Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: June ::
Re: Henry VI, pt 1
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0980  Friday, 11 June 1999.

[1]     From:   Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 11:54:48 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

[2]     From:   Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 12:43:03 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

[3]     From:   Terence Hawkes <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 13:31:28 -0400
        Subj:   SHK 10.0965 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

[4]     From:   Dana Wilson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 13:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
        Subj:   HenryVI pt1


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 11:54:48 -0400
Subject: 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

"In H6.1,I,ii,144, Charles compares Joan to bright Venus the "fallen"
star.  On an astrological level this refers to the fact that at dusk and
dawn Venus is to be seen just above the horizon.  However, on the other
hand, it seems to be a play on the idea of the "fallen woman"."

Could also be a calm acceptance of lore that Venus (or Lucifer) was
originally a comet.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 12:43:03 -0400
Subject: 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0973 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

Has anyone considered the notion that this play was revised from an
older Talbot play to form a prequel to 2HVI and 3HVI?  Given the
probable popularity of the Contention plays, it would have made sense
for Shakespeare's company to cobble up an old play by adding relevant
scenes, particularly the Temple Garden Scene and the Margaret scenes, to
convert the Talbot play into an introduction to what would have
otherwise been a War of the Roses trilogy.  Most of Part 1 appears to me
to be in a style foreign to the bulk of the Canon, including the
Contention plays.

I know it has long been suspected that most of the play is by someone
else (Greene, perhaps); but I have not seen anyone develop this
particular idea.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Terence Hawkes <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 13:31:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Henry VI, pt 1
Comment:        SHK 10.0965 Re: Henry VI, pt 1

Abigail Quart asks,
>is it a stretch to remember that Elizabeth was "England's rose" before
>Diana?

 Some historians think Elizabeth was as much Welsh as English. Diana was
Princess of Wales.

Terence Hawkes

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Dana Wilson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 10 Jun 1999 13:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:        HenryVI pt1

I have been working to understand the relationship between color and
plainness in H6.1.  In the temple garden scene, Vernon (ln 46) says that
he chooses the white rose for plainness and clarity; and Warwick (ln 35)
says that he chooses the white rose as he associates all color with base
flattery.  This accords well with the actions of Joan in III,ii.  She
does not for heraldry sake disdain bringing her army into the city under
the guise of simple corn farmers.  However, in ln 25, Charles notes that
the honor of France will not rally to the sign of weakness under which
she has entered the city.  It is my opinion that this is the policy or
stratagem which Talbot calls treason and  treachery; and indeed, a
soldier caught in such a guise would be liable to being hung as a spy.

Charles while respecting the efficacy of Joan's spies feels bound to
uphold his chivalric honor.  In III,iii,12-5, he tells Joan seek out
your wit for secret policy and we will make him famous, being secret no
more but open to light.  Charles demonstrates this penchant again when
he prefers the revenues of half France and the title of king to the
revenues of all France and the title of vice-roy in V,v,139-43.  Far
from being empty ceremony then it seems that Charles sets a dear rate at
the prestige between roi and vice-roy.

Yours in the work,
Dana
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.