Wolf Hall, episode 2
Wolf Hall, the TV series, continues to be mind-blowingly good through episode 2.
First, the acting. None of it is sub-par. Mark Rylance as Cromwell is intensely emotional, but restrained. One possible quibble with Rylance’s interpretation, though: Cromwell went from blacksmith’s son to chief minister and anointed earl of England in a time when very few crossed class lines, and no one had ever crossed them to a such a great degree. Thus I always pictured him as having an evident self-assurance to spare, maybe even an occasional touch of cockiness. Kinda like Obama in 2004. But while Rylance never seems uncomfortable in a social situation, he doesn’t play up any self-assurance.
Damian Lewis is Henry VIII. It’s sort of annoying that there is a theatrical law that every actor who plays Henry VIII must stand with his legs apart and feet pointed out, like in Henry VIII’s most famous portraits. Did Henry really stand like that all the time? I thought Lewis was great in Band of Brothers, only pretty okay in Homeland, but that might be attributable to the fact that that part was written without coherence. He excels in Wolf Hall, alternating Henry’s confidence with his emotional immaturity and neediness.
Last week, I mentioned that the photography had the feel of a slide show of paintings. This week, I will go one step further: pause on almost any frame, and the image could be a gorgeous early Renaissance painting. Cameras today can, more than ever, handle shooting in low light. This is an innovation of which Wolf Hall takes full advantage. The night scenes are truly dark, the flickering flames all the more noticeable. The costumes and setting seem more realistic than in most historical dramas, but I’m not entirely sure how they manage to convey that impression. Maybe it’s that the excellent actors seem to move more comfortably in them.
An episode of Wolf Hall had almost exactly half the budget of one episode of The Tudors, but somehow Wolf Hall‘s showrunners manage to do so much with so little. Part of that is by choosing to lavish the relatively simple scenes they choose to film. Cardinal Wolsey is mobbed by thousands of fans, but this is not depicted, only described by characters. The money is spent on relatively few characters in relatively few spaces.
One of the great strengths of Wolf Hall the novel was that it used fiction combined with historical accuracy to actually make a historical argument: namely, that while Thomas More had been seen as a saintly martyr and Cromwell had been seen as a Machiavellian villain, in fact it was More who was detestable and Cromwell’s character ought to be quite redeemed.
In this episode, the show captures the strangeness and hypocrisy of More. Cromwell and Bishop Gardiner (played by space awesomely slimy Mark Gatiss) visit More’s house for a meal. More’s insistence on the simplicity of his food seems repellently hypocritical (at another point in the episode, Cromwell clucks over a whip that his mentor Cardinal Wolsey uses for self-flagellation). So does More’s detestation of his coarse wife. He keeps a fool, who – it is explained – is the victim of a traumatic brain injury, and during the meal, the fool is kept locked away upstairs but able to peer down at everyone else at the table, aware of his separation. It is not the happy, loving, convivial home that is fictionally created for Cromwell.
Ahead lie spoilers (but note there is some evidence that discovering spoilers does not diminish enjoyment of a work of art!).
Ambassador Chapuys notes that Cromwell must be watching Anne Boleyn with interest, “Since a world in which Anne can be queen is a world in which Cromwell can…” and he trails off. Of course, the immediate implication is that even Putney-born Cromwell can creamily rise to the top based on merit rather than birth.
However, there are other implications that Anne’s becoming queen wreaks changes in all the characters. In this episode Cromwell sleeps with his sister-in-law (there is no historical evidence for this of which I am aware). It was a sin felt much deeply then than would be now to take up with your dead spouse’s sibling, or to sleep with someone whose sibling you’ve already slept with. Henry aims to annul his marriage to Katherine of Aragon on the basis that she was once married to Henry’s brother. Their lack of male heirs, he thinks, is evidence that Katherine is lying that her first marriage was unconsummated. Henry conveniently ignores the fact that his previous mistress was Anne’s sister. Cromwell’s taking up with his (married) sister-in-law after his wife died suggests a new permissiveness – as well as a theme of incestuousness? (It seems noteworthy here, too, that Anne at her downfall will be accused of sleeping with her brother.)
Although the show, like the book, portrays Cromwell as sympathetically as the historical evidence can possibly support, in this episode, we begin to see at least a couple of stains on Cromwell’s character. Cromwell uncharacteristically tells a story of his past in Italy, about how he helped scam a rich man into buying a fake antique, mentioning that the man had tears in his eyes after the purchase. He expresses no guilt, and says he took his cut and sold the donkeys. So we have a sense of ruthlessness in money matters. Cromwell also insists he has to stay in London to fight for Wolsey’s cause. Thus, he was not with Wolsey when he died calling for Cromwell. Instead, Cromwell was, for the first time, exuberant after a night of getting in good with the king (and thus advancing the Protestant – and Anne Boleyn’s – cause) and sleeping with his sister-in-law. That is when he receives the news of Wolsey’s death. We are not entirely sure whether Cromwell really did need remain in London for Wolsey’s sake, or whether he was more focused on advancing his own career.
At the end of the episode, though, when Cromwell hears of his mentor’s death, he is genuinely devastated and vows revenge. It is another of Mantel’s historical arguments (less plausible than the one that Cromwell was in many ways quite enlightened and modern, but far from impossible) that many of Cromwell’s later actions – most notably, bringing about the downfall of Anne Boleyn and some of her clique – are explicable by fervent loyalty to Wolsey. In the first two episodes, we see the groundwork for revenge laid. Those who are insulting Wolsey in various ways (insults for which there are no evidence of which I am aware, but certainly possible) are the ones whom Cromwell will have executed along with Anne Boleyn.
Cromwell slips on the turquoise ring that can be seen in his sole surviving portrait by Holbein. In Wolf Hall, it is explained as the cardinal’s ring, one that Cromwell will continue wear while presumably wedded to the memory of his former master.
What did you think?
Cromwell sleeping with his sister-in-law was probably done to add a little romance or sex for the main character after his wife died. This would be a big no-no as you imply. In fact, it was against the law to marry your dead spouse’s sibling. Yet, there was apparently such a desire to do so that the United Kingdom passed legislation to legalize such marriages during the early 20th century.
I like the character drama of Wolf Hall but reading it as a historical document is not a good idea. Hillary Mantel apparently has some sort of hard feelings towards the Roman Catholic Church as an institution so she spins the pro-Catholic faction of English society as the bad guys. There really isn’t much evidence that Cromwell was a good family man towards his wife and daughters. We do have a lot of evidence that Thomas Moore was a good family man by something close to our standards. Educating his daughters was very unusual at the time but Moore did it.Report
Thomas More was not good to his wives. You’re right about no evidence of Cromwell’s home life, except the wards he took in were very loyal to him.
Yes, I gathered from an interview she has a pro-C of E, anti-Catholic axe to grind. She’s right to point out that More burned heretics and may not be so saintly, and Cromwell was ahead of his time in terms of understanding statesmanship and finance.
There is nothing historically inaccurate per se about the novel in the movie, in that she doesn’t contradict any known facts. She fills in spaces imaginatively, and, as I suggested in OP, in those spaces puts the best possible reading on Cromwell’s behavior. A defense lawyer’s case. I think it’s a useful historical argument that needed to be made. I did read one bio of Cromwell that made that case, and it was even more insistent on seeing only the good in him.Report
I always thought it was interesting that in Utopia, More preached the virtues of religious tolerance, while in real life…Report
Cromwell’s wards were all boys though. By all accounts Cromwell did do well for his family and made sure they received a lot of wealth from the dissolution of the monasteries. Its how Richard Cromwell, his nephew, rose to gentry levels and eventually gave the world Oliver Cromwell as a great grandson.
Thomas Moore was a typical 16th century husband but he was a lot better with his daughters than other men at the time or even in the present. As to whether a person who burned heretic was saintly, it was a time of intense religious passion. The Protestants have a lot of blood on their hands to. Not only from people who wanted to stay Catholic and loyal to the Pope but dissenting Protestant and women accused of witchcraft; which people forget was a Protestant thing. The Catholic Church was more likely to go against the person accusing a woman of witchcraft.Report
Yes, More educated his daughters, which was amazingly uncommon, and treated his wives like s**t, which is a lot more common.
FTR, I didn’t mean to imply that Protestants had no blood on their hands. Just that Cromwell the man didn’t burn heretics (although was a fan of censorship), whereas More the man did. Not everybody back then endorsed burning religious opposition at the stake (e.g., Wolsey didn’t, as I recall, and I believe Elizabeth I burned less than 10 in her years as queen).
Cromwell did, however, have a way of making sure his enemies got their heads chopped off, which doesn’t quite fit in Mantel’s pretty picture of him. Hence the (somewhat implausible) it’s-all-revenge-for-Cardinal-Wolsey explanation.Report
Elizabeth I didn’t burn many people at the stake but dozens of Catholics died by more ordinary means of execution during her reign.Report
Pius V didn’t help.Report
Oh, this has me dying to watch it. I really enjoyed Episode 1.Report
@chris I think 2 is even better!Report
Loved this week’s episode, especially the interaction between Cromwell and Mary Boleyn….Report
Yes, @maribou, loved that scene and the way Rylance played it.Report
Both the book and the show felt deliberately revisionist to me. It feels as much like an argument as a story: my first impression of it was as a systematic counterargument against A Man for All Seasons.
And I’m not convinced by the arguments they put in Cromwell’s mouth that the monasteries were solely a burden and provided nothing in the way of education, literacy, learning, and scholasticism. At that point in history – and until centuries later – I believe the Church provided more in the way of education than the State.
And while this is a much more upper-class argument than I typically make, the dissolution of the monasteries in England was a crime against art, even if it left the country with many picturesque ruins. They must have been amazing places in their day. It wasn’t about the monasteries being wasteful; it was a giant royal land grab.Report
You remind me that I need to recommend, and probably reread, my favorite novels about this period in England.Report
Oh, that looks interesting!Report
@chris Just got the Kindle.Report
I hope you enjoy them. Ford is best known for The Good Soldier, of course, but those are wonderful.
And he was a close friend of, and wrote with, my favorite novelist, Conrad.Report
And a power grab. The monasteries were more wealthy than King Henry VIII, who couldn’t stand this.
I’m not sure how much education they supplied though. Most schooling was provided by what we could private schools established for charitable purposes. These grammar schools were independent of church and state more or less.Report
I don’t know if Cromwell really believed they were dens of iniquity (he also supposedly loved Cardinal Wolsey, which doesn’t really fit with that) but I do think some of his protestantism was genuine belief. Which is not to say that the dissolution of the monasteries was not also primarily a land grab.Report
For Rose, I believe that you overlook the power of personality in that era. Wolsey appears to be the only person that Cromwell thought was his equal in terms of intellect and conversation (in England). In the days before mass media and indeed even books, human interaction dominated life. I see no reason why Cromwell would not be capable of such loyalty.
Remember also that Cromwell had extreme patience. Heads were cut but only when the offenders were shown to be guilty. Not guilty perhaps in our modern sense but guilty in the sense of offending the king.
Is there any question that More would have had Cromwell burned if he had slipped even slightly in the King’s regard?Report