Why The Tudors Is Kinda Good

If you know anything about Showtime's The Tudors you know that it is...rather trashy. It has been maligned by critics, fashion historians, and regular historians. But having recently re-watched it, and watched it alongside Wolf Hall, I am ready to make the case that it is, at times, actually good.

First, to recap why The Tudors gets a bad rap, and why it is mostly deserved:

The pitch meeting for the show seems to be: History, but make it SEXY. And this being the 2000s, SEXY meant that all the actors are all young and hot, the clothes are all ready to fall off at any moment, and there are lots of sex scenes that are gratuitous and unrelated to the plot. The show tries to aggressively sell everyone on Jonathan Rhys Meyers as hot beefcake Henry VIII and he mostly comes across as gross.

He enjoys aggressively and sensually eating fruit for some reason

The costumes are frequently hilarious, but I particularly enjoy how they keep trying to find ways to show off Henry's body even in scenes where he isn't having sex. Like, how about he is with his tailor and his tailor hasn't put sleeves on his doublet yet, but then he is angry so has to have a big important argument without sleeves?

 

So hot

In summary: Henry VIII is HOT and has SEX and everyone in his court has SEX and it is all just so HOT.

You get the idea

But the other thing is that it is still a multi-episode television show. Each episode is an hour and the Anne Boleyn story is stretched out for two 10-episode seasons. So that is 20 hours to fill and it can't be 20 hours of Jonathan Rhys Meyers ripping his shirt off.

Some of that time has to be filled with actual historical events and details of Henry's reign. Sure, there is stuff that is totally made up or wildly stretched, but some of it is actually accurate. And historical figures who are usually flattened down to a few basic traits in a movie retelling, get more screen time and stuff to do.

Take for example the two women at the center of the story: Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn.  Queen Catherine is usually depicted as either stoic and saintly or dried up and stubborn. Anne Boleyn is either slutty and conniving or romantic and heroic. In The Tudors Catherine is shown as strong and pious, but also savvy about the politics of the court and knows how to play her hand. Anne Boleyn is calculating and power-hungry at times, but she also is shown as vulnerable and aware that she is being played as a pawn for her family's own ambitions. She is sympathetic to the Protestant church but also argues with Cromwell about money from the monasteries going to the needy instead of into Henry's pocket. Gosh, maybe women are full human beings with complex emotions and motivations?!

In a similar vein are Thomas More and Thomas Cromwell. In most versions of the Henry VIII story, More is a hero and Cromwell a villain. More, a great scholar and thinker of the time, felt his conscience wouldn't allow him to support Henry's marriage to Anne. He was tried and executed as a traitor. There is understandable respect for him and he was even sainted by the Catholic Church. In The Tudors he is played by Jeremy Northam so he is principled AND attractive.

Mmmm.

But The Tudors also shows us his less palatable side-- like when he was Chancellor he jumped at the opportunity to burn as many Protestants as possible.

The non-sexy kind of hot

Then there is Thomas Cromwell, who is usually viewed as an opportunist who had no problem doing Henry's dirty work. In The Tudors he is a major character for three seasons, so he gets a lot of screen time. He is clever and capable, sympathetic to the Protestant cause, zealously against aspects of the Catholic church, eager to please Henry, and not terribly afraid of making enemies. Again, they cast an actor (James Frain) who is much younger and more attractive than the real Cromwell.

Dark curly hair yes please

While doing some googling I found this article by a Cromwell biographer who begrudgingly admits that The Tudors is the most accurate portrayal of Cromwell on screen. Her reasoning is that the real Cromwell was quite complicated, not fully hero or villain (as it true for most people) and The Tudors came closest to showing that.

Ok, so I mentioned Wolf Hall earlier. If you don't know, Wolf Hall is the name of both a novel by Hilary Mantel and a miniseries made by the BBC (which was actually an adaptation of both Wolf Hall and the second book Bring up the Bodies. The last book The Mirror and the Light was just published). Mantel positions Cromwell as the hero of the story and makes him very charming and sympathetic. Both book and miniseries are FANTASTIC and I'm sort of obsessed.

If he loves cats, how bad can he be?

While historians may quibble about how favorably Mantel portrays Cromwell, everyone agrees that her books are painstakingly researched and evocative of the Tudor period. But watching The Tudors back-to-back with Wolf Hall highlighted how surprisingly historical much of The Tudors actually was--it just got lost under so much schlock.

