Henry the Sixth I Am, I Am
Monday, May 5th by scott malia
Among Henries, the Sixth never gets quite the same attention as his predecessors. In the canon of Shakespeare’s histories, the chronicles of Henry IV (two plays often combined as one) and Henry V are far more popular. This makes a new production of all three parts of Henry VI (along with its historical follow-up, Richard III) notable. A rapturous review of this new interpretation of the cycle notes the many values of the Henry VI plays as well as their recent stage history. As the author notes, the plays have evolved from a kind of Tudor pageant to a more complex historical opus in the past half century.
One of the main points that dogs the Henry VI plays is the questionable authorship of the first play in the trilogy. Written very early in Shakespeare’s career while young Will was in his early twenties, many have questioned exactly how much Shakespeare contributed to the initial installment. As the reviewer notes, some editions have published the plays under alternate titles derived from Quarto editions of the plays (rather than the standard Folio texts used). Some even choose to exclude the first part altogether on the basis of its iffy authorship.
Finally, some take umbrage at treating the history plays in any kind of grouping because they were not written in chronological order. I am inclined to take the more relaxed perspective adopted by the reviewer. The history plays are like a large family: wildly different, not always functional as a group, but stuck with each other for good or ill.
