The Henry VI plays

by Stuart Hampton-Reeves, Carol Chillington Rutter

The Henry VI plays are Shakespeare’s earliest, most theatrically exciting plays and in their day, they were among his most popular works. In a story which stretches over thirty years, Shakespeare dramatises the fall of the House of Lancaster and creates some of his most compelling characters, among them the Queen Margaret and the wildly ambitious Richard, Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III).

Modern productions have become landmark works that have defined institutions such as the Royal Shakespeare Company and the English Shakespeare Company. This book, the first major study of the Henry VI plays in performance, focuses on the cultural context of modern British productions on stage and screen which have explored Shakespeare’s troubling depiction of England in crisis and related those themes to contemporaneous questions of national identity.

Genres: Shakespeare, Theatre, Drama

232 pages, Hardcover

First published July 24, 2007

Reviews

[Pauline Calkin · Rating 3 out of 5]

All three plays compress the timeline of events to rather absurd lengths and places historical figures at times and places where they were not. The most notable example occurs in Part II where Richard of Gloucester (later Richard III) takes part in the first Battle of St. Albans, killing the Duke of Somerset. That battle occurred in 1455; Richard was born in 1452. Part I covers features Joan of Arc and the English forces led by old Talbot. Part II concerns the downfall of “good” Duke Humphrey, Cade’s rebellion, and the rise of the ambitious Richard, Duke of York, ending with the Battle of St. Albans, as noted above. It is thought that these two plays are a pastiches put together from actors’s recollections and probably include contributions from various playwrights, including Marlowe, as well as Shakespeare. They are pretty dreadful, and the only memorable line is in Part II: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
Part III begins when the Duke of York makes his claim to the crown of England and ends with his son Richard killing Henry VI following the battle of Tewkesbury. It is clear even to me that Part III is mostly, if not entirely, Shakespeare’s creation. It has that clever turn of phrase: “If that be right which Warwick says is right; There is no wrong, but everything is right.” There are also longer poetic passages and it echoes themes from the Bard’s other works; Henry VI muses that he willingly gives up the cares of the throne to Warwick just as Henry IV believed that “uneasy” lies the head that wears the crown. The most vivid character is Richard of Gloucester who tells the audience what is to come—he is a nasty piece of work who plans to kill his way to the throne. Conversely, Prince Hal in the Henry IV plays also lets us know that he is not a total wastrel and will become a great king.
Not the Bard’s best and for a Ricaradian, not the most enjoyable plays to read, but, since we skipped over them in my college Shakespeare course, I completed my education

[Sasha · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, these haven't gotten any better than I remembered. Part i is absolutely terrible - almost as bad as Henry VIII; parts 2 and 3 aren't a hell of a lot better. The breakneck pace of part 3 renders it almost incomprehensible, and Shakespeare heaps the pathos on like a Mel Gibson movie.

Glad I'm through these things.