Analysis and criticism Henry VI, Part 2

1 analysis , criticism

1.1 critical history

1.1.1 contention reported text
1.1.2 contention draft


1.2 language
1.3 themes

1.3.1 henry s weakness
1.3.2 contrast between henry , margaret
1.3.3 religion
1.3.4 justice
1.3.5 physical destruction

analysis , criticism
critical history

some critics argue henry vi trilogy first ever plays based on recent english history, , such, deserve elevated position in canon, , more central role in shakespearean criticism. according f.p. wilson example, there no evidence dramatist before defeat of spanish armada in 1588 dared put upon public stage play based upon english history [...] far know, shakespeare first. however, not critics agree wilson here. example, michael taylor argues there @ least thirty-nine history plays prior 1592, including two-part christopher marlowe play tamburlaine (1587), thomas lodge s wounds of civil war (1588), george peele s troublesome reign of king john (1588), anonymous edmund ironside (1590), robert green , thomas lodge s selimus (1591) , anonymous play, true tragedy of richard iii (1591). paola pugliatti argues case may somewhere between wilson , taylor s argument; shakespeare may not have been first bring english history before audience of public playhouse, first treat in manner of mature historian rather in manner of worshipper of historical, political , religious myth.

in case, there more critical disagreement play, not least of concerns relationship contention.

the contention reported text

over years, critics have debated connection between 2 henry vi , contention, point 4 main theories have emerged:

traditionally, critical opinion has tended favour first theory; contention bad quarto, memorial reconstruction, perhaps actor had played suffolk and/or cade in performance. samuel johnson put forth theory in 1765, challenged edmond malone in 1790, suggested contention draft of 2 henry vi. malone s view dominant 1 until 1929, when peter alexander , madeleine doran, working independently of 1 another, re-established dominance of bad quarto theory.

they focused on genealogical error in contention, argue seems unlikely have been made author, , therefore attributable reporter. in contention, when york sets out claim throne, identifies edmund of langley edward iii s second son, instead of fifth. in 2 henry vi, langley correctly placed in genealogy. error renders unnecessary york s need claim throne through mother s ancestry: descended second son, himself descended directly elder son henry. has been argued no 1 understood writing – is, no author – have made error, parroting else s work, of himself had dim understanding – is, reporter – could.

act 3, scene 1 has been pinpointed scene provides evidence contention reported text. in contention, after court has turned on gloucester, suffolk illogically switches discussing regentship of france. horner , thump introduced , gloucester arranges them formally duel. @ point, gloucester leaves, without discernible reason. margaret strikes eleanor, gloucester returns, , , wife leave together. steven urkowitz (a staunch opponent of theory of bad quartos in general) argues difference in 2 scenes example of finely shakespearean first choices recorded in quarto. roger warren, however, argues scene provides strong evidence contention reported text; not hard conjecture how quarto s version came about. conflicting claims of york , somerset led armourer , man being introduced soon; whoever compiling quarto text remembered humphrey left stage, though not why, did remember while offstage margaret struck wife. utterly unmotivated exit , reappearance of humphrey in rules out possibility quarto s scene legitimate alternative folio version, rather confused report of it.

further evidence reported text theory provided in how other plays used throughout contention. example, marlowe s tragical history of doctor faustus quoted in witchcraft scene ( faustus, wouldst thou have me do? (1.3.36) reproduced bolingbroke, wouldst thou have me do? ), , marlowe s edward ii paraphrased in act 3, scene 1 (marlowe s wild o neill, swarms of irish kerns,/lives uncontrolled within english pale (2.2.163–164) becomes wild o neill, lords, in arms,/with troops of irish kerns uncontrolled/doth plant within english pale ). line 3 henry vi used in act 3, scene 1 ( if our king henry had shook hands death (1.4.103)), of seems suggest that, case in bad quartos, reporter filling in blanks (i.e. passages couldn t remember) extracts other plays.

