Would you like to see historical dramas set in 15th/16th/17th century be more realistic? I don’t talk about historical accuracy but like in terms of themes or even plot? I always get the feeling that pieces set 500 or so years from now are made more like a fairy tales or even a play. I supposse the costumes and the period play a role but shows set in 20th century seems more realistic to me.What do you think?

Hmm…yes, I would tend to agree with you. I mean, it’s always going to be like a play especially with the dialogue, because it has to be entertaining. Everything’s high stakes etc.

But I think they tend to be anachronistic in ways that go even beyond the costumes and the word choice. 

For theme and setting, and just kind of story set-up, I definitely feel you:

In Tudors, for instance, you get the impression that Henry VIII was like…The Bachelor (he’s married but like…you get me); and that every single eligible woman 18-30 at his court was a contestant vying for his attention and Dat Time in the Fantasy Suite (up to the time he’s like…50ish); and it was really………not that way.

Or, it was if you ask Amy Licence– but I tend to disagree. Antonia Fraser talks about the tidbit shared on tours that Henry is one of the few kings you can name that had more wives than he had mistresses (well, that can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, anyway). I tend to believe that’s true…among mistresses he didn’t eventually wife there’s Bessie Blount, Mary Boleyn, and Madge Shelton. There could have been more, but imo all evidence is circumstantial and hardly ironclad for the hypothetical others. 

But within this set-up, certain things in the storyline are rendered more believable…if Bessie Blount is one among many, it makes sense that he never sees her again besides the day of the birth of Henry Fitzroy. That certainly wasn’t what happened; but it also serves to lend veracity to Anne’s earlier quote in the series about “all his liasons are soon over…he blows hot, he blows cold’. 

And we have fairytale morality/plot twists as well– Henry Fiztroy dies, and this is, to Henry, further proof of his interpretation of Leviticus. And it leads to the personalization of it… it’s not “they will be childless”, it’s he will be childless– even if the child is not from his first marriage, God will punish him until he ends it. 

We have the fairytale arrival/appearance of Jane Seymour (who, in actuality, had served Anne as lady-in-waiting for quite some time before she garnered much attention), we have the sort of…twisted Cinderella, pick-them-up-from-the-gutter and Fair Lady them twist for Katherine Howard (who also just served as lady-in-waiting to Anne of Cleves, and was hardly chosen by Charles Brandon to adjacently throw down Cromwell).

I suppose some like the fairy-tale flash, the quick turn of the wheel of Fate, but it feels dishonest and…tv is supposed to be charismatic, it’s certainly supposed to be escapism but…less is more, often. 

In actuality, big change comes in layers; and a cliff erodes bit by bit. Nothing happens all at once…not the erosion of a marriage, not distrust, not shifting alliances. It’s the build that is exciting to watch…and I think you’re right, in that often period dramas take that away from us.