Henry VI, Part 1

The first of three plays about the reign of Henry VI of England shows conflict between the English and the French, and within the English ranks. Joan of Arc is on the side of the French cause, and the English can’t believe a woman is capable of fighting, so they have to resort to misogyny to feel superior. Richard Plantagenet (the Duke of York) and Somerset, meanwhile, have squared off against each other, each picking white and red roses to symbolize their respective factions.

This is a surprisingly slim and action-packed play for a history play. Lots of rapid scenes, changes in location, running around and shouting, and occasional death scenes. It is nice to see Joan fighting, but not to see the English casting aspersions on her sex show more life. The portrayals of the French in general are designed to make the English look superior, which likely reflects the target audience. For this 21st-century audience, reading this makes me want to find more authoritative, less propagandist sources, particularly for the story of Joan of Arc. Nevertheless, I will read the other two plays in the trilogy. show less

Shakespeare’s histories have always felt less accessible to me than his other work. But I realized the other day that it’s probably because I’m not that familiar with the people involved. What is the musical “Hamilton” if not our version of Shakespeare's histories? It’s a theatrical show based on our own country’s history. Shakespeare's histories are not as easy for us to understand because we they are covering a time period that we don’t always learn about. But during Shakespeare's time everyone knew who those dukes and kings were, just as we know names like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.

Anyway, all of that to say that these three plays worked much better for me than some of the other histories of his I've show more tackled and I think it’s because I finally made that connection. It was also incredibly helpful to me to watch the Hollow Crown series before reading the plays. It covers all three of these plays although it's called Henry VI Part one and two, it's really a combination of parts 1, 2 and 3.They are so well done and watching those first helped me picture a face with a name while reading the place, which helped me keep all the characters straight.

These plays are part of the eight plays that make up the War of the Roses. Henry VI Part 1 includes the original scene where the characters pick a white or red rose to declare their allegiance. From there it’s a constant stream of battle and betrayal as they all fight for the thrown. Poor King Henry VI is thrust into his role as monarch when he’s only a baby. The death of his father meant a life time watching others attempt to steal his throne. Almost everyone in the plays comes to a bloody end by the final curtain.

A few thoughts:
Margaret was such a bad ass. She was conniving, but she was strong where her husband, King Henry VI, was weak. I have to admire her and she certainly has some of the best lines.
We meet the infamous Richard in these plays. I'd read and seen Richard III before, so reading these gave me a better understanding of his character's background. He’s a delicious villain and one that I loved getting to know.

“Why, I can smile and murder whiles I smile,
And cry 'content' to that which grieves my heart,
And wet my cheeks with artificial tears,
And frame my face for all occasions”

BOTTOM LINE: I ended up loving them. I was surprised by how hooked I got on the War of the Roses drama, but it’s like a soap opera. It’s amazing to see how power seems to corrupt all the touch it. Even those who are not driven with a desire for power are often the easiest to steal power from, because they aren’t as vicious as others. I would definitely read part 1, 2, and 3 back-to-back because they work better as one continuous story. I also highly recommend watching the Hollow Crown series first, but just dive into the plays and enjoy them!

“Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind.”

“For where thou art, there is the world itself,
With every several pleasure in the world,
And where thou art not, desolation.”

“Unbidden guests are often welcomest when they are gone.” show less

Considering that I took a whole class on Joan of Arc in film and literature, you would think I would remember that she was routing the English out of France during the reign of Henry VI… Apparently not! After the death of Henry V, who made strategic alliances and major military victories to take occupation of France, we see the unstable rule of his son, Henry VI, begin to crumble England’s foundation. Shakespeare (and his apparent co-authors) take advantage of the realistic instability in England during this time period, focusing in this first of the trilogy of Henry VI plays on the loss of French territories. A lot of the pre-Tudor plays focus specifically on dissension, whether it be war itself, feuding nobles, or courtly show more machinations, and this play has a bit of everything. As Henry VI comes of age the nobles who hold regency and true control of the court begin an almost inevitable bickering, a typical result of the system which pits noble families against one another to gain more power and riches. This specific eda of English history isn’t one which I’m particularly invested in, so some of the finer points of this play and linguistic sparring are a bit obtuse without further historical research, but we see the emergence of the York bid for the crown as well as Henry’s ill-advised alliance with France via Margaret of Anjou take hold of the narrative. Offsetting the rumblings at court, the nobles are also engaged in an ongoing battle in France, which they are beginning to lose due to the introduction of Joan of Arc into the narrative to rally the Frenchmen. Joan’s character features heavily throughout the story, and I feel almost like Shakespeare could have written a whole history play about her as a stand-alone, but considering the anti-French rhetoric of Shakespeare’s time it was enough to see her wage battle, spar linguistically, and then meet her fate for heresy at the stake. The play ends shortly after Joan’s death, as Henry makes his alliance with France through marriage, but we are left very much without a real ending and little in the way of satisfaction. The final speeches made by Lords Suffolk and Gloucester make it clear that Henry’s (and England’s) woes have not yet been solved, and further action must play out in subsequent drama. Without the dual story of Joan of Arc, I don’t think that this play is particularly well done in terms of heightening the realistic court drama of the time period, and without the further two story arcs can’t have been much of a success for audiences. show less

William Shakespeare's "Henry VI, part one" certainly doesn't live up to the bard's later historical plays. The Henry VI series was apparently one of his first plays and it shows -- the language lacks sparkle and the writing seems a little flat.

That said, I enjoyed it more than I expected to, mostly due to Joan of Arc, who is given an interesting yet fiercely anti-French portrayal as you'd expect from an Elizabethan playwright.

The story starts with the unexpected death of Henry V, who leaves an infant as his heir. Powerful lords fight in the War of the Roses for control all while England and France remain at war.

I'm interested to find out what happens in parts two and three.

http://nhw.livejournal.com/1081694.html

The first play is really much more about Talbot, the English commander in France, and Joan La Pucelle, who inspires the French to treacherously resist their English rulers, than about King Henry, who doesn't even appear until the third act. The story is of increasingly united and successful French prevailing against the divided English, who come to identify their factions with red or white roses. King Henry is rather innocently being manipulated by the factions (including into a rather bizarre arranged marriage in the last act, organised by Suffolk who is deeply in love with the future queen himself).

Talbot gets the best two scenes, at the end of the fourth act, in rhyming couplets with his son as show more they go to their doom in combat. It's not surprising that the most explicit contemporary record of Henry VI Part 1 being performed is Nashe's note about a play about Talbot. The moral lesson of the play is that thanks to the power-hungry squabbles of the English leadership, Talbot's courage and leadership are lost disastrously (there is also a very peculiar scene with the Countess of Auvergne who attempts to capture him, but apparently ends up being seduced herself). The play runs out of steam and direction after his death.

The other fascinating character is Joan La Pucelle. The English (and some of the French) accuse her of being a whore and a witch, but there is nothing in the script of the first four acts to support this; I must say I was expecting her to be a misguided idealist à la Bernard Shaw's Saint Joan. So it actually came as rather a shock in the last act when she did, in fact, turn out to be consorting with demons and pleaded to be spared execution on the grounds of pregnancy, though she couldn't remember who the father was (the implication is surely that she is just making it up). Of course, there is a large element of simple anti-French propaganda operating here; but I was surprised that her transformation into panic-stricken witch in the last act seemed so sudden.

Anyway, it is generally a good read; the battles would require careful and diligent staging, to keep the different factions distinct and give clear outcomes to the various sieges and other engagements, and that's one thing that just doesn't come across on audio. show less

This is not Shakespeare's best work and is disappointing after having just finished the magnificent Richard III. The one virtue it has is that it brings to life the events and people that started the War of the Roses.
The Folger Library e-books are the very best e-books for reading Shakespeare with their easy access to the notes and textual commentary. The essays included with each book, however, tend to be redundant once you have read them in other books. The essay that they are missing is an essay on the historical background.

Henry VI, Part I is the first of three plays about that king's troubled reign, which along with Richard III form Shakespeare's First Tetrology. This first volume describes the beginning of Henry's reign, starting with his father's early death, and focuses on both the physical war in France and the political war at home. We also get to meet Joan of Arc, who is either a divine maiden or a demonic witch. Either way, she gets some good results against the English and is helped by internal infighting amongst leaders of the opposite camp. This is the play with the famous rose-picking scene, although I think I enjoyed the death of the Talbots ("Stay, go, do what you will, the like do I; / For live I will not, if my father die.") the best. It show more may not be Shakespeare's greatest history play, but it is certainly worth reading. show less