Hood and Maid Marian could be so platonic about it all after two years on the screen, doesn't it?"

Pat is no stranger to television, having long had her own five-a-week show for children, Looking with Mother, which she does on film.  She has even played a running part in a British soap opera more conservatively known as a serial, The Other Man, a subject on which she doesn't like to dwell at any great length.

For that matter, Pat doesn't particularly like to dwell on the subject of television itself.  "I don't like it" she admits, smiling brightly.  "We don't even have a set.  We have a small flat and TV would be too much on top of me.  I'm just not too keen on it.  I'd rather go to a motion picture."

The Lamonts live in a London mews, a mews being a converted row of stables.  Childless, they have three cats, one small car and a three speed record player.  Says Lamont, a walking example of offhand British charm, "Pat's the star these days, I'm just a typed actor.  All I play are detectives.  Quite good at it, I suspect, but still typed."

Pat's fondest dream is to come to the United States, even though she is fearful of the competition.  "American actresses", she says wistfully, "are all so lovely and have such outstanding - well, measurements.  But it would be nice to work over there for a while and make a bundle and then just come back here and live."

Perhaps if she can "hot it up a bit," Hollywood might make an appropriate noise or two.

(Our thanks go to Elaine Brulinski who did the research to unearth this article)

My thanks go to Dave Blake and Hawkeye who both provided me with a copy of the following image of The Robin Hood game.