What do you think?
Rate this book
The Last Wife
Kate Parr is smart, confident, and passionate: a rising star in a world of intense competition. But her obligatory marriage to Henry is rife with the threat of violence and the lure of deceit; her secret liaisons with Thom, her husband’s former brother-in-law, could send her to an early grave; and her devotion to the education and equal rights of Henry’s daughters is putting an even bigger strain on her marriage. Does Kate risk her life to gain authority in both her relationship and her political career? Which love will she be led to if she follows her heart? And what kind of future is there for her children if she makes a crucial mistake?
“Here is a playwright who is taking on the big themes of feminism with a restless, probing intelligence and political savvy. Her characters are living, breathing, messy human beings who reach for the stars and who stumble in the dirt. These are not mouthpieces for politically correct punditry, but people whose emotions cause chaos and whose ideas drive their passion. In short, this is the best kind of playwriting: thoughtful, full-bodied, and redolent of the stuff of life.” —Bob White, Director of New Plays, Stratford Festival
“Here is a playwright who is taking on the big themes of feminism with a restless, probing intelligence and political savvy. Her characters are living, breathing, messy human beings who reach for the stars and who stumble in the dirt. These are not mouthpieces for politically correct punditry, but people whose emotions cause chaos and whose ideas drive their passion. In short, this is the best kind of playwriting: thoughtful, full-bodied, and redolent of the stuff of life.” —Bob White, Director of New Plays, Stratford Festival
112 pages, ebook
First published August 17, 2015
2 people are currently reading
86 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 - 16 of 16 reviews
April 1, 2019
“If anything’s true it’s what we feel.”
It is always exciting to discover a really good new play! And Kate Hennig’s “The Last Wife” is certainly that. Commissioned by the Stratford Festival in Ontario Canada, this play is a “contemporary retelling” of the marriage of Katherine Parr and Henry VIII. Ms. Hennig is writing a trilogy of plays about the Tudor women, examining the sexual and gender politics of those women and that period. I did not see this play in performance at Stratford, but after seeing the extraordinary production of the second piece in the trilogy, I had to go back and read this one. The plays are each meant to be stand-alone works, so you are not obligated to a series if you just want to pick up a good play and not be committed to anything more.
A great strength of the play is the contemporary language and angle that is used to convey this story steeped in history. The characters refer to modern items; they speak (and swear) in modern slang, and have a modern sensibility about some issues. Yet as you read, you feel like you are in the 1540s with these people. Mainly because the things they feel are relevant, and the issues they confront are human and long lasting, and thus the power of the piece. This particular story might have happened long ago, but it still happens today in various forms and its contemporary relevance leaps off the page.
I especially enjoyed the characterization of Kate (as she is called) Parr and her subtle machinations. In the hands of a good actress the script makes it very plausible that Kate is sneaky, or very sincere…or more likely a bit of both. Also especially vibrant is the character of Mary (Bloody Mary to history) who is wry, sardonic, and not at all a fool. Really, all of the characters come across as human, and for a play’s text alone to do that is no minor feat.
I have seen the second play in the series, “The Virgin Trial”, and I will be reading it soon. Already looking forward to seeing future productions of “The Last Wife”. It is a play that deserves to (and should) stick around!
It is always exciting to discover a really good new play! And Kate Hennig’s “The Last Wife” is certainly that. Commissioned by the Stratford Festival in Ontario Canada, this play is a “contemporary retelling” of the marriage of Katherine Parr and Henry VIII. Ms. Hennig is writing a trilogy of plays about the Tudor women, examining the sexual and gender politics of those women and that period. I did not see this play in performance at Stratford, but after seeing the extraordinary production of the second piece in the trilogy, I had to go back and read this one. The plays are each meant to be stand-alone works, so you are not obligated to a series if you just want to pick up a good play and not be committed to anything more.
A great strength of the play is the contemporary language and angle that is used to convey this story steeped in history. The characters refer to modern items; they speak (and swear) in modern slang, and have a modern sensibility about some issues. Yet as you read, you feel like you are in the 1540s with these people. Mainly because the things they feel are relevant, and the issues they confront are human and long lasting, and thus the power of the piece. This particular story might have happened long ago, but it still happens today in various forms and its contemporary relevance leaps off the page.