So to summarize, The Tudors isn't so bad, Wolf Hall is amazing, and I maybe have a crush on Thomas Cromwell.

Why Doctor Thorne Is Bad But I Re-Watched it Anyway

Last night I re-watched Doctor Thorne on Amazon Prime and it was just as head-scratchingly bad as the first time I saw it. This is a four-part adaptation of Anthony Trollope's book of the same name, adapted by Downton Abbey creator Julian Fellows.

Why it is bad:

1. The main romance is between two people who are already in love

A good period movie does not need to have a love story, but if it is going to be a central part of the story, the "in love since childhood" trope is the most booooooooring of all possibilities. We don't get to see them meet, exchange any exciting banter, or thrillingly touch hands while dancing/helping into a carriage/handing a teacup

Not a scene from Dr. Thorne

[SIDE NOTE: this pandemic may just revive the idea that hand to hand contact is forbidden yet thrilling]

More hand porn from North & South

Instead when we see them together for the first time on screen we get swelling music that tells us they are IN LOVE and then they just goofily grin at each other.

Nothing new or exciting happens between them. The only conflict is that he is rich and she is poor and his family is against it. Now, an "in love but can't be together" story could be salvaged by some tortured glances but even then, nada. The two leads are both just bland and sweet. So they either smile at each other or look sad. But not dramatic sad. Sort of "well gosh this sure is a pickle" sad. 

2. The resolution of the plot is clear from the first episode 

Ok, so actually the "rich" guy's family is terribly in debt and so he must marry a wealthy woman in order save the family. Also, his romantic interest is from a sketchy, most likely illegitimate background. So here comes a spoiler, but like I said, you find this out very early on:  There is this other super rich guy in town who is about to die. When he does his son will inherit everything. BUT if his son dies the money will go to his sister's "oldest child" and SHOCKINGLY that turns out to be the same young woman who thinks she can't marry the man she loves because she is poor.

All that needs to happen for everything to work out is that the rich guy's son needs to die young. And when we meet the son, he is the absolute worst. He doesn't care that his father is dead, is straight-up cruel to his mother, is skeevy toward women, and has a serious drinking problem. 

Oh yeah, this guy is toast

So somehow there are four episodes to get us to a resolution that plays out exactly as you would expect. 

3. Julian Fellows thinks he is Alistair Cooke / Russell Baker and he is NOT

Greetings idiot Americans

If you watch this on Amazon there are these unbearable fireside chats where Julian Fellows condescendingly explains what is going on in this very un-complex story. 

4. Flower crowns, bad hair, and skirt scrunching

The gals over at Frock Flicks have an excellent post on some very strange costuming quirks of this adaptation:

http://www.frockflicks.com/doctor-thorne-2016/

Also more about why skirt-hiking is obnoxious and unnecessary

http://www.frockflicks.com/snark-week-stop-skirt-hiking/ 

But despite all that, I re-watched it anyway!!

Here is why:

1. Despite all the skirt schrunching, the costumes are pretty

Ballgown pastels

Mean ladies = fab dresses 

Love the blues 

2. Alison Brie plays the only character that isn't a familiar 19th-century trope

She is an over-30 wealthy American who enjoys watching men embarrass themselves by trying to marry her.

#sorrynotsorry

3. I find even bad period movies (and shows) to be strangely comforting

And here is the meat of it: I like seeing pretty costumes walking around on screen. My absolute favorites combine good visuals with compelling stories, but even when the story misses the mark, the good costumes can make it worthwhile. I put on Doctor Thorne to chill out and also half-watch while doing a couple other things. One of the things that was bad about Doctor Thorne (virtually no drama) was also good. It was safe and gentle and easy to digest.

So if you want something to watch that will be pretty, take very little mental energy, and make you angry about something as unimportant as skirt scrunching, I highly recommend Doctor Thorne. 

Blogging about stupid stuff during the Coronapocalypse

I've taken a long break from blogging, but sitting at home by myself last night I had a lil' anxiety freakout about the possibility that this might just be what life is like for a couple of MONTHS. And so I watched a period movie and it made me feel better. But also I had lots of opinions about the movie and felt like writing them down. So if you are also stuck at home and want to read something that isn't terrifying or a massive guilt trip about leaving your house and maybe touching something that someone else will touch, join me for some opinionated blogging about shows I am watching.

And you know there will be gifs.

Grief, Action, and St. Catherine

For four years now I've been posting on (or around) November 25th about St. Catherine's Day--the day that celebrates the patron saint of archivists, couture house workers, and single women over 25. In years past I've gathered my friends, donned silly hats, and toasted to history, fashion, and life without husbands.

But this year, I haven't been feeling it. Since the election I've been more in the mood to wear a black veil than my 90s Blossom hat. I realize though that going into full Victorian mourning would only play into the conservative taunts that liberals are just being "dramatic" about Donald Trump's election. "Liberal Idiot Now Only Wears Black Crepe" the Breitbart headline would read.

Which is to say that all of this melancholy has got me thinking differently about Saint Catherine this year. Her legend tells the story of an educated woman from a privileged background who spoke out against persecution and injustice. For those of us who grieve the results of the election but have the privilege to possibly sail through the next four years mostly unscathed, we need to resist the lure of that comfort.

Of all the things Cathy is a patron saint of, the ones that resonate with me the most is her patronage of archivists and educators, couture house and millinery workers, and single women over the age of 25. So this year, rather than writing goofy prayers to a (most likely) fictional saint, I'm going to make some Catherinesq post-election pledges.

As a museum professional: I pledge to be inclusive in my collecting and seek out opportunities to tell stories about people who are underrepresented in museums. I pledge to remember that I do not preserve objects for their own sake but for the benefit of the people of the community. I pledge to not only tell the happy, triumphant stories of history but also the ones that are painful and difficult. I also pledge to not always be the storyteller, to step back and amplify other voices, and allow those voices to educate me.

As a person who loves fashion: I pledge to care about those to make my clothing, and the environmental impact of clothing manufacturing. I pledge to buy fair trade, to buy from companies that pay their workers a living wage, and support local businesses whenever possible. I also pledge to buy less, to care for the clothing I already have, and dispose of unwanted clothing as conscientiously as possible.

As a single woman who has the gift of free time and disposable income: I pledge to seek out concrete actions and activities that I can do, to sign up and show up, to push myself, and to also take time to recharge. I pledge to increase the annual amount that I give the charitable causes. I also pledge to be conscious of self-congratulation about any of my actions, thinking not in terms of "enough" but always seeking to do more.

Dark Corner of the Internet

In a few short weeks MOHAI is opening a major exhibition about food culture in Seattle called Edible City. Even though food is the focus, there will also be clothes-- including some chef's jackets and dresses worn to a famous Seattle restaurant.  For various reasons, we wanted a couple of the mannequins to not be the usual ones we had in stock. So I was tasked with finding some new mannequins.

***WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS INANIMATE OBJECT NUDITY***

Since we had a limited budget and limited time, it meant finding something from a retail supply company rather than a custom order from someplace fancy. So I went online to search. And I'm here to tell you that the internet world of mannequins was grimmer and even more upsetting than I expected.

I realize that the bar for icky things on the internet is set pretty high, but I still feel like this was a dark little corner I had stumbled upon. 

The idea was to get mannequins that were a bit more dynamic and lifelike than our regular ones. So I guess, faces? But if the faces are painted, you sort of need wigs...

Ok, ok, no wigs. Maybe "molded" hair? 

Erm. A little better, I guess, but sort of hard to pass her off as a 1930s housewife, right? 

Hey, oh actually this molded hair one looks a little better... 

Wait...how come all the non-white mannequins are specifically listed as "Ethnic" or "African"? 

This...feels a bit racist. I guess it is good that they even sell mannequins that aren't white, but you lose points if the white version of the style is "female mannequin" and the black version is "ethnic female mannequin." And you definitely lose points if all your "African" mannequins are in a separate special category, away from all your "regular" (white or abstract) mannequins. 

Oh there was also a site that used "Latin style" as the euphemism for mannequins with larger butts. 

Even without the casual/blatant racism, there were lots of weird categories on the sites. Some that I really didn't want to click on...

And some that were a little more intriguing. Like a whole section of "Euro Male" mannequins???

Tell me more!!

And then there was just straight-up nightmare fodder. 

Aren't you glad I started blogging again?