User blog comment:MerlinUSA/Merlin -- The Big Picture/@comment-5102537-20130120143649/@comment-5995315-20130121010057

So to sum up your point,  Merlin was never about the relationship between Arthur and Merlin, but rather a quest to legalize magic and bring about Albion? Since  you don't like the last two seasons, am I right to think you won't be voting for Merlin or Colin Morgan for the BTA award?

In the U.S. Merlin has never been a children's show. In fact, it doesn't air before 10:00 p.m. It was treated as an adult fantasy from the start, and both the emphasis on magic and the bromantic innuendo would have been enough for many parents to forbid their children from watching it. Those two things alone make it an anti-Christian program about Satan worship for too many viewers here. The BBC must have had different standards of judging it.

Regardless, once parents in the UK saw the turn you say happened at season 4 they had no excuse for letting their kids continue watching the show. So for them to complain now gets little sympathy from me. And actually,  season 3 was as horrifying as anything else, seeing that it was a ghastly story arc highlighting Morgana turning into an evil witch. And that was okay for children? Or what about the very first episode in which a man is publicly executed? Is that children's entertainment?

Okay, about the point of the show, we'll defer to the dragon and the prophets. I agree they foresaw Arthur as the greatest king, one who would bring about Albion, and that Merlin's job was to help Arthur become that king. So far, so good. But they said many other things. Specifically, the dragon told Merlin he and Arthur were "two sides of the same coin. "  In what sense did he mean that? In season 2 the dragon goes into a long disquisition on the power of love. What was that? A plot hole? No, it was a foreshadowing.

You claim that it was intended for the show to end when Arthur was crowned. How do you know this? Everyone connected with the show said it was built around a five-year story arc, and the writers said at least a year ago and many times since that they already knew how the show would end when they started it.

You agree that the show was sending mixed messages about magic. But where you call plot holes is more foreshadowing. Who would be interested in watching a five year program about legalizing magic? That makes no sense. It makes much more sense that the message of the show was what the dragon referred to as the "mystery" of love.

The message was not abruptly changed at the end. That, too, makes no sense. It makes more sense that the writers developed a fairly consistent theme about a young boy's coming of age. A five-year story arc about that would make sense,  it's undeniably what they told us with the very first episode, and it would certainly make for an interesting story as opposed to one about getting magic legalized.

Now if you understand the finale the way I do -- that it became a love story between Merlin and Arthur,  then that story didn't come out of nowhere. There had to be something leading up to it. The relationship between the two began as a kind of bromance in season 1 and two, deepened to a friendship in seasons 3 and 4, and was a loving relationship of some kind by season 5. Since a bromance is in part a comic relationship, I don't agree that the last season depicted one, given the tragic turn. With the Disir episode, it can only be called love, and on Merlin's part an increasingly desperate love up until the end.

I don't think anyone who sees it this way is "editing out" all the rest as you claim. I think you're imputing ideas to me unfairly. Since I may have been unclear the first time, I'll take it up again. The relationship between Merlin and Arthur, being part of Merlin's coming of age, is and always was the backbone of the show. That doesn't mean anyone has "edited out" everything else. It means that I think that relationship takes precedence over the other themes and always has.

So, if I'm right, the overall disagreement between us is simply how important the Arthur/Merlin relationship was throughout the series. The finale vindicates me, so you're arguing that the finale was utterly disconnected from the rest of the show.

That seems highly unlikely to me, but citing scene after scene from the rest of the show to prove my point is too much for a single post. Nevertheless, I'm willing to have that exchange with you here or on some other blog if it will narrow the difference.

I disagree that the  relationship between Arthur and Merlin depicted in the finale is what splits opinion. It is one of many problems people had with the finale. I think most people who didn't like the finale didn't like what happened to their favorite character, Morgana and Gwaine for instance, but especially Arthur. And yes, even Merlin fans were upset about what happened to him.

Of these people, I haven't read any who object to Arthur and Merlin's relationship as such. The split is actually between viewers who wanted a Disneyland, Hollywood ending and those who recognized the tragedy implicit in the show and were braced for its tragic end.

What you took to be a children's show is a tragedy that shocked you. You were mistaken about what this show was about all along, unless you can show that it was reasonable to take the first two seasons as children's programming.

My objection to the criticism is not that people shouldn't criticize it. What I object to is people who have nothing good to say about the show and instead want to pour venom out on it. For my part, I'm trying to point out things I like about the show, and I hope to continue blogging and commenting to that effect. While I don't mind debating and disagreeing about specific things,  much of what I've read here is thinly disguised hate and some of it amounts to out-and-out slander against the actors, producers, writers and editors of the show. I hope not to see that sort of posting continue.