I especially enjoyed the characterization of Kate (as she is called) Parr and her subtle machinations. In the hands of a good actress the script makes it very plausible that Kate is sneaky, or very sincere…or more likely a bit of both. Also especially vibrant is the character of Mary (Bloody Mary to history) who is wry, sardonic, and not at all a fool. Really, all of the characters come across as human, and for a play’s text alone to do that is no minor feat.
I have seen the second play in the series, “The Virgin Trial”, and I will be reading it soon. Already looking forward to seeing future productions of “The Last Wife”. It is a play that deserves to (and should) stick around!
March 9, 2017
Saw this play at the Belfry in Victoria, BC. Reading it brought back many vivid scenes. It is the first play in a trilogy: The Virgin Trial, on stage at Stratford (Ontario, Canada) this summer (2017) and Father's Daughter. I hope to see both of the sequels. And read them.
August 30, 2021
Reread 2021 — rating unchanged. Kate Hennig could rip out my heart and stomp on it and I would thank her.
___________
5/5 stars, full review to come! Not to be dramatic but if I can’t play Mary in this show.. what’s even the point? My theory that every Kate Hennig play is perfection is slowly being proven correct.
Plot: 5/5
Characters: 5/5
Pacing: 5/5
Writing: 5/5
Enjoyment: 5/5
___________
5/5 stars, full review to come! Not to be dramatic but if I can’t play Mary in this show.. what’s even the point? My theory that every Kate Hennig play is perfection is slowly being proven correct.
Plot: 5/5
Characters: 5/5
Pacing: 5/5
Writing: 5/5
Enjoyment: 5/5
March 10, 2019
I just finished Porter's recent biography of Katherine, and this popped up in my feed. I direct plays for a living and am fascinated by the Tudors, so . . .
It's really good, although it tells you very little about any of the characters. Every once in awhile Hennig incorporates actual words written by Katherine Parr, Mary Tudor, Henry VIII, Elizabeth Tudor and even Edward VI. If the purpose of these excerpts was to remind us of the actual historical personages, they may have backfired. Mary and Elizabeth are louche as characters, which they certainly weren't in real life. Katherine herself was obviously intelligent as an actual person. Hennig makes her a "feminist" in a contemporary sense of the word. Like Porter, Hennig wants to give Parr credit for modeling queenship for the future Gloriana, and like Porter, she doesn't quite make it coherent. This failure is at least partly due to the same lacuna that bedevils the actual biography. Thomas Seymour eludes both writers, the one as an historical figure and Hennig as a coherent character. And because the character in the play remains incoherent, Kate does as well. The incident at Sudely that ended Elizabeth's residence with Parr and Seymour remains a mystery, and Kate's willingness to overlook Seymour's behavior jars with the woman who earlier kicked Henry Tudor hard in his game leg to fend him off. Hennig wants Kate to have it both ways by the end. She marries the diseased old man to exercise power over his heirs, showing Mary and Elizabeth the way forward as queen regnants. You know, just in case "Eddie" doesn't live to reproduce. But she also hints that Kate loves Henry, despite his unfortunate proclivities to wife-disposals. Unfortunately, the play can't really explain why.
All of this is a bit carping. What Hennig does do is write excellent dialogue, recasting the Tudors as a deeply dysfunctional family in modern terms. I was particularly taken with the portrait of Mary. Her actual recantation after the death of Anne Boleyn was a seminal event. She was forced to deny her own legitimacy, as well as her mother's marriage and title. In Hennig's version, she does not forgive Henry. Not ever.
Whether it is historically accurate or not (mostly . . . not), The Last Wife is a thrilling play in much the same way that Shakespeare's Richard III is. Whoever killed the Princes in the Tower, Shakespeare produced an exciting meditation upon power, ambition and politics. Hennig is interested in the role of women under the control of the patriarchy, and she uses the broad outlines of Katherine Parr's life to make a fairly caustic case for the damage men have inflicted upon women in history.
I would very much like to direct this play. Recommend.
