5-hour "Wars of the Roses"?
Patty Winter
information about the 5 (or 5.5?) hour synopsis of the Henry and
Richard plays that was shown in snippets in last night's season
finale. Maybe it was made up for TV, but it sure looked real.
The closest anyone has found is a 14-hour RSC production that's
basically all the full plays. Also, this version had some
musical segments, which presumably the RSC version didn't. In
fact, the last scene looked like some rousing segment from Les
Miz, based on clips I've seen of that show on TV.
Anyway....is there in fact a production called "The Wars of
the Roses" that has the aforementioned shortened versions
of Shakespeare's plays? If so, where is it playing/has it
played?
Patty
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter wrote:
> So far no one in the "West Wing" newsgroup has been able to find
> information about the 5 (or 5.5?) hour synopsis of the Henry and
> Richard plays that was shown in snippets in last night's season
> finale. Maybe it was made up for TV, but it sure looked real.
It was made for TV, I'm sure. The song of course was fake.
I wrote out some of the lyrics, they are nothing like Shakespeare.
"Victorious in War, Glorious in Peace." Ecch.
I was shocked that West Wing muffed its way through this.
Of course Royal Shakespeare Company performed the first
"War of the Roses" production in 1963, and it is not like
West Wingers to be unaware. Then they made a big deal in
at least two episodes that this was *different* and there
would be song and music! Well, Shakespeare already has
song and music! And the blah-blah music they added was
so poorly rigged. It would not be acceptable, let alone
praised.
My complaint is that West Wing usually helps educate us
on certain issues (pennies, North Dakota, legislative loop-
holes) but this time they looked like they were drowning
in subject matter they couldn't grasp.
I, of course, was electrified by their staging for the brief
moment they showed it, but wasn't that H IV, part 1? And
does not the Henriad begin in Richard II? Anyway, 5.5 hours
is only 3 plays tops (I didn't hear them say a time span).
My biggest complaint in how often and thoroughly they
all totally ignored the Shakespeare plays and just left the theatre
to talk, smoke, whatever. What is the purpose?
> The closest anyone has found is a 14-hour RSC production that's
> basically all the full plays. Also, this version had some
> musical segments, which presumably the RSC version didn't. In
> fact, the last scene looked like some rousing segment from Les
> Miz, based on clips I've seen of that show on TV.
I love West Wing (real glad Mark Harmon died last night, he had
no business in the cast, and my jury is still out on Lily Tomlin) so
I was surprised they didn't add anything, show some of their
Shakespeare smarts. It was as though they were all unfamiliar.
> Anyway....is there in fact a production called "The Wars of
> the Roses" that has the aforementioned shortened versions
> of Shakespeare's plays? If so, where is it playing/has it
> played?
It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
> Patty
Maybe the credits mentioned the troupe shown, if indeed it was one.
Greg Reynolds
Greg Reynolds
(This is 1963 RSC production.)
Richard Nathan
What was REALLY silly was that they said it a prior episode it
included material from "HENRY VIII." Why any play about the War of
the Roses would inlcude material from "HENRY VIII" is beyond me.
pat...@wintertime.com (Patty Winter) wrote in message news:<acjld3$t7$1...@newbolt.sonic.net>...
Tad Davis
Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
> I, of course, was electrified by their staging for the brief
> moment they showed it, but wasn't that H IV, part 1? And
> does not the Henriad begin in Richard II? Anyway, 5.5 hours
> is only 3 plays tops (I didn't hear them say a time span).
What I understood them to be attending was a conflation of the three
parts of "Henry VI." The two scenes I actually heard dialogue from were
1 Henry VI 1.1 and 3 Henry VI 1.4. (As I remarked to my family: this may
be our only chance to hear those lines spoken on a major television
network in our lifetimes.) The snippet from 1 Henry VI includes the
first lines of the trilogy: "Hung be the heavens with black." In the
snippet from 3 Henry VI, York starts his wonderful speech: "She-wolf of
France but worse than wolves of France...."
And I agree; the song was terrible.
> I love West Wing (real glad Mark Harmon died last night, he had
> no business in the cast, and my jury is still out on Lily Tomlin)
....break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue. Whassamadda, you don't
want CJ to have any fun in her life?
Tad Davis
--
Tad Davis
dav...@voicenet.com
Patty Winter
In article <3ced91f8$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
>
>
>It was made for TV, I'm sure.
It's beginning to look that way, since no one yet (either here or
on the WW group) has posted information about an actual production
matching its description.
>The song of course was fake.
