Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.
Cargando... Anne Boleyn (2010)por Howard Brenton
Ninguno Cargando...
Inscríbete en LibraryThing para averiguar si este libro te gustará. Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro. sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
Pertenece a las series editoriales
A celebration of a great English heroine, Anne Boleyn dramatises the life and legacy of Henry VIII's notorious second wife, who helped change the course of the nation's history.Traditionally seen as either the pawn of an ambitious family manoeuvred into the King's bed or as a predator manipulating her way to power, Anne - and her ghost - are seen in a very different light in Howard Brenton's epic play.Rummaging through the dead Queen Elizabeth's possessions upon coming to the throne in 1603, King James I finds alarming evidence that Anne was a religious conspirator, in love with Henry VIII but also with the most dangerous ideas of her day. She comes alive for him, a brilliant but reckless young woman confident in her sexuality, whose marriage and death transformed England for ever. No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca. |
Debates activosNingunoCubiertas populares
Google Books — Cargando... GénerosSistema Decimal Melvil (DDC)822.914Literature English English drama 1900- 1900-1999 20th Century 1945-1999Clasificación de la Biblioteca del CongresoValoraciónPromedio:
¿Eres tú?Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing. |
The opening scene is striking, done to perfection. Anne is beautifully depicted. Bright, charming, straightforward. The focus is one her contribution on the religious reformation of the realm, not on her sexual prowess or her so-called wickedness. So, Anne’s part is definitely exceptionally constructed. Unfortunately, Anne wasn’t enough to salvage the play for me. In my opinion, the other historical figures are inadequately portrayed to the point of being debased. I never had any sympathy for James V but having him dressed in women’s clothes, frolicking with a Duke on stage? I don’t know, I admit this isn’t my idea of fun. Furthermore, the writing striked me as unbalanced. There were certainly moments of beauty but the overall result was quite weird and, in my opinion, bad. The playwright probably aimed to create mix of contemporary, modernist dialogue but I found the interactions naive, absurd and loaded with unnecessary swearing and hysterics. I felt there was no hint of respect for the on-stage transformation of a period that sealed the history of Europe forever. Perhaps the purpose was to create a Satire? Even so, I’ve never been one to enjoy satires. My sense of humor is non-existent and I apologise for that:)
Could this be a case that confirms a play should be seen and not read? I never agreed with this statement but I don’t altogether dismiss it. However, I can’t fathom how such bad dialogue could work on stage, even if it was uttered by the finest thespian.Then again, it is a fairly acclaimed work so it must have done something right. Speaking strictly for me, this isn’t agreeable with my personal ideas and convictions of what Theatre means, it failed to do justice to a bloody wonderful period.
My reviews can also be found on https://theopinionatedreaderblog.wordpress.com ( )