It's really good, although it tells you very little about any of the characters. Every once in awhile Hennig incorporates actual words written by Katherine Parr, Mary Tudor, Henry VIII, Elizabeth Tudor and even Edward VI. If the purpose of these excerpts was to remind us of the actual historical personages, they may have backfired. Mary and Elizabeth are louche as characters, which they certainly weren't in real life. Katherine herself was obviously intelligent as an actual person. Hennig makes her a "feminist" in a contemporary sense of the word. Like Porter, Hennig wants to give Parr credit for modeling queenship for the future Gloriana, and like Porter, she doesn't quite make it coherent. This failure is at least partly due to the same lacuna that bedevils the actual biography. Thomas Seymour eludes both writers, the one as an historical figure and Hennig as a coherent character. And because the character in the play remains incoherent, Kate does as well. The incident at Sudely that ended Elizabeth's residence with Parr and Seymour remains a mystery, and Kate's willingness to overlook Seymour's behavior jars with the woman who earlier kicked Henry Tudor hard in his game leg to fend him off. Hennig wants Kate to have it both ways by the end. She marries the diseased old man to exercise power over his heirs, showing Mary and Elizabeth the way forward as queen regnants. You know, just in case "Eddie" doesn't live to reproduce. But she also hints that Kate loves Henry, despite his unfortunate proclivities to wife-disposals. Unfortunately, the play can't really explain why.
All of this is a bit carping. What Hennig does do is write excellent dialogue, recasting the Tudors as a deeply dysfunctional family in modern terms. I was particularly taken with the portrait of Mary. Her actual recantation after the death of Anne Boleyn was a seminal event. She was forced to deny her own legitimacy, as well as her mother's marriage and title. In Hennig's version, she does not forgive Henry. Not ever.
Whether it is historically accurate or not (mostly . . . not), The Last Wife is a thrilling play in much the same way that Shakespeare's Richard III is. Whoever killed the Princes in the Tower, Shakespeare produced an exciting meditation upon power, ambition and politics. Hennig is interested in the role of women under the control of the patriarchy, and she uses the broad outlines of Katherine Parr's life to make a fairly caustic case for the damage men have inflicted upon women in history.
I would very much like to direct this play. Recommend.
January 31, 2025
katherine’s a baddie, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that this play didn’t make any sense
February 25, 2023
4.5 stars
I love these women SO. MUCH.
Writing-wise I'm so impressed at the blending of modern and historical (something a lot of playwrights think they can do and not many actually can...) The characterization is phenomenal (Mary might be my fave) and the relationships are so complex and interesting.
The only things I didn't love are the change Hennig made re: Kate getting back in Henry's good graces, and the fact that in the info at the back of the play she describes Queen Elizabeth as "moderate" and "tolerant" !!! I mean I guess in some ways she was, relatively speaking? particularly closer to the beginning of her reign. But in general she wasn't super forgiving of anyone who wasn't Anglican, and it's kind of annoying that Mary is "Bloody Mary" [though again, I'm not excusing the horrible things she did either] whereas we don't call her sister "Bloody Elizabeth".
Still, a fantastic play, and I'm so glad to have finally read something by Kate Hennig.
CW: Grief, misogyny, references to: execution, death in childbirth
I love these women SO. MUCH.
Writing-wise I'm so impressed at the blending of modern and historical (something a lot of playwrights think they can do and not many actually can...) The characterization is phenomenal (Mary might be my fave) and the relationships are so complex and interesting.
The only things I didn't love are the change Hennig made re: Kate getting back in Henry's good graces, and the fact that in the info at the back of the play she describes Queen Elizabeth as "moderate" and "tolerant" !!! I mean I guess in some ways she was, relatively speaking? particularly closer to the beginning of her reign. But in general she wasn't super forgiving of anyone who wasn't Anglican, and it's kind of annoying that Mary is "Bloody Mary" [though again, I'm not excusing the horrible things she did either] whereas we don't call her sister "Bloody Elizabeth".
Still, a fantastic play, and I'm so glad to have finally read something by Kate Hennig.
CW: Grief, misogyny, references to: execution, death in childbirth
December 1, 2023
One of the great tragedies of my life is that I didn’t get to see this staged in Stratford in 2015, especially knowing how amazing the next two in the series were live. But wow, this read really well on the page.