Actually, it wasn't. Someone on the West Wing group identified
it as being from "Nicholas Nickleby."
> Anyway, 5.5 hours
>is only 3 plays tops (I didn't hear them say a time span).
Jed Bartlet has been explaining to people over the past few weeks
that the show used heavily abridged versions of all the relevant plays.
>My biggest complaint in how often and thoroughly they
>all totally ignored the Shakespeare plays and just left the theatre
>to talk, smoke, whatever. What is the purpose?
Aaron Sorkin didn't want to use up his whole season finale with
Shakespeare plays? ;-)
>I love West Wing (real glad Mark Harmon died last night
Boo! Hiss! How can you be so heartless toward CJ, even if you
didn't like Simon? I was furious about that!
>It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
Except as I mentioned, everything I've read about that one said
it was a 14-hour production, not 5-1/2. And no mention of music.
So this either really is a different production, or as the evidence
seems to be indicating, a fictitious production.
Patty
Jo Lonergan
wrote:
And the recorded version is in black and white, IIRC.
>And no mention of music.
>So this either really is a different production, or as the evidence
>seems to be indicating, a fictitious production.
>
Did the cast have English accents? There was a well-received
production by the English Stage Company (1990), and it sounds as
though it could have been that. (I haven't seen the WW episode). This
runs at about 5.5 hrs for the Henry VI plays alone, but I'm presuming
that the timing was mentioned by the WW cast, and isn't necessarily
accurate.
Wasn't there a credit, either for the actors or for a video recording?
--
Jo
John W. Kennedy
> > Anyway....is there in fact a production called "The Wars of
> > the Roses" that has the aforementioned shortened versions
> > of Shakespeare's plays? If so, where is it playing/has it
> > played?
>
> It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
But the title has often been used for productions of H6-R3, not just for
that particular heavily edited (and considerably farced) version.
--
John W. Kennedy
Read the remains of Shakespeare's lost play, now annotated!
http://pws.prserv.net/jwkennedy/Double%20Falshood.html
Greg Reynolds
"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
> Greg Reynolds wrote:
> > > Anyway....is there in fact a production called "The Wars of
> > > the Roses" that has the aforementioned shortened versions
> > > of Shakespeare's plays? If so, where is it playing/has it
> > > played?
> >
> > It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
>
> But the title has often been used for productions of H6-R3, not just for
> that particular heavily edited (and considerably farced) version.
The RSC Michigan Residency appeared in
Ann Arbor, MI a year ago March in full length
H6,1,2,3 and R3, and I believe Ann Carrigan
and Janet O'Keefe attended all four plays. Here
is RSC/MR's old page, where they mention Wars
of the Roses in the promotional text but let the
plays' own names speak for themselves. How
we ever let Ann and Janet slip away I will
always wonder. I'm just tell myself they're in
a better place.
Greg Reynolds
Greg Reynolds
http://www.umich.edu/pres/shakespeare/plays.html
+++
"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
> Greg Reynolds wrote:
> > > Anyway....is there in fact a production called "The Wars of
> > > the Roses" that has the aforementioned shortened versions
> > > of Shakespeare's plays? If so, where is it playing/has it
> > > played?
> >
> > It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
>
> But the title has often been used for productions of H6-R3, not just for
> that particular heavily edited (and considerably farced) version.
The RSC Michigan Residency appeared in
Patty Winter
I think so, but they were such short snippets that I don't really
remember. I'll check my tape.
>Wasn't there a credit, either for the actors or for a video recording?
Unfortunately, there were tons of people listed in the opening
credits. I guess I could filter out the ones I know to be in
other scenes of the show and post the others to see whether they
ring any bells with folks here.
We're still all trying to figure out where Armin Shimerman was
in the episode, and that's a name I do recognize!
Patty
Patty Winter
Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>In article <700seusmnt3sleafm...@4ax.com>,
>Jo Lonergan <jolon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>Did the cast have English accents?
>
>I think so, but they were such short snippets that I don't really
>remember. I'll check my tape.
Okay, I just rewatched the show. Some of them sounded English,
some were hard to tell. There were only two short snippets. (As
Tad mentioned, they were from 1 Henry VI 1.1 and 3 Henry VI 1.4.)
>>Wasn't there a credit, either for the actors or for a video recording?
>
>Unfortunately, there were tons of people listed in the opening
>credits. I guess I could filter out the ones I know to be in
>other scenes of the show and post the others to see whether they
>ring any bells with folks here.
Okay, here are the ones I don't know. Any Shakespeareans among them?
