Comments on: ‘The Tudors’ recap: Anne’s nightmare

By: Abby

Abby — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:43:36 +0000

To answer a few different questions above:
15th century European society was (rather obviously) androcentric. Henry was afforded many more liberties than any of his wives, based purely on gender and societal views of gender roles and propriety. Furthermore, with Anne especially, since she was not of noble birth, Henry literally held all of the cards. Her station was completely of his creation… and he really could tear her down just as quickly as he built her up. Katherine was a royal in her own right, which is largely why Henry could not pull the same shenanigans with her as he did with Anne.
As for the Cranmer question- the idea of clerical celibacy was not fully rooted until the end of the Renaissance (mid 1600′s or so). Up until then, many clergy (including the high-ups) had wives, mistresses, children, etc. Cranmer was a “nobody” in the Ecclesiastical world, it certainly wouldn’t have been unusual that he was married or had a devoted mistress. Even Wolsey did in the 1st season

By: Deborah Earle

Deborah Earle — Tue, 27 May 2008 04:12:44 +0000

I hope Natalie Dormer scores a triple crown with an Emmy, Golden Globe, and SAG Award. For me, Genevieve Bujold will always be the definitive Anne Boleyn. But Dormer gave a lengthier portrayal of her, and had to depict more facets of her life. One really empathized with her as she cried at her brother’s execution in last night’s episode.

By: slik

slik — Wed, 14 May 2008 18:57:15 +0000

I must admit, I think the writing is getting a little better in this show and the women steal the show in their straightforwardness. It was nice to know that “Ann” would actually be something in addition to sex object. “Henry” is so weak. The king’s portrayl is so weak, juvenile, and he hasn’t gotten any better. O’Toole steals the stage, that’s why he deserves a so-called “vanity credit.” Vanity indeed. All the principal cast members could learn a thing or two from him about acting and boat loads regarding the use of nuance. But then he doesn’t have sex with anyone, so why should he get mentioned at all? Right. It’s a pity that audiences settle for so little in the players these days. Just throw in enough graphic sex and a show is sure to be a hit, sad commentary on values of what constitutes artful presentation.

By: Mr. C. Nashawarmaty

Mr. C. Nashawarmaty — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:52:57 +0000

kim in kentucky, that’s certainly part of it, but I think the biggest issue is that no king wants to see another man’s bastard sitting on his dynasty’s throne.

By: Sara

Sara — Wed, 14 May 2008 06:59:35 +0000

I think Thomas Wyatt gave her an apple in the dream because in season I (and in history), Ann bragged to Thomas that she craved apples, which was a sure sign she was pregnant. I think it’s him sort-of throwing it back in her face, since she still has not produced a male heir.

By: kim in kentucky

kim in kentucky — Wed, 14 May 2008 03:09:33 +0000

its always been okay for the men – esp men in power – to have affairs – but the wives are always suppose to be virtious and faithful — cheat on the king? its treason! and remember, women have always been thought as property – the queen belonged to king and no others may touch her

By: anne

anne — Wed, 14 May 2008 01:04:18 +0000

just saw that my comment about a naked Charles made it into “21 Gratuitous TV Moments” but they accompanied the comment with a picture of Henry and Anne. Don’t they know that the show is all about the Cavill?

By: mom-of-2

mom-of-2 — Tue, 13 May 2008 22:32:23 +0000

Question…
Why was it okay for King Henry VIII to have so many affairs but not the Queen (even though we know it was a lie) and killed?

By: Cranmer's Wife

Cranmer's Wife — Tue, 13 May 2008 19:38:06 +0000

Back then it was illegal for the clergy to marry in England (he’d picked her up/wed her in Germany where the laws weren’t as strict).

By: ItsgoodtobetheKing

ItsgoodtobetheKing — Tue, 13 May 2008 19:25:58 +0000

I don’t get the whole thing w/Cranmer and his ‘Boxcar Bertha.’ Is there some reason why he smuggled her in? Is it perhaps b/c he’s not supposed to marry for religious reasons? Can anyone help explain this. THX