the contention draft

steven urkowitz has spoken @ great length debate between bad quarto theory , draft theory, coming down firmly on side of draft. urkowitz argues quarto of 2 henry vi , octavo of 3 henry vi present scholars unique opportunity see play evolving, shakespeare edited , rewrote sections; texts of 2 , 3 henry vi offer particularly rich illustrations of textual variation , theatrical transformation. urkowitz cites dialogue in opening scene of 2 henry vi strong evidence of draft theory. in contention, henry receives margaret joy , exclamation worldly troubles behind him. margaret depicted utterly humble, vowing love king no matter what. after initial meeting then, henry asks margaret sit beside him before bidding lords stand nearby , welcome her. in 2 henry vi, on other hand, henry more cautious in greeting margaret, seeing relief problems, if , can find common ground , love 1 another. herself bolder , self-congratulatory in 2 henry vi in contention. additionally, in 2 henry vi there no reference sitting, , lords kneel before speaking margaret. urkowitz summarises these differences arguing,

in visible geometry of courtly ceremony, folio version offers bold queen margaret , exuberant king stands erect while visibly subordinated nobles kneel before them. in contrast modest queen seated beside king surrounded standing nobles, in text @ equivalent moment, have assertive queen standing upright monarch, visibly subordinating kneeling, obedient lords. distinct theatrical representations of psychological , political tensions distinguish 2 versions of passage. both texts work leading audience through elaborate ceremonial display fraught symbolic gestures of emotional attachment, sanctification, regal authority, , feudal obedience, each displays distinct pattern of language , coded gestures. such fine-tuning of dramatic themes , actions staples of professional theatrical writing.

the differences in texts of sort 1 tends find in texts altered original form, , urkowitz cites eric rasmussen, e.a.j. honigmann , grace ioppolo supporting view. refers case of richard brinsley sheridan s school scandal (1777), existed in earlier form, sheridan, in two-part play slanderers , sir peter teazel, argues contain same type of modifications found in henry vi plays.

dick butcher & smith weaver seizing clerk of chatham henry william bunbury (1795)

urkowitz not alone in finding evidence support draft theory. example, in contention, margery jourdayne referred cunning witch of ely , in 2 henry vi referred merely cunning witch. traditional argument explain disparity such information added either shakespeare or else during rehearsals, not found in prompt book used print first folio. however, r.b. mckerrow argues against likelihood of theory. asks why writer go chronicle source add piece of information of no importance dramatically, , brings nothing scene. mckerrow suggests line cut after performance. similar example found in act 4, scene 7 cade orders men kill lord saye , sir james comer. in 2 henry vi, cade orders them cut off saye s head , go cromer s house , kill him, in contention, tells them bring saye standard in cheapside , , go cromer s house in mile end green. mckerrow argues such unimportant detail suggests removal after performance rather addition before performance.

more evidence found in act 2, scene 1. in contention, after winchester has accepted gloucester s challenge duel (l. 38; marry, when thou dar est ), there additional dialogue not found in 2 henry vi;

again, mckerrow s argument here not these lines added during rehearsals, existed in draft of play , removed after rehearsals, deemed unnecessary; animosity between 2 had been established.

however, theory contention may draft not imply not represent bad quarto. traditionally, critics (such alexander, doran, mckerrow , urkowitz) have looked @ problem either-or situation; contention either reported text or draft, there has been argument may both. example, theory supported roger warren in oxford shakespeare edition of play. theory advanced randall martin in oxford shakespeare edition of 3 henry vi. crux of argument both evidence bad quarto theory , evidence draft theory compelling neither able refute other. such, if play contains evidence of being both reported text , draft, must both; i.e. contention represents reported text of draft of 2 henry vi. shakespeare wrote version of play, staged. shortly after staging, of actors constructed bad quarto , had published. in meantime, shakespeare had rewritten play form found in first folio. warren argues theory can account strong evidence both reporting , revision, , theory gaining increased support in late twentieth/early twenty-first century.

language

language, throughout play, helps establish theme tone of each particular episode. example, opening speech of play ornate, formal declaration suffolk:

the substance of suffolk s speech instructed marry margaret on behalf, did so, , deliver you. however, formality of scene , importance of event require him deliver message in heightened language, formal significance of henry s marriage margaret mirrored in formal language used suffolk announce marriage.

cardinal beaufort s bedchamber joshua reynolds (1788)

language conveys importance of religion throughout play. henry s language echoes bible. example, hearing of cade rebellion, comments Ο graceless men, know not (4.4.37), echoing gospel of luke: father, forgive them: know not (23:34). earlier in play, refers heaven treasury of everlasting joy (2.1.18), recalling gospel of matthew s lay treasures yourselves in heaven (6:20), , few lines later muses blessèd peacemakers on earth (2.1.34), echoing jesus sermon on mount. on both of these occasions however, cardinal winchester, ostensibly pious man, distorts henry s genuine piety. after henry s assessment of heaven, winchester says gloucester, thy heaven on earth, thine eyes , thoughts/beat on crown, treasure of thy heart (2.1.19–20). then, after henry praises peacemakers, winchester hypocritically says, let me blessèd peace make,/against proud protector sword (2.1.35–36). cardinal mocks religion shortly before murder of gloucester. speaking of forthcoming murder, suffolk says, , preserve sovereign foe,/say word , priest (3.1.271–272), winchester responds have him dead, lord of suffolk,/ere can take due orders priest (3.1.273–274), disdaining priesthood , trivialising murder. after gloucester dead, winchester continues blaspheme himself, proclaiming death of gloucester god s secret judgement (3.2.31), callous , knowing distortion.

shakespeare uses language distinguish between different types of characters. courtly scenes tend spoken in blank verse, whereas commons tend speak in prose, fewer metaphors , less decorative language (shakespeare uses contrast in several plays, such 2 gentlemen of verona, prose marks servants out masters). when power begins go jack cade s head, begins slip more courtly way of speaking. noticeable in adoption of royal , using phrases such our jurisdiction regal (4.7.24), , charge , command (4.7.116).

the longest speech in play margaret s lament henry after have found gloucester s dead body. lengthy speech full of classical allusions, elaborate metaphors , verbosity margaret moves through litany of topics in effort make point:

there debate amongst critics meaning , purpose of speech, although tend agree meaning inherently tied in elaborate language. critics (such stanley wells) argue speech, wordiness, abstraction, strained allusions, , lengthy metaphors, poorly written, evidence shakespeare not yet in control of medium. proponents of theory point contention, 7 lines retained, argument being rest of speech cut performance. l.c. knights, contrast, argues speech deliberately excessive , highly-wrought because margaret trying deflect confused , dejected henry accusing suffolk of murder.

peter hall suggested speech there establish emotional, hysterical side of margaret s nature. think why language gets extremely elaborate – attempt margaret contain turbulent emotions expressing them in such strange way.

the complete antithesis of theory has been suggested possibility: speech shows not margaret losing control, in control of herself , emotions. theory noticeable in how director jane howell had julia foster act part in 1981 bbc television shakespeare adaptation. here, margaret uses speech vent intense emotions, not contain them. far ranging metaphors , classical allusions way of letting go of pent rage , emotion, disdain henry , inherent passion.

in terry hands 1977 production royal shakespeare company, margaret (played helen mirren) tried bring henry brink of madness engaging mind in elaborate, difficult follow verbal dance. henry s preceding speech suffolk, demands suffolk not @ him, , demands wants suffolk s eyes played alan howard in such way suggest henry losing grip on reality, , in response this, mirren played speech in such way engage henry s mind in here , now, focus thoughts , prevent them drifting away.

themes
henry s weakness

a major theme of play henry s inherent weakness , inability control country or own court. according martin, henry s weakness king main reason many nineteenth century critics judged 2 henry vi lack emotion: henry inept audiences not empathise him, , hence, tragedy diminished. there numerous examples throughout play such critics have focused on. example, henry fails unite bickering nobles, , instead allows them push him around decide how act , do, , @ same time, allows himself utterly dominated margaret. subservient consents imprisonment of man (gloucester) loves , knows innocent, , attempts hide implications of decision, trying leave court after gloucester s arrest:

this leads henry realisation of how has failed gloucester, , lament own lack of decisiveness , resolution:

another example of weakness ruler seen in utter indifference vital decision of choosing new french regent; somerset , york debate issue, each trying convince henry should 1 job, henry dismissively declares, part, noble lords, care not which:/or somerset or york, s 1 me (1.3.102-103). lack of concern forcibly emphasised when somerset later tells henry french territories have been lost, , henry responds nonchalantly, cold news, lord somerset; god s done (3.1.86). lack of decisive leadership referred others; margaret claims henry lord cold in great affairs,/too full of foolish pity (3.1.224–225). later, when irish post appears news of rebellion, york says whatever henry deems necessary, suffolk responds why, our authority consent,/and establish confirms (3.1.316-317).

the penance of eleanor, duchess of gloucester edwin austin abbey (1900)

henry presented man, poor king, whom roger warren refers man of deep religious conviction no political acumen. weak leader, , partly failure assert authority responsible chaos takes on country. director peter hall says, in theory, henry should king. applies christian ethics government. against men don t. justify behaviour invoking great sanctions – god, king, parliament, people – unscrupulous statesmen, motivated naked desire on top, have used throughout ages. here central irony of play: henry s christian goodness produces evil.

contrast between henry , margaret

another major theme throughout play contrast between margaret , henry, introduced when first meet. henry god bringing margaret him, , exclaims thou hast given me in beauteous face/a world of earthly blessing soul,/if sympathy of love unite our thoughts (1.1.21–23). irony here, commented on critics, unity not happen – thoughts never unite, , contrasting , incompatible attitudes seen time , again throughout play. example, after false miracle, henry distraught , laments, o god, seest thou , bear st long? (2.1.150), while margaret s response more mundane; made me laugh see villain run (2.1.151). when buckingham arrives bring news henry of eleanor s dabbling in necromancy, henry s reaction pious , sorrowful, o god, mischiefs work wicked ones,/heaping confusion on heads thereby (2.1.181–182). margaret s response, however, combative, using news forward own agenda; gloucester, see here tainture of thy nest,/and thyself faultless, thou wert best (2.1.183–184). later, when horner , thump fight, henry sees contest sacred point of honour: god s name, see lists , things fit;/here let them end it, , god defend right (2.3.54–55). margaret however, looking forward fight; purposely therefore,/left court see quarrel tried (2.3.52–53). henry fatally married polar opposite.

the marriage of king henry , queen margaret james stephanoff (19th century).

the contrast between them perhaps forcibly realised when gloucester dies in act 3, scene 2. margaret makes speech in points out how unfair accuse suffolk of murder because suffolk , gloucester enemies, , gloucester s wife enemies too, if suffolk suspect, should 1 well; ay me unhappy,/to queen, , crowned infamy (70–71). again, turning events focus on herself. henry however, ignores her, calling out sorrowfully; ah, woe me gloucester, wretched man (72). situation repeated during cade rebellion, time ignore 1 another. after rebels deliver terms henry, tells buckingham speak cade, margaret concerned herself , suffolk (whose head carrying). speaking head ignores henry s problems , exclaims, ah barbarous villain! hath lovely face/ruled wandering planet on me,/and not enforce them relent,/that unworthy behold same? (4.4.14–17). henry ignores this, , continues deal rebel demands, saying simply, lord saye, jack cade hath sworn have thy head (4.4.18). tendency them ignore 1 another example of incompatibility, failure unite in thoughts.

religion

religion fundamental fact of life henry, presented pious. shakespeare may have taken aspect of henry s character edward hall s description of him: did abhor of own nature, vices, of body of soul; , infancy of honest conversation , pure integrity; no knower of evil, , keeper of goodness; despiser of things wont cause minds of mortal men slide or appair. besides this, patience radicate in heart of injuries him committed (which no small number) never asked vengeance nor punishment, rendered almighty god, creator, hearty thanks, thinking trouble , adversity sins him forgotten , forgiven.

when henry first meets margaret, reaction welcome her, , thank god bringing him; can express no kinder sign of love/than kind kiss. o lord lends me life,/lend me heart replete thankfulness! (1.1.18–20). hearing later of false miracle, before meeting simpcox, henry exclaims, god praised, believing souls/gives light in darkness, comfort in despair (2.1.64–65). henry accepts authenticity of event without evidence, trusting in faith true , god has performed miracle. later, when henry defending gloucester against accusations of treason, uses 2 religious images point across: our kinsman gloucester innocent/from meaning treason our royal person/as sucking lamb or harmless dove (3.1.69-71). upon seeing delirious winchester, henry exclaims o thou eternal mover of heavens,/look gentle eye upon wretch (3.3.19-20). then, after winchester s death, warwick comments bad death argues monstrous life , henry replies forbear judge, sinners (3.3.30-31).

