Well that was fascinating in the way that you can't turn your eyes away from something horrifying is.
Henry VI, Part 1, The Hollow Crown. was the first of the Henriad plays where I finally started to understand the family tree well enough to keep everyone straight. It’s very likely the repetition starting to make sense plus the fact that it’s literally the same family squabble from four plays ago.
This play continues with the conflict created by Henry IV when he showed everyone that actually maybe you don’t have to respect the divine right of the king. Unfortunately, they have not figured out what other authority gives you right to the throne. The Bolingbrooke line already showed up the divine right but don’t necessarily want the “power is right” authority because that just encourages other people to try and take it from them. That is why I had to laugh a little at Henry VI’s uncle bowing to the infant king. They’ve got themselves in a right mess.
Quite early on, I had a trepidation of: is Henry VI an idiot? I can’t remember the exact moment, but it came early. I was so surprised to realize that it was Henry VI who said, "For blessed are the peacemakers on earth." What a great line to waste on that situation. I can't believe we ever quote that line seriously given the context it was said in.
I don't totally get Henry VI and we're back at the madness question. Is he actually falling into insanity? Is he mentally deficient? Is he just easily influenced? Or is he just weak-willed? Since Shakespeare lumps all that together usually, it's hard to tell. At first, I thought he was just being tempted by a woman, but then it seems like he's not even sleeping with her. I didn’t understand his interest in her if he wasn’t being physically tempted by her. Does it make sense that he feels good about her marrying him if he doesn’t physically understand the prize? Possibly, if everyone is telling him so.
The dramatic plucking of white and red roses was great. At first, I wasn't sure who's side I was on. Then I realized, I was on no one's side. Both York and Somerset were horrible people which I full realized in the scene of the burning of Joan of Arc. This was the most disturbing scene I've watched so far in a Shakespeare play. York had her burned and Somerset snacked through the whole thing. But I did laugh when York captured her and she yelled, "I prithee, give me leave to curse a while." Lady had some priorities.
Margaret of Anjou as told by Shakespeare was quite despicable. But when I looked up the history, she's not even rumored to have done most of the things Shakespeare has attributed to her. So Shakespeare really didn't like her. I made the observation that he seems to think the downfall of all great men is through women, (Macbeth, Othello, Henry VI, Duke of Gloucester) but Missy made the point that he's careful to say strong English women are fine, strong Scottish women, very suspect, and strong French women, just rank evil.
I'm more of the opinion that we should be blaming Henry VI. Man was just giving away France. I felt bad for the Talbots who were fighting for a fickle king.
I read something about how the Duke of Gloucester, is one of Shakespeare's few unambiguously good characters. Loved that, because Shakespeare's penchant for the ambiguous morality of all is realistic but drives me nuts. Poor guy, he could have had a Kenneth Branagh hero movie as Henry V's brother in his own right.
I liked the visuals in this even better than Richard II. The story was engrossing if a little lurid. I get why this was the inspiration for Game of Thrones, now. It's very dramatic. I am now invested in the Henriad.
Next is All's Well That Ends Well:
No comments:
Post a Comment