skygiants | (no subject)

Entry tags:

theater

(no subject)

Tonight

genarti and I went to go see SIX, the musical in which the six wives of Henry VIII compete to be lead singer in their pop-rock band by comparing miserable facts about their lives through the medium of catchy and potentially chart-topping singles!

The program: "No longer on the outskirts of history, these Queens are taking over the world!"
Me, reading this out to

genarti: Okay, sure, but can anyone really say that the six wives of Henry VIII are on the outskirts of history?

genarti: It's true, they are extremely in-skirted.

Was the show good? ... I mean, what is 'good'? What is 'art'? Is it a synth-heavy remix of "Greensleeves" punctuated by shouts of "Divorced! Beheaded! LIVE!" Is it a pop-feminist musical that takes 75 minutes to come to the conclusion that, perhaps, defining historical women by the men in their lives is Bad? Who am I to say? I'm just a humble theater lover who's here to watch six talented and sparkly women don giant ruffs and fake German accents in a transcendently weird ode to Hans Holbein and Renaissance-era makeup while a hail of confetti rains down on their heads.

(At first I assumed the costuming was inspired by historical portraiture and was disappointed that I couldn't correctly identify which wife was which from the poster except for Anne Boleyn with her signature B, but it turns out their costumes are instead all mostly homages to their pop musical inspiration with some vague Tudor elements so now I feel less bad.)

Do I have beef? Obviously I have beef, I have far too many Tudor opinions not to have beef. My biggest issue is the almost complete and total erasure of political ambition as a motivation for any of the wives, which comes out most significantly in Anne Boleyn's frustrating presentation as an airheaded Mean Girl but seems like kind of a significant oversight in a musical whose stated project is about returning voice and agency to historical women ...

In pettier news, it's not like anyone can prove "Jane Seymour truly loved and was loved by Henry VIII" is wrong, technically, it's just the most boring Jane Seymour take possible in this or any other year.

(

genarti's theory is that the Boring Jane Seymour Take reflects the showriter's opinions on Adele and the genre of soulful white girls, on whom her musical stylings are based, as much as it does their opinions on Jane Seymour herself, and this may well be true but I'm still annoyed.)

All that said: were we not entertained? Yes, we were, extremely, and it's entirely possible I'm going to buy the cast recording at some point and happily listen to relisten to the siren sound of synth-pop Greensleeves in the comfort of my own home.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Yes, we were, extremely, and it's entirely possible I'm going to buy the cast recording at some point and happily listen to relisten to the siren sound of synth-pop Greensleeves in the comfort of my own home.

Is the music better than the politics? (The costumes look amazing.)

That pic is awesome.

I just, I know in my heart I would not be able to get past these bad Tudors takes

The costumes are amazing.

it turns out their costumes are instead all mostly homages to their pop musical inspiration

Ah. My first question was going to be "what is the historical thinking behind the only one who is in trousers and which one is she?" I feel it should be Catherine Parr though.

everything about this musical made more sense to me when i found out they wrote it while procrastinating on studying for university exams

I had a ticket to see this in Cambridge at the ADC after its run at Edinburgh, and then spouse didn't get home in time for me to get to it and I was mildly annoyed. But I had it mentally tagged as "amusing-sounding student theatre" and now it seems to have become an International Musical Theatre Phenomenon ~~and I don't have the bragging rights of knowing it before it was cool~~.

Life truly is a rich tapestry.

a) of course this exists
b) of course you and

genarti went to see it
c) I think, based on this review, I will not make a special effort to see this show, but I may look up synth-pop Greensleeves sometime

Even though not perfect, it sounds FASCINATING.

This is ... incredible. I just ... wow

I kind of want to see it? But I don't know? But kind of????

She is, indeed, Catherine Parr!

Bwah!

which comes out most significantly in Anne Boleyn's frustrating presentation as an airheaded Mean Girl

HJK;LBGK;LKJHKM,;.'LKOIJHUYGTFVBHJNHKML;,KJBHBWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH

*deep breath*

So, what do they do with my girl Catherine Howard?

One of my coworkers is obsessed with this show! So I am glad to hear about someone seeing it In the Wild, although at the same time it seems like kind of a lost opportunity that they did not base the wives' costumes on Tudor portraiture, only with 110% more glitter.

I feel like leaving out the wives' political ambitions is kind of big misstep for a show that aims to return voice and agency to historical women. What even was Anne Boleyn about if not political ambition?

I'm actually really looking forward to this show, which I've been listening to on Spotify after seeing it mentioned somewhere. It's not Historical Accurate, but the songs are a lot of fun.

I remain amused at the fact that I saw a musical about the six wives of Henry VIII, except that it was clearly not this one, because mine had the six wives putting Henry on trial in the afterlife and pretty much all telling him he was a dick.

The music was very catchy! We especially enjoyed Anne of Cleves' tribute to Nicki Minaj.

The costuming does a really good job of being visually distinctive, unified, and conveying character!

YOU WOULD BE SO MAD. I spent the first half of the Anne Boleyn number ("I want to dance and sing/Politics not my thing") hoping it was meant to be ironic and was going to be subverted later and, like ... maybe that was the intention but if so they did NOT convey it well.

I think my favorite is Catherine of Aragon's Beyonce look but they're honestly all incredible!

As soon as it came clear who was who I was like "I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT WAS PARR FROM THE PANTS."

(The picture doesn't make it obvious, but Anne of Cleves gets shorts instead of a skirt.)

Right?

(There's a bit where the wives have a wistful-meta discussion about how no one would go see a musical about the wives of Henry VI or VII and I'm like "I WOULD THOUGH. WRITE THAT MUSICAL.")

I almost saw it in London last year, but then went to see the puppet show about Darwin instead - a choice I did not regret at the time even before I knew I was going to have later opportunities on its unexpected World Tour, though I'm glad I did finally get to see it!

And the richest of all is musical theater!

all ... reasonable conclusions >.>

I seem to remember there being more Greensleeves in the opening number than there is in this rendition but, you know, that's the vibe, there it is. Live in consort!

It was absolutely an experience I would not have missed!

It sounds like it's going to Broadway and probably thence to tour, so there will likely be opportunities! :D

The emphasis with Catherine Howard is on the patriarchy and predatory behavior of older men towards young women (her number is a Britney Spears riff which starts out peppily disturbing and then gets more so) which is not the world's worst take. Overall I felt they did better with the later wives than the early ones, but that's partly because the early ones got introduced first and then had to keep riffing on their one note in the party banter through the rest of the show.

(I was saying to

genarti that maybe the thing I would have liked most to see, if they'd been a little less wedded to Strict Historical Order and One Song Per Wife, is a duet between Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard about the ways in which Howard looks like but is also significantly different from a Boleyn speedrun.)

I spent so long trying to figure out what portrait Aragon's headdress came from until I realized it was a Beyonce riff! (Admittedly, a gorgeous Beyonce riff.)

THIS ALSO IS MY QUESTION. "Traditionally [Anne Boleyn]'s taken very seriously, so we wanted to flip that on its head and make her fun and carefree -- like Lily Allen or Avril Lavigne," says the program, infuriatingly; a.) guys I hate to break it to you but you're absolutely not the first to go mocking Mean Girl with Boleyn and b.) it's not a bold and novel take if it erases all her historically documented agency and intelligence in the process!

The music is so enjoyable; I've taking the opportunity to relisten to bits while writing/responding to comments on this post. >.>

Well now I'm very curious about that musical!! Do you remember what it was called?

. . . hmmm. Okay. I feel marginally more charitable towards this show now.

But the total lack of politics is still mindboggling to me. How do you divorce (heh) Anne Boleyn and Katherine Parr from their political ambitions???

Ladies in Waiting: The Judgement of Henry VIII!

Here is a review of it.

I'm also not convinced "fun and carefree" is a description I'd use for Avril Lavigne, but admittedly I'm more familiar with her older, slightly more emo songs: the more recent stuff does seem a little lighter.

