![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Went into London last night with my beloved ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
cheshcat to see the Richmond Shakespeare Society put on a production of King John. This raises our Shakespeare number to thirty-one. Seven more plays left to go.[*]
This was the last of the English history plays that we had yet to see performed on the stage.[**] In some ways, it reminded me very much of certain other history plays. War with France, for instance, was also a central part of the plot in King Henry V and in King Henry VI, part one. A sitting monarch ordering the murder of the child who could make a rival claim to the throne smacks heavily of King Richard III; the turning of public opinion and ill fate that follows the child's death is another commonality. Conflict with the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church was also integral to King Henry VIII, though the outcome broke differently there.
Other bits draw heavily on different legends that were never translated for the stage by the Bard. For instance, in exasperation, King John refers to Cardinal Pandolf as a "meddling priest", thus echoing the description that his father, King Henry II, used in reference to Archbishop Thomas à Becket. Similarly, when John he hints of his desire to be rid of his youthful rival, Arthur, it is expressed in words that mimic his father's infamous utterance: "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"
However, in certain ways, this play was rather unlike those that we had seen before. The characters keep changing their minds, over and over again. Phillip will wage war on England... then he will make peace... then he will go to war. John shall absolutely not heed the Cardinal's demands, even though he be excommunicated... except then he shall. The Bastard of Richard Couer de Lion wants to keep his dubiously inherited lands... until he gives them away to become a landless knight. The Lords Salisbury and Essex and Pembroke are loyal to England. I mean France. I mean England. And John will not let his nephew and rival to the throne, the young Price Arthur, be killed. Oh yes, he will! Oh no, he won't! It goes on to the point where these characters make Hamlet look positively decisive!
Certain parts of the play were rather funny, such as the scenes where the citizens of Angers cannily avoid choosing between the two sides in the war that rages just outside their city walls. They repeatedly pledge allegiance as loyal subjects to England's rightful king... whilst ever dodging the dangerous question of just who should be that king. Many of the scenes with the Bastard were also quite amusing. Indeed, I found that the entire performance of this character, known first as Philip Falconbridge then later as Sir Richard Plantagenet, to be particularly compelling. Tis fitting, since it is probably the best role in the play and would have been a great disappointment if done poorly. This particular production was put on by an amateur theatre company blessed with few noteworthy actors. The Bastard was certainly one of these, as was John himself and also his mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. Well done!
Overall, we enjoyed the play quite a bit and it possesses some rather beautiful language in parts. One of my favourite examples comes in Act 4, when Lord Salisbury berates King John for performing a second coronation ceremony. Tis the same verse that gives us the commonly misquoted phrase, "To gild the lily":
I was rather thankful that John's henchman Huber did not follow through with his plan to put out Prince Arthur's eyes with hot pokers. I've rather had my fill of eyes put out lately and have have tried to declare a moratorium. Unfortunately, it does not seem to be sticking, as Mestor, King of Mestor, had his eyes poked out last week in the godawful production of After Troy that we saw at the Oxford Playhouse, and Gloucester will lose his eyes next week when we see Derek Jacobi star in King Lear. After that, though, no more eyes gouged out! I'm serious! This means Oedipus Rex (and, for that matter, Into The Woods) is off the list for the foreseeable future!
Although not the greatest of the Bard's works, King John is also far from the worst; it really is a shame that this piece is not performed more frequently. Perhaps it will make a comeback in various repertoires come 2015, when the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta is upon us. Despite the play spanning past the end of John's life, this monumental event is never touched upon.[***] Still, it would not surprise me to see a resurgence linked to the Great Charter's "birthday".
Even though we have completed the round of Shakespeare's English history plays, I very much enjoy this genre and would like to see more. Last year,cheshcat and I attended a production of Marlowe's King Edward II at Oriel College, which Edward himself had founded. I would very much like to find a production of King Edward III, which is thought by some to have been penned by the Bard, to continue on from here... and then into a showing of Thomas of Woodstock. Together, those two plays would nicely bridge the gap between Marlowe's King Edward II and the start of Shakespeare's eight-play history cycle with King Richard II. Besides, as we begin to finish up our Shakespeare list, we will need to look elsewhere for sources of new Renaissance drama. I have seen Middleton's The Revenger's Tragedy and the aforementioned King Edward II. Next week, we will be seeing Marlowe's Doctor Faustus. Need to keep an eye out for more. A production of Tamburlaine the Great, for instance, would be most welcome!
[*] Specifically, our "Shakespeare number" refers to the plays of the Bard that we have seen performed live on stage. I do not count recreations of lost plays or adaptations of his poetry. Thus, even though we have tickets to see the Royal Shakespeare Company perform a recreation of Cardenio and an adaptation of The Rape of Lucrece, these shall not boost our S-number.
[**] Overall, the remaining plays that we need to see are Pericles, Timon of Athens, Two Noble Kinsmen, Coriolanus, Two Gentlemen of Verona, Titus Andronicus, and All's Well That Ends Well. Happily, we have already have tickets to the see the last of these performed at Shakespeare's Globe in July.
