What do you think?
Rate this book
55 Days
A gripping historical drama that dramatises a crucial moment of English history. Premiered at Hampstead Theatre in October 2012.
December 1648. The Army has occupied London. Parliament votes not to put the imprisoned king on trial, so the Army moves against Westminster in the first and only military coup in English history. What follows over the next fifty-five days, as Cromwell seeks to compromise with a king who will do no such thing, is nothing less than the forging of a new nation, an entirely new world.
Howard BrentonOCOs play depicts the dangerous and dramatic days when, in a country exhausted by Civil War, a few great men attempt to think the unthinkable: to create a country without a king.
'A forgotten era of revolutionary British history is fascinatingly unlocked... electrifying.' "Whatonstage.com"
'[A] confident and idea-packed piece... It could have been a dour history lesson. Instead it engages with the present, raising some pungent questions about the kind of democracy we have in Britain today.' "Evening Standard""
December 1648. The Army has occupied London. Parliament votes not to put the imprisoned king on trial, so the Army moves against Westminster in the first and only military coup in English history. What follows over the next fifty-five days, as Cromwell seeks to compromise with a king who will do no such thing, is nothing less than the forging of a new nation, an entirely new world.
Howard BrentonOCOs play depicts the dangerous and dramatic days when, in a country exhausted by Civil War, a few great men attempt to think the unthinkable: to create a country without a king.
'A forgotten era of revolutionary British history is fascinatingly unlocked... electrifying.' "Whatonstage.com"
'[A] confident and idea-packed piece... It could have been a dour history lesson. Instead it engages with the present, raising some pungent questions about the kind of democracy we have in Britain today.' "Evening Standard""
83 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 15, 2012
1 person is currently reading
16 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
January 28, 2025
Masterfully done.
You get a tangible sense of the monumental shift that is about to happen, and the anxiety/passion that comes with it: “We are not just trying a tyrant, we are inventing a country. We are in an unknown region, floating on nothing, trying to think thoughts never thought before.”
Especially in comparison to Cromwell (1970), in which Charles I is meek and anxious and Cromwell is always yelling, Brenton’s grasp on the two central figures is much more compelling and accurate (at least to a non-expert). Charles I has no doubts about his divine right, he schemes and makes false promises, and is haughty and sarcastic. Cromwell is deeply religious, tactful, trapped in a debate with himself and with God about what to do. There’s a stage direction that describes Cromwell as waiting and watching from the sidelines, gauging his next move. I think this one stage direction captures Cromwell’s character excellently.
I think Brenton lays out a very complicated timeline of events and characters in a clear way (or at least as clear as you can get). You get a sense of the motivations behind the actions, not just a timeline bleached of any emotion.
Excellent beginning and ending scenes, perfect choices for starting and ending the play.
Once again jealous of established British playwrights and their massive casts of actors. If only!
You get a tangible sense of the monumental shift that is about to happen, and the anxiety/passion that comes with it: “We are not just trying a tyrant, we are inventing a country. We are in an unknown region, floating on nothing, trying to think thoughts never thought before.”
Especially in comparison to Cromwell (1970), in which Charles I is meek and anxious and Cromwell is always yelling, Brenton’s grasp on the two central figures is much more compelling and accurate (at least to a non-expert). Charles I has no doubts about his divine right, he schemes and makes false promises, and is haughty and sarcastic. Cromwell is deeply religious, tactful, trapped in a debate with himself and with God about what to do. There’s a stage direction that describes Cromwell as waiting and watching from the sidelines, gauging his next move. I think this one stage direction captures Cromwell’s character excellently.
I think Brenton lays out a very complicated timeline of events and characters in a clear way (or at least as clear as you can get). You get a sense of the motivations behind the actions, not just a timeline bleached of any emotion.
Excellent beginning and ending scenes, perfect choices for starting and ending the play.
Once again jealous of established British playwrights and their massive casts of actors. If only!
November 8, 2018
Very much enjoyed the play, with the slight caveat that Mark Gatiss played Charles I (see cover). Mr. Gatiss is a fine actor but he is 6' 1". Charles was barely 5ft. Imagine the court scene played with a tiny, fine boned actor....so much more chilling.
July 31, 2015
This is a fantastic play about the period of time between the purging of Parliament by the New Model Army in 1648 and the execution of King Charles I in 1649. During that time period (at least in Brenton's dramatization) the Parliamentary faction splintered between those who demanded the king's blood at any price, those who demanded a legitimately elected Parliament, and those who sought a constitutional monarchy--but the factionalism was fixed by Oliver Cromwell, who moves a bit like Stalin to eliminate anyone, even his friends and allies, who threatens his ultimate goal. The play definitely deals with questions of legality, power, and religion, but what I find most interesting is that this was one of those moments in history when England got to define itself (or more properly, Cromwell got to define England) and its future in a fairly definite way. This was a turning point in British history, and choosing one direction or another could have lead to a very different British experience of the past 366 years.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews