Scan barcode
A review by twilliamson
Henry VI, Part I by William Shakespeare
3.0
In what has been determined to be one of his earliest plays (although his authorship is certainly questioned by many scholars), Shakespeare here presents the first part of a trilogy of plays dealing with King Henry VI, one of the weaker kings of England who presided, in the mid-15th century, over one of the greatest periods of tumult in English history. While his play by no means represents an overtly flattering picture of any of the English nobility (except, perhaps, Lord Talbot), the play seems to have been intended as a sort of nationalist effort at elevating history through artistry.
The play itself, though, is all over the place, with an abundance of scheming characters whose conflicts are not ever resolved within the play itself. The overarching theme of the play is one warning of division leading to loss; internal strife between many of the characters on both sides of conflict in the war between England and France leads almost directly to the downfall of any of the figures squabbling. The conflicts between English nobles are seen to directly influence the loss of life of English forces, and internal divisions with the French similarly cause an inability to overcome English efforts to hold the country under the English crown.
Sprawling as it is, there are, of course, moments of excellence scattered throughout the play. I particularly enjoyed the exchanges between Talbot and his son, as tragic as their fates ultimately are. Individual scenes all work fairly well, with characters arguing and creating drama and tension with one another pretty consistently. As a whole, though, the play relies very heavily on the implications of action as it occurs in the background, and doesn't do much to guide "readers" of the play so many centuries later. As a result, the modern reader might be quite lost without at least a cursory knowledge of the events detailed in the play, including the conflict resulting in the War of the Roses, the questions of lineage and the legitimacy of English rule in France, or the course of the war as led by Dauphin and Joan la Pucelle.
It's also a bit dizzying to try to track who all is in conflict with whom. There are so many individuals cavorting about for power or control of the throne; whether it be Richard Plantagenet, Duke of Gloucester, Bishop (then Cardinal) of Winchester, Earl of Suffolk, or Earl of Somerset, there are so many characters with conflicting motivations, it can be difficult to track who wants what or why. The play feels fractured along so many lines, such that the eventual resolution of the play leaves too many parts dangling--it ends on an almost literal cliffhanger.
Even so, there's definitely enough here to sponsor rich imagination about these conflicts, and there are some standout characters here (especially Lord Talbot, Joan la Pucelle, and Richard Plantagenet, all of whom are pretty interesting). While it's resolutely not Shakespeare's best, it's still worthy of a read.
The play itself, though, is all over the place, with an abundance of scheming characters whose conflicts are not ever resolved within the play itself. The overarching theme of the play is one warning of division leading to loss; internal strife between many of the characters on both sides of conflict in the war between England and France leads almost directly to the downfall of any of the figures squabbling. The conflicts between English nobles are seen to directly influence the loss of life of English forces, and internal divisions with the French similarly cause an inability to overcome English efforts to hold the country under the English crown.
Sprawling as it is, there are, of course, moments of excellence scattered throughout the play. I particularly enjoyed the exchanges between Talbot and his son, as tragic as their fates ultimately are. Individual scenes all work fairly well, with characters arguing and creating drama and tension with one another pretty consistently. As a whole, though, the play relies very heavily on the implications of action as it occurs in the background, and doesn't do much to guide "readers" of the play so many centuries later. As a result, the modern reader might be quite lost without at least a cursory knowledge of the events detailed in the play, including the conflict resulting in the War of the Roses, the questions of lineage and the legitimacy of English rule in France, or the course of the war as led by Dauphin and Joan la Pucelle.
It's also a bit dizzying to try to track who all is in conflict with whom. There are so many individuals cavorting about for power or control of the throne; whether it be Richard Plantagenet, Duke of Gloucester, Bishop (then Cardinal) of Winchester, Earl of Suffolk, or Earl of Somerset, there are so many characters with conflicting motivations, it can be difficult to track who wants what or why. The play feels fractured along so many lines, such that the eventual resolution of the play leaves too many parts dangling--it ends on an almost literal cliffhanger.
Even so, there's definitely enough here to sponsor rich imagination about these conflicts, and there are some standout characters here (especially Lord Talbot, Joan la Pucelle, and Richard Plantagenet, all of whom are pretty interesting). While it's resolutely not Shakespeare's best, it's still worthy of a read.