The Tudors - Series Two

[bookgazing]

Is anyone else out there watching the second series of ‘The Tudors’? Would you like to discuss it? Well this is the post for you then.

I missed the first series, because I always seemed to be out when it was on but my mum assured me I would know what was going on, Henry and his wives stories are legendary in England after all. I’ve seen the first six episodes and I have the mixed feelings about this adaptation – let’s examine them shall we?

Firstly I love, love, love the casting. I’m only going to say this once and I expect the BBC to take note, Jonathan Rhys Mears is not on television enough at all. I’m considering a protest. Cromwell is easily my favourite character. Ah, James Frain, a most unlikely heartthrob, but as a historical villain with a sympathetic edge he is unsurpassable. I am sad I missed many hours of Jeremy Northam, as he’s killed off in the first series. Oh and Mary, penitent, beautiful and full of strength – wonderful.

The Catholics seem to be getting a very sympathetic hearing in this series, while Cromwell and his ministers are getting the manipulative advisor treatment. That’s interesting considering how the persecution impulse swung relentlessly back and forth between the Protestants and Catholics, depending on who was in power. I would have expected to see a more even handed approach, with both sides having good and bad characters, who take religion seriously. However Cromwell is becoming more sympathetic as Henry crushes his hopes for reformation, making what is essentially a Catholic church without divorce.

Sometimes the dialogue takes an odd turn. There are parts where it’s clear portions of primary sources have been inserted into the script, as the dialogue becomes less natural and people recite as if they are reading from a page. I think what makes these parts sound so odd is that the phrasing and the grammar are much more formal than the rest of the character’s speech. I guess it’s a stab at establishing historical legitimacy, but I think they might have done better masking their scholarship in their own words.

Love the choice to cast Henry as a psychopathic, power mad, angry young man. His character feels like a historically accurate, rich, male personality and little has been done to make the character sympathetic to a modern audience (although there’s still a lot that will probably resonate with male members of a modern audience, like the man’s longing for a son). When he tells his wife he is upset because she is ‘not yet with child’, to her face, in front of people and then displays so much more affection for her once she is pregnant a chill went through me as the reality of the indignities women put up with appeared so starkly.

Does anyone know much about the idea that Henry’s bad leg is caused by syphilis? It seems likely that Henry contracted syphilis, considering how many partners he had, but as far as I understand the boils manifests over a person’s whole body, not just in one spot. And the madness the disease brings isn’t fleeting, its permanent. Can anyone who knows more about it than me tell me if the scholars support the idea that his leg injury was caused by syphilis?

If you’re watching ‘The Tudors’ do you have your own issues with the program and what are you loving? How do you think this series compares with the first and do you think it’s worth me buying the box set? Did you have to hide during the hanging of Mr Ask? What are your feelings about the family of the challenger for the throne, who were executed last week?

Let’s talk Tudors!