Cromwell (Mark Rylance) holding up crossed wrists at Henry’s seething onslaught of accusation of plotting against him with Chapuys for the Emperor Charles V; Anne (Claire Foy) shivering in the wind, trembling as she waits to be beheaded (Wolf Hall 5 & 6)
He doesn’t exactly miss the man. It’s just that sometimes, he forgets he’s dead. It’s as if they’re deep in conversation, and suddenly the conversation stops, he says something and no answer comes back. As if they’d been walking along and More had dropped into a hole in the road, a pit as deep as a man, slopping with rainwater. You do in fact, hear of such accidents … (48)
‘He sent last week for a French executioner. Not from one of our own cities, but the man who chops heads in Calais. It seems there is no Englishman whom he trusts to behead his wife. I wonder he does not take her out himself and strangle her in the street’ … (382, Mantel personating Cromwell, Bring Up the Bodies)
Dear friends and readers,
Prompted by Anibundel’s blog The Course of History, and having finished Mantel’s Bring Up the Bodies, plus locating the release transcripts of Straughan’s screenplays, I feel compelled to add another perspective on last two hours (Act III) of this mini-series, though I know there have been many insightful conversations and blogs online, to say nothing of the print media, about it. I want to point out that this last pair turns this famous Tudor marital-sex imbroglio into a usable past, a mirror to see ourselves in, its obsessive topics circling round its terrifyingly, almost inexplicably powerful figure, Henry Tudor, the Eighth of that name: death waiting right next to us, memory continually haunting us from our particular pasts as each day vanishes, and terror, not just state terror:
Henry (Damien Lewis) watching Anne, Elizabeth on her lap, reach out to him with an embroidered handkerchief
but what makes state terror possible, the obedient collusion of all who together make themselves subject to this terror
Richard Cromwell (Ross Porter) come to tell Henry that Mark Smeaton (Max Fowler) has named the names of men to be accused of adultery with Anne
Bring Up the Bodies may be regarded as a kind of culmination of a group of what’s called gothic but are political themes in Mantel’s contemporary fiction, memoir, and essays diary entries for the LRB, literary reviews and life-writing as a writer. I know as steadily and maybe more continuously nowadays as Mantel that the dead are real (see Larissa MacFarquhar, The New Yorker, October 15, 2012).
The need to keep the film historical, and explain how these startling visible turns of events from making Anne Boleyn into a cherished legitimate queen and wife into a powerless traitor-concubine treasonably adulterous came about rightly takes precedence over the course of Part 5 and into the opening of Part 6. At the same time the central story line about our hero, requires dramatizing the inward journey of how Cromwell drove himself however part- (but only part) reluctantly to put together transparently inadequate evidence. And there must be a pivotal high drama for the hour so that the high point of Part 5 was Henry’s fit of unconsciousness during a joust, and the sudden hysteria and unmasking of many about the king, and the improbably resuscitation by Cromwell:
The turning point for Part 6 the long interrogation of the foolishly vain Smeaton, seething with wounds over his “inferior status” and despised feminine brand of masculinity.
Cromwell congratulating the smirking Smeaton as Rafe watches and listens
And when Smeaton is taken away, Cromwell to Richard:
Well, there aren’t many men alive who can say they took me by surprise. Years of being despised by lords has made a boaster of him. Sometimes I think I should have taken him in here. I don’t want him hurt. If we have to torture sad creatures like that, what next? Stamping on dormice?
These plot-designs precluded the kind of quiet dramatization of passing events that count which were seen especially in Parts 1 & 2. No time for registering the increasingly criminal behaviors of Cromwell (as when he takes a tavern keeper’s wife to bed for a casual encounter, and later brings her to one of his houses, and has her husband disposed of) and the scope of his activities across England enforcing Protestantism, growing richer himself, and the many passing quick scenes, memories of such, letters to and from middle ranking eager sycophants (names familiar to anyone who has read anything of the period, as the Lisles).
Worse yet, well over half of Bring Up the Bodies is given over to Cromwell’s dramatic one-on-one encounters, from the slow gathering of envious vengeful or simply desperately self-serving witnesses (Chapuys, Jane Boleyn’s salacious malice), to the dialogues between Cromwell and his now grown instruments (Richard Cromwell, Rafe Sadler with whose family Cromwell shows his continued ability to love, to be fond, to be kindly cordial) and first Mark Smeaton, then the four accused (George Boleyn, Francis Weston, William Brereton, Harry Norris) and what we can call protected secondary characters (Henry Percy, Thomas Wyatt). In the mini-series only the last third of Part 6 covers this material. The book does give less time to Anne versus Cromwell because he keeps away from her until near the trial.
Yes I’ve found a flaw in the series: they needed seven parts. At least another hour.
****************************
The heroine’s text story-line is seen through Cromwell’s POV: he is ever coming upon and watching from the side the results, evidence, signs of Anne’s miscarriages (her own terror at the window after she bled after the king seethed at her trying to stop him jousting, with do you seek “to geld” me, Madame) and the way her gradual displacement is registered, most notably through the death of her dog: the helpless animal a cynosure for her.
Purefoy thrown on the hard stones, bleeding to death
Cromwell: “The window was open.”
Anne: “He was such an innocent What kind of monster would do such a thing?”
Cromwell: “Perhaps he got up on the ledge somehow and then his paws slipped.
Anne: “– Paws slipped? Paws slipped? — “
A rare scene without Cromwell occurs when we observe her household shunted off to the side, turning on one another, but that is immediately followed with Jane Boleyn reporting it all to Cromwell. The way people become eager to tell him of the slightest breakdown of Anne (as when she says in the tower she doesn’t deserve this room and Kingston reports it unasked) reminds me of the McCarthy era when witnesses came forward to testify against other people. Doubtless my reader will remember analogies of his or her own. We see Jane Seymour’s presence and Katharine’s death through Cromwell’s observation from afar and visits, as if we must have some sign of these or the story does not make sense, with the accent of the latter falling on Anne’s (premature) exultation and (wrong) idea she is now secure (just the opposite in fact happens). But again the focus is on the terrifying: the creepy nightmare of Cromwell seeing Anne served up as a meat dish pulled by sticks through the table with her face photographed upside down, her dress this deathly creamy satin:
I didn’t find the trial as philosophically memorable as the Bolt one from A Man for All Seasons; it was rather realistic, with Cromwell as the effectively trained lawyer trapping George Boleyn, asking leading questions of Anne. From historical studies (as well as her heir-daughter Elizabeth’s survival and reign) we know she was highly intelligent, but this is as nothing when everyone is agreed you must go.
**************************
Straughan is concerned that Cromwell should not appear a monster (and Rylance obliges by the quietude of his tones, face, and occasional hand gestures) so the revenge aspect of Cromwell’s motives are only quietly there. The memorable lines were in what was left of Cromwell’s encounters with individuals who provide phantom evidence, whom he turning into the dead.
So to Brereton’s outrage he takes him back:
Cromwell: “Let’s go back. I remember in the late Cardinal’s time, one of your household killed a man in a bowls match.
Brereton: “Well, the game can get very heated.”Cromwell: “The Cardinal thought it was time for a reckoning, but your family impeded the investigation and I ask myself, ‘Has anything changed since then?’ John ap Eyton had a quarrel with one of your household only recently.
Brereton: “So, that’s why I’m here.”
Cromwell: “Not entirely, but leave aside your adultery with the Queen, let’s concentrate on Eyton. Blows were exchanged, a man was killed. Eyton was tried and acquitted. But you, because you have no respect for the law or Brereton “– I have every respect! — ”
Cromwell: “Don’t interrupt me! You had the man abducted and hanged. You think because it’s only one man, it doesn’t matter. You think no-one will remember, but I remember
To Norris’s complacent conceit, sudden bullying and threat worthy the ferociously corrupt Norfolk:
Norris: “You’ll not torture gentlemen. The King wouldn’t permit it.
Cromwell: “Oh, well There don’t have to be formal arrangements. I can put my thumbs in your eyes and then you would sing Green Grows The Holly if I asked you to.”
My favorite one:
George Boleyn: “But Mark Smeaton? — What has he done to you? — ”
Cromwell: “I don’t know I just don’t like the way he looks at me.”
He stonewalls Anne in the film, making her sudden reaching out to him feel more believable. When he looks out for her creature comforts (“Would you like your furs brought in?”) we get another more alienated light on how he looked out for Wolsey, Princess Mary’s and even Katharine’s transient welfare when placed in front of them. Given a chance, he will mouth platitudes as a wall around himself: to Jane Boleyn he inquires politely why she as a lady-in-waiting did not seek to “comfort her mistress.”
But what I suggest that we should note (while we wait for Hilary to write the third book, and then for the Straughan screenplay and getting the actors together, film-designers and funding together again) are aspects of Cromwell’s encounters with the king. When the king resorts to fierce bullying, Cromwell’s gesture of crossed wrists shows that there were tender moments with his father: it was Walter Cromwell who showed the boy how to soothe a wound with water and clenched hands. Henry makes an appeal which contains offers of friendship, concern, memories of shared interests, as when he takes Cromwell aside in the garden and pretends to ask what they should do for useful entertainment this summer.