[***] Nor, for that matter, is his role in the Robin Hood mythos.
cheshcat to see the Richmond Shakespeare Society put on a production of King John. This raises our Shakespeare number to thirty-one. Seven more plays left to go.[*]This was the last of the English history plays that we had yet to see performed on the stage.[**] In some ways, it reminded me very much of certain other history plays. War with France, for instance, was also a central part of the plot in King Henry V and in King Henry VI, part one. A sitting monarch ordering the murder of the child who could make a rival claim to the throne smacks heavily of King Richard III; the turning of public opinion and ill fate that follows the child's death is another commonality. Conflict with the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church was also integral to King Henry VIII, though the outcome broke differently there.
Other bits draw heavily on different legends that were never translated for the stage by the Bard. For instance, in exasperation, King John refers to Cardinal Pandolf as a "meddling priest", thus echoing the description that his father, King Henry II, used in reference to Archbishop Thomas à Becket. Similarly, when John he hints of his desire to be rid of his youthful rival, Arthur, it is expressed in words that mimic his father's infamous utterance: "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"
However, in certain ways, this play was rather unlike those that we had seen before. The characters keep changing their minds, over and over again. Phillip will wage war on England... then he will make peace... then he will go to war. John shall absolutely not heed the Cardinal's demands, even though he be excommunicated... except then he shall. The Bastard of Richard Couer de Lion wants to keep his dubiously inherited lands... until he gives them away to become a landless knight. The Lords Salisbury and Essex and Pembroke are loyal to England. I mean France. I mean England. And John will not let his nephew and rival to the throne, the young Price Arthur, be killed. Oh yes, he will! Oh no, he won't! It goes on to the point where these characters make Hamlet look positively decisive!
Certain parts of the play were rather funny, such as the scenes where the citizens of Angers cannily avoid choosing between the two sides in the war that rages just outside their city walls. They repeatedly pledge allegiance as loyal subjects to England's rightful king... whilst ever dodging the dangerous question of just who should be that king. Many of the scenes with the Bastard were also quite amusing. Indeed, I found that the entire performance of this character, known first as Philip Falconbridge then later as Sir Richard Plantagenet, to be particularly compelling. Tis fitting, since it is probably the best role in the play and would have been a great disappointment if done poorly. This particular production was put on by an amateur theatre company blessed with few noteworthy actors. The Bastard was certainly one of these, as was John himself and also his mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. Well done!
Overall, we enjoyed the play quite a bit and it possesses some rather beautiful language in parts. One of my favourite examples comes in Act 4, when Lord Salisbury berates King John for performing a second coronation ceremony. Tis the same verse that gives us the commonly misquoted phrase, "To gild the lily":
To gild refined gold, to paint the lily,
To throw a perfume on the violet,
To smooth the ice, or add another hue
Unto the rainbow, or with taper light
To seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish,
Is wasteful and ridiculous excess.
I was rather thankful that John's henchman Huber did not follow through with his plan to put out Prince Arthur's eyes with hot pokers. I've rather had my fill of eyes put out lately and have have tried to declare a moratorium. Unfortunately, it does not seem to be sticking, as Mestor, King of Mestor, had his eyes poked out last week in the godawful production of After Troy that we saw at the Oxford Playhouse, and Gloucester will lose his eyes next week when we see Derek Jacobi star in King Lear. After that, though, no more eyes gouged out! I'm serious! This means Oedipus Rex (and, for that matter, Into The Woods) is off the list for the foreseeable future!
Although not the greatest of the Bard's works, King John is also far from the worst; it really is a shame that this piece is not performed more frequently. Perhaps it will make a comeback in various repertoires come 2015, when the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta is upon us. Despite the play spanning past the end of John's life, this monumental event is never touched upon.[***] Still, it would not surprise me to see a resurgence linked to the Great Charter's "birthday".
Even though we have completed the round of Shakespeare's English history plays, I very much enjoy this genre and would like to see more. Last year,
cheshcat and I attended a production of Marlowe's King Edward II at Oriel College, which Edward himself had founded. I would very much like to find a production of King Edward III, which is thought by some to have been penned by the Bard, to continue on from here... and then into a showing of Thomas of Woodstock. Together, those two plays would nicely bridge the gap between Marlowe's King Edward II and the start of Shakespeare's eight-play history cycle with King Richard II. Besides, as we begin to finish up our Shakespeare list, we will need to look elsewhere for sources of new Renaissance drama. I have seen Middleton's The Revenger's Tragedy and the aforementioned King Edward II. Next week, we will be seeing Marlowe's Doctor Faustus. Need to keep an eye out for more. A production of Tamburlaine the Great, for instance, would be most welcome![*] Specifically, our "Shakespeare number" refers to the plays of the Bard that we have seen performed live on stage. I do not count recreations of lost plays or adaptations of his poetry. Thus, even though we have tickets to see the Royal Shakespeare Company perform a recreation of Cardenio and an adaptation of The Rape of Lucrece, these shall not boost our S-number.
[**] Overall, the remaining plays that we need to see are Pericles, Timon of Athens, Two Noble Kinsmen, Coriolanus, Two Gentlemen of Verona, Titus Andronicus, and All's Well That Ends Well. Happily, we have already have tickets to the see the last of these performed at Shakespeare's Globe in July.
[***] Nor, for that matter, is his role in the Robin Hood mythos.
Tags: