Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-24762954-20140731125438/@comment-24762954-20140801165819

ReganX wrote: I think that we had a case of a clash between the story the writers may have wanted to tell and the story that came to be to serve an overall agenda.

If we had a situation where all or most of the threats Arthur faced were non-magical, viewers would expect that the great "Once and Future King" should be able to fight his own battles, which would mean that, for the most part, Merlin's presence is unnecessary. On the other hand, if the threats Arthur faces are magical and can only be defeated with the use of magic, it's not a reflection on the warrior he is or the ruler he will be that he is unable to defeat them without Merlin's secret help, allowing Merlin to fulfill his role as protector.

The problem with that is that there then needs to be enough magical threats to justify Merlin's existence as the hero of the story, which means that viewers are repeatedly shown magical threats to Arthur and/or Camelot, which makes magic look darker. Then I'd rather call it a clash between the story and the family show. Arthur was supposed to unite Albion, create fair and just kingdom etc. They could show Merlin and his magic necessary for that purpose. But since it's much simpler series, we got "threats" that need to be solved.