Henry: “Will you walk with me? I wish we would go down to the weald one day – talk to the ironmasters. I’ve had various drawings – mathematical drawings and advices concerning how our ordnance can be improved, but I … I can’t … I can’t make as much of it as you would. It’s because … Well Because you are my right hand, sir. So, shall we go down? You and I, meet the charcoal burners?”
Cromwell: “Of course. But not this summer, sir. I think you will be too busy.
Henry: “Yeah. I cannot live as I have lived, Cromwell. You must free me from this from Anne.
When the evidence has been gathered and the trial is about to commence, Straughan does give Henry some lines suggesting that Anne aroused male insecurities, but nothing like Mantel’s books’ dialogues and monologues suggesting Henry’s intense resentment at how Anne once kept him at bay and then once having given in, delighted him in bed by transgressive sex. In Mantel’s book we see Henry’s rigid pieties come out to condemn her as someone who must’ve been whorish before she met him. In the mini-series the accent is again on how frightened people colluded in believing what they in their gut felt to be false:
Cranmore: “I never had a better opinion in a woman than I had in her. I can’t believe she’s guilty … Except I know Your Highness would never go so far if she weren’t.”
Henry: “She deceived all of us. When I look back, it all falls into place. So many friends lost, alienated Worse.When I think of Wolsey [Camera is on Cromwell hearing this, face to the side.] The way she practised against him. She said she loved me. But she meant the opposite. I’ve written a play. A tragedy. My own story. [gives it to Cromwell]
Cromwell: “You should keep it sir, till we have more leisure to do it justice.”
Henry: “But I want you to see her true nature. I believe she has committed adultery with 100 men.
Cranmore: “But her brother? Is it likely?”
Henry: “Well, I doubt she could resist! Why spare? Why not drink the cup to its filthy dregs?”
According to J.J Scarisbrick (a standard biography), Henry did write a play about Anne’s adultery. It’s a nice touch how Cromwell must flatter the king’s literary aspirations. In Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons, Paul Scofield as More pretends not to flatter Robert Shaw as musician and composer in order to flatter him the more delicately.
But the strength of the screenplay is to (as with the book) leave it improbable that Anne was adulterous but make it understandable that she could be suspected and even thought to have had sex with her male courtiers. Again looking forward to the third book and another mini-series, we should keep the ambiguities of Cromwell’s conduct and how Henry’s mind can twist something into plausibility in mind.
******************************
I have in another blog described the unflinching close-up way the execution of Anne is performed (“How can one tell of a life lived at this aware angle” — the question referring to Mantel herself). Here I want to say how this terror is reinforced by Cromwell’s slow walk back to the king, half terrified that the king might turn on him, and then the look in his eye as he allows Henry to pull him into a bear hug and Damien Lewis personates the half-crazed lunacy of someone who knows he can do anything to anyone, almost.
A parable for our time, or a new man for how we today see all seasons. I remember reading later fragments in the papers of Anne Murray Halkett who wrote an autobiography of her life in the later 17th century as an adherent of the Stuarts. She wondered how it was that a group of men could just murder Charles I when everyone asked later on who would speak about it expressed horror. How could this have occurred? How is it all these people stand there going through this barbaric scene, each behaving with utter calmness over a detached head, a bloody corpse, a wooden box to take her away.
Next to Cromwell and his son, Gregory (whom in the book he brings to demonstrate the boy’s loyalty) a man snickers over one of her women who had been so hard to her in the prison saying with frantic tones “We do not want men to handle her”: “It’s a little late for that.”
Ellen
Vivian: “The New Yorker had a nice article on why the PBS version is superior to the RSC stage version. I gave it to someone, so don’t recall the citation, but it should not be hard to find.”
Maureen: “Beautifully prepared, Ellen, and obviously worthwhile. On behalf of many, I am sure, thanks indeed for this new offering.”
Ellen,
An insightful blog with some great stills, especially of Anne ready to be executed. We see her vulnerability so wholly in that shot. I am fascinated by the moral–or perhaps I would say ethical–ambiguity the series presents, which makes me want to revisit Bring up the Bodies and read Wolf Hall. Anne and Cromwell really are parallel or mirror figures in many ways–both get caught up “over their heads,” she because she is a female who even her family will throw away as soon as she is no longer useful (and how little control she has over what makes her useful, her reproductive organs), and Cromwell because he is a commoner with only Henry to depend upon. But again, as you note, nobody is really safe, now or then, and we all make decisions within contexts that often don’t offer any “good” answers. This is the stuff of great literature, though, as I say, I have to look at Mantel’s writing again–and it’s hard to say when it is all so new. I look forward to the next book.
As I too don’t have the time to devote to this, I’ve bought myself a set of CDs of a good reader reading aloud the whole of Wolf Hall. I am reluctant to write a blog on Bring Up the Bodies because I’ve not read enough. I feel I must first finish Ives’s Life and Death of Anne, and read at least one more of Mantel’s contemporary fictions. (I am committed to this paper on Trollope and Australia and pushing myself to read over 1000 pages these three weeks so have to relegate Ives to the night and I’m not much good at nighttime reading.)
The moment I was struck most by — and suggest it was Rylance who somehow communicated the appalling horror of this — was when in Part 6 Kingston voluntarily offered the information that Anne had said she was not worthy these apartments. As Cromwell Rylance says with subdued eyes, that is helpful. But the actor conveyed what I remember reading by Lillian Hellman when she described the people who voluntarily told the same kind of insinuating information about friends, associates, anyone: she called them (not her language but mine) the worst curs. She was wordlessly appalled. I remember reading something similar happened in France in the post WW2 era: people turning one another in for collusion.
It is though the author and screenplay writer: for all I now will defend The Other Boleyn Girl, given the part offered Rylance as a cowardly utterly abject Thomas Boleyn, Rylance does not enter into the role in the same resonating way. It’s left to Kristin Scott Thomas as the mother of these Boleyns to do that. The Other Boleyn Girl despised and preposterous as it is, is worth study. An actor can rise only some above his or her material.
These Renaissance women are worth study — but the kinds of documents you have to wade through are impossible (theology) and they are a tremendously I(I use that word deliberately, meaning tremblingly at their core) guarded lot.
A friend: Thanks, My daughter wanted to see the stage adaptation–$160 –and I did not have the heart to tell her that Rylance is the finest actor around today here and there and that the PBS show was absorbing and would put to shame the stage version. Of course it had to; you can’t see Rylance’s face move and not move from the balcony. Just a glorious talent, there and in all his other performances.”
People have suggested that Henry changed either after his fall or the coming of syphilis, and Tyler disagreed with this.
“Tyler:
I would question that Henry VIII changed at all. I think the seeds were probably always there. He was the second son and as a result, always in Prince Arthur’s shadow and probably jealous of his older brother. He was sort of in the position of getting Arthur’s hand-me-downs, at least in the case of Katherine, who was first married to Arthur. He was probably also spoiled. He also was probably very paranoid and with good reason to some extent. His father was very paranoid and is not given a flattering portrait in any of the books I read since he won his throne by violence and continually feared being overthrown. I think the throne was more stable by the time Henry VIII came to it, but he did no doubt fear Civil
War. He had so many of his cousins killed from fear they were plotting against him (some were, some weren’t, I believe). As he got older, I think he became more paranoid and fearful – the fall might have been a wound to his pride that added to the paranoia and bullying, but I think those character traits were likely always in him.
Tyler”
I feel Damien Lewis played the part in Wolf Hall with real intelligence, showing from the time we first see him that he had in him the willingness to destroy people wantonly, that his religion justified to him not only his power but made his motives and rationales to him what God wanted or was manipulating to get. I begin to see that Mantel’s anti-catholicism is an anti-religious stance. I couldn’t agree more that Rylance is central to the success of the mini-series but wonder whether this was not by chance an ideal part for him. When he plays the weak, corrupt Sir Thomas Boleyn in The Other Boleyn Girl (Peter Morgan’s screenplay, Justin Chadwick the director) he is nowhere as impressive, not a dominating presence. Both Kirsten Scott Thomas and David Morrisey as Lady Elizabeth Boleyn and the Duke of Norfolk overshadow him.
See The Tudor Matter — the Other Boleyn Girl as a possible ‘nother source for Wolf Hall; I compare the books and films as historical fiction and romance:
https://reveriesunderthesignofausten.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/the-tudor-matter-and-the-other-boleyn-girl-peter-morgan-justin-chadwyck-out-of-phillipa-gregory/
[…] Claire Foy) (1-2: Fathers and sons;, 3-4, Stealth Heroine and a contemporary Man for All Seasons; 5-6, what human beings are capable of). Though I had read it and listened to Simon Slater’s brilliantly interpretative reading […]
[…] We did Bring Up the Bodies much more rapidly; in the film covered by Parts Five and Six. […]