henry believes justice, truth , guilt determined god, not through human actions. after fight between horner , thump, henry announces,

indeed, devoted god henry other characters comment on it. example, when margaret mockingly describing henry suffolk, says,

york twice refers henry s piousness. first, when outlining plan assume power refers henry king church-like humours fits not crown (1.1.246). then, when making argument why should king, says henry, thy hand made grasp palmer s staff/and not grace aweful princely sceptre (5.1.97–98).

justice

study fiend s head based on asmath henry vi, part 2, george romney (1789)

ideas of justice paramount throughout play, notion of justice comes from, determines it. hinted @ when thump first meets henry, , henry asks gloucester s opinion. gloucester says,

of scene, michael hattaway has commented, feudal ritual of trial combat reduced grotesque fights between drunken armourer , apprentice [...] serves mirror realities of play: instead of seeing justice determined god regards rights of adversaries, here see trial of might. henry himself says,

he returns notion later, again arguing truth defence against death , defeat:

henry believes in purity of justice, , cannot imagine how possibly corrupt; , poise cause in justice equal scales/whose beam stands sure, rightful cause prevails (2.1.199-200).

however, perversion of justice dominant theme throughout play, despite henry s inability see it. 1 of famous lines in play, spoken rebel cade s sidekick dick butcher, first thing do, let s kill lawyers . whether means lawyers protectors of justice, or agents of corruption disputed.

gloucester assures eleanor long has truth on side, enemies cannot destroy him: must offend before attainted,/and had twenty times many foes,/and each of them had twenty times power,/all these not procure me scathe/so long loyal, true, , crimeless (2.4.60–64). claims prove false, however, arrested on false charges , assassinated before trial. later in play, lord saye makes similar claim. when buckingham warns him careful rebels targeting people him, saye responds trust have in mine innocence,/and therefore bold , resolute (4.4.58-59). humphrey, innocence not save him, , both , son-in-law killed rebels.

the nobles disdain justice revealed more forcibly when henry, unaware gloucester dead, asks court treat him fairly, , margaret, knowing both innocent , dead, responds, god forbid malice should prevail/that faultless may condemn noble man (3.2.23–24). hattaway points out in england under henry, law bears little relation divinity , stands divorced equity. regal , judicial roles of king s court hopelessly confused, status of institution compromised.

h.c. selous illustration of cade rebellion in act 4, scene 2; plays of william shakespeare: historical plays, edited charles cowden clarke , mary cowden clarke (1830)

the lords failure understand need impartial , functioning judiciary echoed in rebellion; virulent ambition , hostility law characterised barons equally characterise workmen, suggesting there no difference between old order , new. evident in cade s speech after ordering execution of lord saye; proudest peer in realm shall not wear head on shoulders unless pay me tribute. there shall not maid married shall pay me maidenhead ere have it. men shall hold of me in capite. , charge , command wives free heart can wish or tongue can tell (4.7.112–117). in proposed new world order, cade envisions establishing autocracy pay fealty him, , laws, can make arbitrarily, stand everyone. such, in political system, in old, law , justice seem have little relevance.

physical destruction

physical violence permeates play, many characters dying violently. gloucester suffocated in bed; winchester dies in passionate frenzy; suffolk beheaded; somerset , clifford killed in battle; cade has matthew gough, humphrey stafford, william stafford, lord saye, james comer, , clerk of chatham executed during rebellion, , killed , beheaded himself alexander iden.

gloucester s death in particular associated physical, seen in warwick s detailed description of body;

winchester s death physically grotesque distorts face , curses god, haunted ghost of gloucester.

however, many of after-death actions more macabre deaths themselves. suffolk s head delivered margaret, carries around court last 2 acts of play. lord stafford , brother killed , bodies dragged through streets behind horses. lord saye , son-in-law beheaded , heads carried throughout streets on poles , made kiss. cade beheaded , head delivered king. not physical violence presented major theme, physical desecration, disregard body after death.

cite error: there <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on page, references not show without {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see page).