September 13, 2017
Had to read this in preparation for the second part of the trilogy I'll see at Stratford this week. Great history.
November 23, 2017
Read this for drama class... twas fun
October 18, 2019
The premise intrigued me! It was interesting to see how feminism could be incorporated with what we know of Henry the eighth and Catherine Parr.
December 16, 2019
A great play. Mightn't have had the same impact if I hadn't seen another of her plays recently, so that I had a feel for the style and what the staging might be like. Katherine Parr was pretty cool.
October 25, 2022
te quiero mucho katherine parr
July 23, 2025
i strongly dislike henry.
March 4, 2017
I was assigned this play to read as a part of my Drama class.
February 21, 2017
I loved this! It's all very relevant to me right now since I'm taking a Shakespeare Histories course so I know all this history - but I loved seeing Henry and Kate grow together and their little quirks and then the inevitable fall of their relationship - he almost has her killed, for christs sake. The figure of the king versus that of the husband and father - which one wins out? And that recurring phrase - you can't just turn the system on its head. Well why the fuck not, as Kate will question. Who made the fucking rules?
Such a great feminist play. Another thing I enjoyed was seeing the 'feminine' traits come out in Henry, especially in the embroidery, and then the 'masculine' traits in Kate.
I want to see this performed. It would be epic.
And Henry's line: Patriarchy is part of nature.
NO. It has been naturalized. It's about time we de-fucking-stabilize that.
Such a great feminist play. Another thing I enjoyed was seeing the 'feminine' traits come out in Henry, especially in the embroidery, and then the 'masculine' traits in Kate.
I want to see this performed. It would be epic.
And Henry's line: Patriarchy is part of nature.
NO. It has been naturalized. It's about time we de-fucking-stabilize that.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 23, 2015
Kate and Henry go mano a mano (or head to head) in this look at the trials and tribulations of each of these historic characters: Katherine Parrs and Henry VIII. It’s historical fiction, of course, but it’s chock full of facts, and it helps understand the ethos of the day, even though it’s replete with verbal anachronisms and street language familiar to us but unlikely to have been used in Tudor England.
The play explores the plight of women in the day. Kate wields her clever wit and impressive learning to get her way and win back her life, when Henry threatens to end it, as he did four of his previous five wives. (Kate’s predecessor, Jane Seymour, died in childbirth.) Thom Seymour, Jane’s brother, is Kate’s beau. They would have married soon after Kate was widowed, but Henry stepped in. What Henry wants, Henry gets. But Kate succeeds in persuading the king reinstate his daughters as heirs to the throne. She becomes a doting mother to them, though Henry continues to think of two of his three daughters, Bess and Elizabeth, as “bastards.” Mary, the legitimate child, has little patience for her new stepmother, though ultimately they establish a working relationship.
Kate does not love Henry, but the die is cast. She does care for him. She nurses his ulcerous leg, which he alternately appreciates and loathes. She must be a witch for being such a healer. She must be a traitor for helping him in other ways. Her wiles are a good match for his fears, and she survives him.
The play is written by a fine actor, Kate Hennig, who has performed on the Stratford Festival stages (Canada) and with the RSC. She’s good.
The play explores the plight of women in the day. Kate wields her clever wit and impressive learning to get her way and win back her life, when Henry threatens to end it, as he did four of his previous five wives. (Kate’s predecessor, Jane Seymour, died in childbirth.) Thom Seymour, Jane’s brother, is Kate’s beau. They would have married soon after Kate was widowed, but Henry stepped in. What Henry wants, Henry gets. But Kate succeeds in persuading the king reinstate his daughters as heirs to the throne. She becomes a doting mother to them, though Henry continues to think of two of his three daughters, Bess and Elizabeth, as “bastards.” Mary, the legitimate child, has little patience for her new stepmother, though ultimately they establish a working relationship.
Kate does not love Henry, but the die is cast. She does care for him. She nurses his ulcerous leg, which he alternately appreciates and loathes. She must be a witch for being such a healer. She must be a traitor for helping him in other ways. Her wiles are a good match for his fears, and she survives him.
The play is written by a fine actor, Kate Hennig, who has performed on the Stratford Festival stages (Canada) and with the RSC. She’s good.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews