Hollow Crown Afterthoughts
Now the Hollow Crown is over, here's a personal summing up:
Best cinematography: Richard II is the uncontested winner. They really overcame any sense of theatre staticness by using those landscapes in a majorly fashion.
Best performance: Sorry, Hiddlestans. Jeremy Irons wins. Because Henry IV, as opposed to Hal/Henry V, isn't a main part, as opposed to Falstaff or Richard II isn't flashy, and often feels like a walk-on, but Irons took what's a unflashy supporting past (never mind the title of the play) and made it central and fascinating. All the awards, please.
Best production twist not actually in Shakespeare: Chorus is Owen Tudor Falstaff's boy. (Runner up, because it's practically
likeadeuce fanfic: Percy and Kate have back to wall sex during the Lady Mortimer sings scene.)
(Production twist most likely to enrage shippers but my heartless self is on board with it: Aumerle as one of Richard's killers. )
Actor doing the most with the least amount of lines: Maxine Peake as Doll Tearsheet. No wonder
meri wants Doll fanfic. I loved practically everything she did, from the "I can't read, idiot!" look she gave Hal in Henry IV, 1 when he first wanted her to read out the papers in Falstaff's purse to her scene with Falstaff in Henry IV, 2 with its swinging back and forth between tenderness and knife pulling.
Best thing to hope from all the new folk young Master Hiddleston brought to the Shakespeare fandom: lots of fanfic, of course. I mean, half of it will be Hal/Poins which I won't read because I can't stand Poins, but there's bound to be some interesting stuff in the rest. If anyone does their research and figures out Katherine is actually the younger sister of Richard II.'s queen whom young Hal knew pretty well, you get bonus points. Anyone ignoring the casting discontinuity from Aumerle in Richard II to York in Henry V and writes fanfic using Hollow Crown!Aumerle/York's backstory for his interactions with Hal in the "oh not today!" scene does as well. If anyone writes The Life and Loves of Doll Tearsheet and lets it end with her alive, well, and unimpressed by Henry V.'s martial glory I'll sacrifice my non existing firstborn.
And now for my favourite scene from Henry V., which, though a bit shortened, made it into the screen version, with comments, because it is so good it bears being read again and again. It's of course Anonymous! Henry's pre battle conversation with the two soldiers Bates and Williams.
Williams. We see yonder the beginning of the day, but I think
we shall never see the end of it. Who goes there?
Henry V. A friend.
Williams. Under what captain serve you?
Henry V. Under Sir Thomas Erpingham.
Williams. A good old commander and a most kind gentleman: I pray you, what thinks he of our estate?
Henry V. Even as men wrecked upon a sand, that look to be washed off the next tide.
(I find it fascinating that good old Hal here uses Sir Thomas to voice a pessimistic assessment of the situation. Does he want to sound the soldiers out whether or not they agree?)
Bates. He hath not told his thought to the king?
Henry V. No; nor it is not meet he should. For, though I speak it to you, I think the king is but a man, as I am: the violet smells to him as it doth to me: the element shows to him as it doth to me; all his senses have but human conditions: his ceremonies laid by, in his nakedness he appears but a man; and though his affections are higher mounted than ours, yet, when they stoop, they stoop with the like wing. Therefore when he sees reason of fears, as we do, his fears, out of doubt, be of the same relish as ours are: yet, in reason, no man should possess
him with any appearance of fear, lest he, by showing it, should dishearten his army.
(I.e. "I'm as scared as you are, but I can't show it lest I demoralize the troups." What simultanously drives me crazy and somehow makes me feel sympathetic about Henry V. is that he wants to have it both ways. He wants to be the man like other man when feeling low but only with the certainty of having the power to dispense of the disguise at any moment he chooses. (This, btw, is one of many reasons why I love the Merlin episode "The Once and Future Queen", because Gwen (and the episode in totem) call Arthur out on the "royalty in disguise" trope - it's play acting, because he can't dispense of his privilege, he's doing the "I'm just like you" stick with the knowledge that at any moment he can take it back.) If you think about it, it also echoes a bit what Hal does right at the start of Henry IV, 1 - declare he's just slumming it with the populace because discarding them wiill make him look more awesome than if he hadn't done it to begin with. Not that I believe he has these thoughts here, I think he's genuinenly seeking out the comfort of comradery, but neither do I think anything Hal ever does is entirely uncalculated.)
Bates. He may show what outward courage he will; but I believe, as cold a night as 'tis, he could wish himself in Thames up to the neck; and so I would he were, and I by him, at all adventures, so we were quit here.
(See, that's why Will's a genius. Even in the most "yay, war!" play, you get moments like this, which surely most soldiers go through.)
Henry V. By my troth, I will speak my conscience of the king: I think he would not wish himself any where but where he is.
(He'll elaborate on this in his St. Crispin's speech the next morning, but here's the gem of the idea taking place. See what I mean about nothing Hal ever does being entirely uncalculated?)
Bates. Then I would he were here alone; so should he be sure to be ransomed, and a many poor men's lives saved.
Because that was a genuine and big difference. The nobility could count on being ransomed if they survived the battle. Whereas, if you were a commoner...
Henry V. I dare say you love him not so ill, to wish him here alone, howsoever you speak this to feel other men's minds: methinks I could not die any where so contented as in the king's company; his cause being just and his quarrel honourable.
And here we get to Henry having reached the limit of how much truth he wants to hear when doing his "I'm just one of you" stick. Depending on the production, you can see this as testing or voicing self doubt. The Hollow Crown's Henry is very but not completely sure he's doing the right thing and wants to convince himself as much as he wants others.
Williams. That's more than we know.
Bates. Ay, or more than we should seek after; for we know enough, if we know we are the kings subjects: if his cause be wrong, our obedience to the king wipes the crime of it out of us.
Bates, I hate to tell you this, but they didn't buy that excuse in Nuremberg. In the middle ages, though, absolutely. It's interesting that Shakespeare in Elizabethan times seems to be less sure of it, though.
Williams. But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place;' some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their
children rawly left. I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of any thing, when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it; whom to disobey were against all proportion of subjection.
We get into theology there - dying unshriven without a chance for a last confession is a big thing, that's why Hamlet's father is in purgatory - but even without medieval theology, Williams gets to make a powerful argument here. Even more so if you keep in mind what the late Henry IV. advised his son to do on his deathbed: keep giddy minds busy with foreign quarrels. It works for Hal, too. But here's Williams, saying that all these soldiers and their gruesome deaths are his fault, and this is where Henry has the most uncalculated (i.e. 90%) outburst of the play. Which they cut in The Hollow Crown, because it's basically Hal saying "it's totally your own fault how you die and not mine, damm it!" which would not fit with their concept of the character.
Henry V. So, if a son that is by his father sent about merchandise do sinfully miscarry upon the sea, the imputation of his wickedness by your rule, should be imposed upon his father that sent him: or if a servant, under his master's command transporting a sum of money, be assailed by robbers and die in many irreconciled iniquities, you may call the business of the master the author of the servant's damnation: but this is not so: the king is not bound to answer the particular endings of his soldiers, the father of his son, nor the master of his servant; for they purpose not their death, when they purpose their services. Besides, there is no king, be his cause never so spotless, if it come to the arbitrement of swords, can try it out with all
unspotted soldiers: some peradventure have on them the guilt of premeditated and contrived murder; some, of beguiling virgins with the broken seals of perjury; some, making the wars their bulwark, that have before gored the gentle bosom of peace with pillage and robbery. Now, if these men have defeated the law and outrun native punishment, though they can outstrip men, they have no wings to fly from God: war is his beadle, war is vengeance; so that here men are punished for before-breach of the king's laws in now the king's quarrel: where they feared the death, they have borne life away; and where they would be safe, they perish: then if they die unprovided, no more is the king guilty of their damnation than he was before guilty of those impieties for the which they are now visited. Every subject's duty is the king's; but every subject's soul is his own. Therefore should every soldier in
the wars do as every sick man in his bed, wash every mote out of his conscience: and dying so, death is to him advantage; or not dying, the time was blessedly lost wherein such preparation was gained: and in him that escapes, it were not sin to think that, making God so free an offer, He let him outlive that day to see His greatness and to teach others how they should prepare.
Yes, Hal, but none of them would actually be in danger of dying if you hadn't invaded France in the first place. They're not defending their country. They're dying for your vanity project.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/801796.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.
Best cinematography: Richard II is the uncontested winner. They really overcame any sense of theatre staticness by using those landscapes in a majorly fashion.
Best performance: Sorry, Hiddlestans. Jeremy Irons wins. Because Henry IV, as opposed to Hal/Henry V, isn't a main part, as opposed to Falstaff or Richard II isn't flashy, and often feels like a walk-on, but Irons took what's a unflashy supporting past (never mind the title of the play) and made it central and fascinating. All the awards, please.
Best production twist not actually in Shakespeare: Chorus is Owen Tudor Falstaff's boy. (Runner up, because it's practically
likeadeuce fanfic: Percy and Kate have back to wall sex during the Lady Mortimer sings scene.)
(Production twist most likely to enrage shippers but my heartless self is on board with it: Aumerle as one of Richard's killers. )
Actor doing the most with the least amount of lines: Maxine Peake as Doll Tearsheet. No wonder
meri wants Doll fanfic. I loved practically everything she did, from the "I can't read, idiot!" look she gave Hal in Henry IV, 1 when he first wanted her to read out the papers in Falstaff's purse to her scene with Falstaff in Henry IV, 2 with its swinging back and forth between tenderness and knife pulling.
Best thing to hope from all the new folk young Master Hiddleston brought to the Shakespeare fandom: lots of fanfic, of course. I mean, half of it will be Hal/Poins which I won't read because I can't stand Poins, but there's bound to be some interesting stuff in the rest. If anyone does their research and figures out Katherine is actually the younger sister of Richard II.'s queen whom young Hal knew pretty well, you get bonus points. Anyone ignoring the casting discontinuity from Aumerle in Richard II to York in Henry V and writes fanfic using Hollow Crown!Aumerle/York's backstory for his interactions with Hal in the "oh not today!" scene does as well. If anyone writes The Life and Loves of Doll Tearsheet and lets it end with her alive, well, and unimpressed by Henry V.'s martial glory I'll sacrifice my non existing firstborn.
And now for my favourite scene from Henry V., which, though a bit shortened, made it into the screen version, with comments, because it is so good it bears being read again and again. It's of course Anonymous! Henry's pre battle conversation with the two soldiers Bates and Williams.
Williams. We see yonder the beginning of the day, but I think
we shall never see the end of it. Who goes there?
Henry V. A friend.
Williams. Under what captain serve you?
Henry V. Under Sir Thomas Erpingham.
Williams. A good old commander and a most kind gentleman: I pray you, what thinks he of our estate?
Henry V. Even as men wrecked upon a sand, that look to be washed off the next tide.
(I find it fascinating that good old Hal here uses Sir Thomas to voice a pessimistic assessment of the situation. Does he want to sound the soldiers out whether or not they agree?)
Bates. He hath not told his thought to the king?
Henry V. No; nor it is not meet he should. For, though I speak it to you, I think the king is but a man, as I am: the violet smells to him as it doth to me: the element shows to him as it doth to me; all his senses have but human conditions: his ceremonies laid by, in his nakedness he appears but a man; and though his affections are higher mounted than ours, yet, when they stoop, they stoop with the like wing. Therefore when he sees reason of fears, as we do, his fears, out of doubt, be of the same relish as ours are: yet, in reason, no man should possess
him with any appearance of fear, lest he, by showing it, should dishearten his army.
(I.e. "I'm as scared as you are, but I can't show it lest I demoralize the troups." What simultanously drives me crazy and somehow makes me feel sympathetic about Henry V. is that he wants to have it both ways. He wants to be the man like other man when feeling low but only with the certainty of having the power to dispense of the disguise at any moment he chooses. (This, btw, is one of many reasons why I love the Merlin episode "The Once and Future Queen", because Gwen (and the episode in totem) call Arthur out on the "royalty in disguise" trope - it's play acting, because he can't dispense of his privilege, he's doing the "I'm just like you" stick with the knowledge that at any moment he can take it back.) If you think about it, it also echoes a bit what Hal does right at the start of Henry IV, 1 - declare he's just slumming it with the populace because discarding them wiill make him look more awesome than if he hadn't done it to begin with. Not that I believe he has these thoughts here, I think he's genuinenly seeking out the comfort of comradery, but neither do I think anything Hal ever does is entirely uncalculated.)
Bates. He may show what outward courage he will; but I believe, as cold a night as 'tis, he could wish himself in Thames up to the neck; and so I would he were, and I by him, at all adventures, so we were quit here.
(See, that's why Will's a genius. Even in the most "yay, war!" play, you get moments like this, which surely most soldiers go through.)
Henry V. By my troth, I will speak my conscience of the king: I think he would not wish himself any where but where he is.
(He'll elaborate on this in his St. Crispin's speech the next morning, but here's the gem of the idea taking place. See what I mean about nothing Hal ever does being entirely uncalculated?)
Bates. Then I would he were here alone; so should he be sure to be ransomed, and a many poor men's lives saved.
Because that was a genuine and big difference. The nobility could count on being ransomed if they survived the battle. Whereas, if you were a commoner...
Henry V. I dare say you love him not so ill, to wish him here alone, howsoever you speak this to feel other men's minds: methinks I could not die any where so contented as in the king's company; his cause being just and his quarrel honourable.
And here we get to Henry having reached the limit of how much truth he wants to hear when doing his "I'm just one of you" stick. Depending on the production, you can see this as testing or voicing self doubt. The Hollow Crown's Henry is very but not completely sure he's doing the right thing and wants to convince himself as much as he wants others.
Williams. That's more than we know.
Bates. Ay, or more than we should seek after; for we know enough, if we know we are the kings subjects: if his cause be wrong, our obedience to the king wipes the crime of it out of us.
Bates, I hate to tell you this, but they didn't buy that excuse in Nuremberg. In the middle ages, though, absolutely. It's interesting that Shakespeare in Elizabethan times seems to be less sure of it, though.
Williams. But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place;' some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their
children rawly left. I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of any thing, when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it; whom to disobey were against all proportion of subjection.
We get into theology there - dying unshriven without a chance for a last confession is a big thing, that's why Hamlet's father is in purgatory - but even without medieval theology, Williams gets to make a powerful argument here. Even more so if you keep in mind what the late Henry IV. advised his son to do on his deathbed: keep giddy minds busy with foreign quarrels. It works for Hal, too. But here's Williams, saying that all these soldiers and their gruesome deaths are his fault, and this is where Henry has the most uncalculated (i.e. 90%) outburst of the play. Which they cut in The Hollow Crown, because it's basically Hal saying "it's totally your own fault how you die and not mine, damm it!" which would not fit with their concept of the character.
Henry V. So, if a son that is by his father sent about merchandise do sinfully miscarry upon the sea, the imputation of his wickedness by your rule, should be imposed upon his father that sent him: or if a servant, under his master's command transporting a sum of money, be assailed by robbers and die in many irreconciled iniquities, you may call the business of the master the author of the servant's damnation: but this is not so: the king is not bound to answer the particular endings of his soldiers, the father of his son, nor the master of his servant; for they purpose not their death, when they purpose their services. Besides, there is no king, be his cause never so spotless, if it come to the arbitrement of swords, can try it out with all
unspotted soldiers: some peradventure have on them the guilt of premeditated and contrived murder; some, of beguiling virgins with the broken seals of perjury; some, making the wars their bulwark, that have before gored the gentle bosom of peace with pillage and robbery. Now, if these men have defeated the law and outrun native punishment, though they can outstrip men, they have no wings to fly from God: war is his beadle, war is vengeance; so that here men are punished for before-breach of the king's laws in now the king's quarrel: where they feared the death, they have borne life away; and where they would be safe, they perish: then if they die unprovided, no more is the king guilty of their damnation than he was before guilty of those impieties for the which they are now visited. Every subject's duty is the king's; but every subject's soul is his own. Therefore should every soldier in
the wars do as every sick man in his bed, wash every mote out of his conscience: and dying so, death is to him advantage; or not dying, the time was blessedly lost wherein such preparation was gained: and in him that escapes, it were not sin to think that, making God so free an offer, He let him outlive that day to see His greatness and to teach others how they should prepare.
Yes, Hal, but none of them would actually be in danger of dying if you hadn't invaded France in the first place. They're not defending their country. They're dying for your vanity project.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/801796.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.