What do you think?
Rate this book
Curtmantle
Excerpt from Curtmantle
Between these two dates there is a seething cauldron Of events, con?icts, purposes, errors, brilliance, human endurance, and human suffering, which could provide, in those thirty-hye years, all that we need for a lifetime's study and contemplation of man kind. NO single play could contain more than a splash from the brew. What to use and what to lose out of this feverish concentra tion of life? How far should fidelity to historical events be sacrificed to suit the theatre? If a playwright is rash enough to treat real events at all, he has to accept a double responsibility: to drag out Of the sea Of detail a story simple enough to be understood by people who knew nothing about it before; and to do so without distorting the material he has chosen to use. Otherwise let him invent his characters, let him 'go to Ruritania for his history.
Between these two dates there is a seething cauldron Of events, con?icts, purposes, errors, brilliance, human endurance, and human suffering, which could provide, in those thirty-hye years, all that we need for a lifetime's study and contemplation of man kind. NO single play could contain more than a splash from the brew. What to use and what to lose out of this feverish concentra tion of life? How far should fidelity to historical events be sacrificed to suit the theatre? If a playwright is rash enough to treat real events at all, he has to accept a double responsibility: to drag out Of the sea Of detail a story simple enough to be understood by people who knew nothing about it before; and to do so without distorting the material he has chosen to use. Otherwise let him invent his characters, let him 'go to Ruritania for his history.
- GenresHistorical FictionPlays
99 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1961
13 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 - 6 of 6 reviews
July 9, 2022
"Hour after hour, for thirty years,
You have shouldered up a world towards your mind,
Seen it thrown down more than once
As though for ever, and righted it, and lifted it,
Borne it even higher. It would have broken
Twelve men's hearts, each of your own strength,
To have hewn their way through these years as you have.
The severe day begs for a little night to rest in.
Only a bruised, not a conquered King" (93).
I wanted to like this play more than I did. It engages with some interesting conflicts - between Henry and Eleanor, Henry and Becket, and Henry and his children - but I feel none of them were developed much as they might have been. I'm not sure about the structure - maybe with staging etc. the passage of time could be indicated clearly but sometimes it wasn't fully clear from the dialogue. Fry states that Marshal is the POV character in this play ("The stage is William Marshal's mind") but I'm not sure that he lives up to this pivotal role. His relationship to Henry is just that of subordinate to a king - the play, to me, doesn't communicate why I should care about Marshal's opinion of events.
What I appreciated was gaining a better understanding of Henry's insistence on one law for clergy and everyone else alike. I now feel that Anouilh's Becket, and the 1964 film, skew that conflict much in Becket's favour, and portray Henry as more of a villain in this conflict than he might have been (with the note that both Fry and Anouilh take considerable liberties with history so maybe it's time to reread the biography of Becket now).
You have shouldered up a world towards your mind,
Seen it thrown down more than once
As though for ever, and righted it, and lifted it,
Borne it even higher. It would have broken
Twelve men's hearts, each of your own strength,
To have hewn their way through these years as you have.
The severe day begs for a little night to rest in.
Only a bruised, not a conquered King" (93).
I wanted to like this play more than I did. It engages with some interesting conflicts - between Henry and Eleanor, Henry and Becket, and Henry and his children - but I feel none of them were developed much as they might have been. I'm not sure about the structure - maybe with staging etc. the passage of time could be indicated clearly but sometimes it wasn't fully clear from the dialogue. Fry states that Marshal is the POV character in this play ("The stage is William Marshal's mind") but I'm not sure that he lives up to this pivotal role. His relationship to Henry is just that of subordinate to a king - the play, to me, doesn't communicate why I should care about Marshal's opinion of events.
What I appreciated was gaining a better understanding of Henry's insistence on one law for clergy and everyone else alike. I now feel that Anouilh's Becket, and the 1964 film, skew that conflict much in Becket's favour, and portray Henry as more of a villain in this conflict than he might have been (with the note that both Fry and Anouilh take considerable liberties with history so maybe it's time to reread the biography of Becket now).
November 3, 2015
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06mw116Description: Can Henry II rule his kingdom wisely and keep faith with his friends like Thomas Becket?
King Henry II was simple and royal, (his nickname of "Curtmantle" derived from the plain short cloak he wore) direct and paradoxical, compassionate and hard, a man of intellect, a man of action, God-fearing, superstitious, blasphemous, far-seeing, short-sighted, affectionate, lustful, patient, volcanic, humble and over-riding.
It's difficult to think of any facet of man which at some time he didn't demonstrate, except chastity and sloth.
Starring Brian Cox as Henry II, Bernard Hepton as Becket, Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Eleanor
and Norman Rodway as William Marshal
November 2, 2015
From BBC radio 4 Extra:
Can Henry II rule his kingdom wisely and keep faith with his friends like Thomas Becket?
King Henry II was simple and royal, (his nickname of "Curtmantle" derived from the plain short cloak he wore) direct and paradoxical, compassionate and hard, a man of intellect, a man of action, God-fearing, superstitious, blasphemous, far-seeing, short-sighted, affectionate, lustful, patient, volcanic, humble and over-riding.
It's difficult to think of any facet of man which at some time he didn't demonstrate, except chastity and sloth.
Starring Brian Cox as Henry II, Bernard Hepton as Becket, Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Eleanor
and Norman Rodway as William Marshal
Written by Christopher Fry
Producer: Jane Morgan
First broadcast on BBC Radio 4 in 1982.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06mw116
Can Henry II rule his kingdom wisely and keep faith with his friends like Thomas Becket?
King Henry II was simple and royal, (his nickname of "Curtmantle" derived from the plain short cloak he wore) direct and paradoxical, compassionate and hard, a man of intellect, a man of action, God-fearing, superstitious, blasphemous, far-seeing, short-sighted, affectionate, lustful, patient, volcanic, humble and over-riding.
It's difficult to think of any facet of man which at some time he didn't demonstrate, except chastity and sloth.
Starring Brian Cox as Henry II, Bernard Hepton as Becket, Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Eleanor
and Norman Rodway as William Marshal
Written by Christopher Fry
Producer: Jane Morgan
First broadcast on BBC Radio 4 in 1982.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06mw116
September 3, 2011
Fry's play is a little long winded but I enjoy it none-the-less, partly because of Fry's style, and also because the subject matter- Henry II, Becket, Eleanor of Aquitaine- is subject matter I've always been partial to. Fry does an extraordinary job of weaving together a multitude of stories and historical figures- almost as if he was consciously trying to create a single volume version of BECKET, LION IN WINTER, KING JOHN and every other play that's been written about these titanic beings. Of course, here-in may lay the fallacy because at moments the play drags and at other times becomes confusing- but when it is on, it is on, and the third act and final scenes, in particular, are dramatically striking. A careful cutting could result in a very stage-worthy script.
January 22, 2016
Yet another play about Becket. How many are there? This one, thankfully, focuses more on Henry II’s full life and not just his relationship with the Archbishop.
There’s not really a lot of action. The play is mostly debate, posturing, opining, and reflecting.
I enjoy Fry’s verse – it is musical and clear, but it has some surprises. But its lack of action made the play a rather dull read. Perhaps it’s better on the stage, but I couldn’t get too excited about hairsplitting under discussion. I couldn’t relate it to any of my interests.
Not quite my thing.
There’s not really a lot of action. The play is mostly debate, posturing, opining, and reflecting.
I enjoy Fry’s verse – it is musical and clear, but it has some surprises. But its lack of action made the play a rather dull read. Perhaps it’s better on the stage, but I couldn’t get too excited about hairsplitting under discussion. I couldn’t relate it to any of my interests.
Not quite my thing.
April 16, 2009
It sucks to be the king. And then it sucks more. And then you die.
I had trouble following the time changes in this play as they run seamlessly and I am not particularly familiar with the history of the reign of Henry II. This was a play that seemed more interested in telling the series of events than in creating a narrative arch of what happened.
I had trouble following the time changes in this play as they run seamlessly and I am not particularly familiar with the history of the reign of Henry II. This was a play that seemed more interested in telling the series of events than in creating a narrative arch of what happened.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews