Tag: answered

💣

Parallels/similarities between Henry VIII and Elizabeth I abound, tbh? Not sure why people are not fond of that, I think they’re very interesting and every time I find one I find another. I think there’s this urgency to put her on a pedestal, and conversely to with Henry…do whatever the opposite of ‘put on a pedestal’ is (lol!!) that makes people balk at doing so.

One of the most amusing ones to me (and God, I’m gonna get booed so hard for this but idc fkjsdkfjdslk) is that Elizabeth’s most passionate romantic relationship was with someone that was a masculine version of her mother in a lot of ways (namely, a Mr. Dudley) and that Henry’s most passionate romantic relationship was with someone that was a feminine version of his father in a lot of ways  …

And also that they were both similarly unrealistic about these relationships in ways…I mean Elizabeth was more realistic and pragmatic about hers I think, she never married him even when she technically could have (after his wife’s death, after he was cleared of suspicion…legally/officially, anyway). But she DID order her council to name him protector of the kingdom when she had smallpox and she thought she would die and that’s like?? Wild, tbh….like did she think anyone would actually…?

Also Henry named Anne absolute regent and governess of their children in the event of his death in 1534. Like…know ya love her, boo, but did you think that’d like?? Work?? She wasn’t exactly universally popular; I could see her possibly being regent if Henry died after she had a son but otherwise I don’t think she’d have near enough support to sustain that position (He maybe did this in the hope that she would; I think he might have during her pregnancy that year but?? Still.)            

The GoT writers are terrible and fundamentally don’t get that the point of fantasy is to ‘see the colours again’ (quote from the author of ASOIAF, the series upon which GoT is based), they’re wanky hacks who’re obsessed with making their show as GrimDark as possible, even though Westeros fashion of the books is this amazing technicolour parade of late medieval opulence. Also Michele Clapton seems to work in a boring mud palate no matter the styles, if S1 of The Crown is any indication

Lmaooooo I actually like the costuming of The Crown? Esp. Margaret’s. Idk it kind of makes sense to me that the color palette is duller generally, they’re all living in this gilded world but have to face all this pressure to project a certain image, maintain the status quo, all very strait-laced but repressed and not really allowed to express emotion in any genuine way in the public arena?

Even the colouring on that show seems a bit ~grey~ to me at times (especially the episode with the Great Fog or w/e but also in general); but I always figured that was intentional. Gloomy London with its grey skies and rain and all that; but also just the…vibes/aesthetic of the show. Subdued, things cracking but never doing so on the surface etc. etc.

But yeah I hate the vast majority of the GoT costuming, tb(honest).  And GoT; because of the GrimDark thing and the We Are So Edgy/With Freedom Comes (Gratuitous, almost always Female) Nudity thing and honestly I find the plot…….boring. Like I’m not invested in any of these people, I don’t think most of the actors are that great either so I’ve never really gotten invested in a character.

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. 

💣

I think… Cromwell as a sympathetic figure has gone a bit tooooo far tbh, I could blame this on Mantel (and probably will shsh) but I think that portrayal appeals to a lot of people for…interesting motivations, esp. among people that ship Anne/Cromwell and then make post-after-post-after-post about how ~disgusting Henry/Anne is, how ~disgusting anyone is that ships it, how ~disgusting it is that there exists fanvids and edits and fanfiction, how ~disgusting it is that the Lovers Who Changed History was a title for a documentary about them, and that it existed as a doc at all. 

I’m getting fandom and like … legit historic opinion mixed a bit for this take I guess (although I think often they…are mixed so maybe that’s valid? idk) but I digress……

If we’re treating Anne’s death as judicial murder (and that’s a perfectly valid take), and Henry as her murderer, then…Cromwell is, at the very least, his accomplice. We don’t feel an overt amount of sympathy for accomplices in murders today (or, at least, I hope we don’t) or excuse their actions; and if evidence is found that renders them likely to be guilty in a court of law, they are still sentenced punishment (even if it is lesser than the primary criminal). 

It should be the same in the court of historic opinion. Henry is guilty of the crime, and Cromwell is guilty of the crimer to a lesser degree– but still, ultimately, culpable. 

And yet pro-Cromwell rheotric often descends into making excuses for him (and even, almost, borderline victim-blaming Anne for her own death):

“Cromwell was, above all, a practical man and an astute politician. Sadly for Anne she was no longer useful. She was bad for foreign relations. She had not provided Henry with a son. And Henry was rapidly losing interest in her. Henry wanted a new wife. And Cromwell had no reason to stick his neck out to save Anne. As far as Cromwell was concerned it was his duty to follow his king’s orders.

For some this may not make good fiction. Perhaps that is why recent fictional accounts of Cromwell have sought to find a different motive other than mere duty. But these don’t put Cromwell in a good light. They make him petty and vengeful, and vilify him as much as his alleged enemies. What I wonder is why no one ever tries to explore how Cromwell may have felt when he realised that his prosecution was not merely leading Queen Anne Boleyn to estrangement, but to the scaffold.”

I mean…c’mon…we should think about how Cromwell felt~ about Anne’s execution? He compiled all the ‘evidence’ and was heavily involved in and at her trial, it’s not as if he was just in the background, twiddling his thumbs! Cry me a whole-ass river… 

To sum up: if we’re not to feel sympathy for Henry over the manner of Anne’s death (which I would agree– is grossly misplaced– we shouldn’t, whether he genuinely believed her guilt or not), then by the same token we should also not feel sympathy towards Cromwell for Anne’s death. We can feel sympathy for him re: other things…he was a fascinating and extremely competent genius (basically, someone who was indispensable; that Henry nevertheless dispensed of) , and also as much a victim of judicial murder as Anne was. I certainly don’t believe he ‘deserved’ to die in such a horrific way, as some of Anne’s mega-fans do. 

I don’t think Cromwell deserves to be put in a purposefully bad light in general, I find that to be somewhat symptomatic of a classist take on him as a greedy, greedy-good-for-nothing-social-climber due to his humble origins (ironically enough, also a common take on Anne– despite that in her case her origins were certainly not humble in nature)…but I don’t think he deserves to be portrayed in a sympathetic light when it comes to Anne’s execution. To me, that’s taking a sympathetic portrayal a bit too far.