I think it's possible that the airheaded mean girl act was meant to be ICly an act? There were some vague indications that might have been meant to signal that. (Vg gheaf bhg gung gur jubyr YRG'F PBZCRGR GB FRR JUB UNQ VG UNEQRFG jnf va snpg VPyl n snxr pbzcrgvgvba gb vyyhfgengr ubj evqvphybhf vg vf gb znxr crbcyr va trareny naq jbzra va fcrpvsvp (naq Urael IVVV'f jvirf va rkgen-fcrpvsvp) pbzcrgr sbe Jubfr Genhzn Vf Gur Jbefg, Yrg'f Oner Nyy Bhe Cnva Fb Lbh Pna Qrpvqr.) Anne Boleyn was one of the first wives, thus one of the first to sing, thus spent a LOT of time on her one-note Mean Girl sniping while we progressed through other wives' songs, and it's possible the whole sniping thing was a deliberate persona she just got really into.

But... like... if that's what they were going for, they REALLY needed to make it more unambiguously clear that that was the case, and generally subvert it more. Not to mention, yeah, the way political ambition and political maneuvering were sanded away from all of them in the interests of POP STAR GIRL POWER and catchy songs. (But the songs were super fun and catchy!)

I cannot wait to see this! I won't manage to make it to Boston in time but am definitely going once it gets to NYC.

FASCINATING. I would also be extremely interested to see that variant; it sounds like it has room for a little more complexity...

YES PLEASE DO, I'm SO stoked to hear what you think!!!

Katherine Parr does get a few lines in which she outlines some of the Other More Interesting things she did than outlive Henry ... but her entire song is about having to give up Thomas Seymour, so ......

(Any less flattering facts about Thomas Seymour: not mentioned.)

I would see that musical! I would even MORE go see a musical about Henry I's first wife, Edith/Matilda of Scotland, who as I recall had an exciting time hiding out in abbeys since she was the sister of Edgar the Aetheling and thus various Norman contenders wanted to marry her and legitimise their line by adding Anglo-Saxon royal blood. Plus she ran the kingdom for him repeatedly while he was off doing Things, and was a patron of the arts and architecture and all kinds of stuff. Which I suppose does not lend itself to glittery costumes and pop music as well, but I love her.

I would really love to see this; I do have many many Tudor Opinions but also I just cannot resist the glitter and big pop numbers and -- everything.

Please tell me more about what they did with my favourite, Anne of Cleves?

I hope you get the chance to, I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Anne of Cleves was probably the most fun of all - she gets a joyous hip-hop riff about her party-going life as a carefree divorcee, and all the others are like "why did you even enter the 'our lives were hard' competition, this sounds AMAZING."

I would watch that musical in a HEARTBEAT, and also I feel quite sure that anyone could add glittery costumes and pop music to that story if they really believed in themselves.

Meanwhile, I'm kind of amazed there hasn't already been a pop-rock musical about Henry II's wife...

This review makes me feel much better about the fact that tickets had sold out by the time my excellent human and I got our schedules sorted.

I'm very glad I got to see it, but it wouldn't be my top-priority ticket to see again!

She is surprisingly neglected; I wanted historical fiction about her and as I recall I couldn't find anything other than Jean Plaidy -- although I first encountered her in Agnes Strickland's historical biographies (from the mid-C19th) which sort of spill into historical fiction themselves, and it was long enough ago that I suspect more may have been written since I looked.

That is fantastic! I am glad the creators of Six did her justice. I love the story of her wide-eyed 'Oh he kisses me every night, soon I will have a baby, right?' and I have always wondered how much that was innocence and how much that was hedging her bets. She definitely seemed to make what joy she could out of her post-Henry life.

A different friend won lottery tickets, so I got to see it after all, and I'm glad I got to. I enjoyed it more than I expected to -- and getting to experience all the interstitial text (as well as the staging) really helped me contextualize the songs (as opposed to just listening to the soundtrack, which is what I did on a friend's recommendation after tickets sold out). But yeah, also all the critiques named in this post are valid.

My friend said the best part of the play was that it made the latter 3 lesser-known wives more interesting to her -- but it didn't change how she thought/felt about the first 3 wives.

It could have been such a stronger play if instead of the ~fake competition~ it was just the 6 wives in the afterlife lamenting that they're only known for the rhyme and deciding to tell their own stories from their own perspective. They could have still bickered, but it would have felt much less like "doing the thing you claim to be critiquing." It also could have felt less ahistorical that way -- it was weird to us that Anne Boleyn doesn't even name her daughter, nevermind anyone naming the Mary/Elizabeth feud that would become so important historically.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only