Kurt Fuller
Michael O'Neill
Andrew McFarlane
William Thomas, Jr.
Fred Sanders
Glenn Morshower
Thomas Kopache
Wren T. Brown
Ken Thorley
Basil Hoffman
What's interesting about that list is that it's all men, yet
we clearly hear some lines from Queen Margaret during the
excerpt from 3H6.
BTW, the roses theme (which I assume tied into political
assassinations) was underscored by a red-and-white rose
arrangement in the president's study and containers of red
and white roses in the grocery store, which fell on the
floor next to the person who was shot.
Patty
Patty Winter
Janice Miller <jbmi...@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>We never did find out which character from the Henry plays President
>Bartlett is most supposed to be like, though, I guess.
It looked like Sorkin did something weird with Barlet's profile behind
the curtain at the very end, but I couldn't figure out what it was
supposed to mean...
>I've never been a big Mark Harmon fan (and there was a tiny bit
>stolen/borrowed, there, from that Clint Eastwood, John Malkovich movie),
>but it was interesting to find out that the Secret Service is part of the
>Treasury Department.
Umm, that Clint Eastwood/John Malkovich movie ("In the Line of Fire")
opens with Eastwood and his partner busting some counterfeiters. It's
one of the Secret Service's primary responsibilities.
Patty
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter wrote:
> Spoilers for 5/22 West Wing ahead....
>
> In article <3ced91f8$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
> Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >It was made for TV, I'm sure.
>
> It's beginning to look that way, since no one yet (either here or
> on the WW group) has posted information about an actual production
> matching its description.
It would just be too irresistible for a tv production company
to accomplish it themselves, without a theatre company--after
all, we're only speaking of several seconds of window dressing.
Since the WW cast was so disinterested, they needn't insult
an actual drama company.
> >The song of course was fake.
>
> Actually, it wasn't.
Yes it was.
> Someone on the West Wing group identified
> it as being from "Nicholas Nickleby."
Then have that person isolate the lyrics.
I had jotted down these phrases from the "song:"
-wealth of nations
-sincerity
-victorious in war, glorious in peace
Now, here's a Nickleby search tool. Have at it.
http://www.online-literature.com/dickens/nickleby/
This song is a fake. It sounds Reichstagish to me.
> > Anyway, 5.5 hours
> >is only 3 plays tops (I didn't hear them say a time span).
>
> Jed Bartlet has been explaining to people over the past few weeks
> that the show used heavily abridged versions of all the relevant plays.
Why didn't Jed sit and enjoy it?
> >My biggest complaint in how often and thoroughly they
> >all totally ignored the Shakespeare plays and just left the theatre
> >to talk, smoke, whatever. What is the purpose?
>
> Aaron Sorkin didn't want to use up his whole season finale with
> Shakespeare plays? ;-)
>
> >I love West Wing (real glad Mark Harmon died last night
>
> Boo! Hiss! How can you be so heartless toward CJ, even if you
> didn't like Simon? I was furious about that!
I liked Harmon as mass murderer Ted Bundy about 12 years ago.
Sorry, never trusted the guy. His character was pitiful--blabbing
about his secret operation, falling in love--he was a danger to CJ.
And he really blew it asking for candy instead of SEEING IF THE
ROBBER MIGHT HAVE AN ACCOMPLICE! BAD COP, BAD!
Patty, of course I want CJ to find happiness. A smart
attractive woman like CJ needs more than an inept
opportunist such as Harmon portrayed. Maybe CJ
will do The Jackal again. Remember that?
> >It started in 1963 by RSC, I think, and was named that.
>
> Except as I mentioned, everything I've read about that one said
> it was a 14-hour production, not 5-1/2. And no mention of music.
> So this either really is a different production, or as the evidence
> seems to be indicating, a fictitious production.
It is as real as the Bartlett administration.
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter
Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
>
>Patty Winter wrote:
>
>> In article <3ced91f8$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
>> Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
>>
>> >The song of course was fake.
>>
>> Actually, it wasn't.
>
>Yes it was.
>
>> Someone on the West Wing group identified
>> it as being from "Nicholas Nickleby."
>
>Then have that person isolate the lyrics.
Well, you could have looked it up in the West Wing newsgroup if
it meant that much to you, and you would have discovered that she
had posted all the lyrics. But here it is for you:
------------------------------------
From: Dana Carpender <dcar...@kiva.net>
Newsgroups: alt.tv.the-west-wing
Subject: Re: Okay, what was the *other* song?
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 16:46:45 -0500
Don't know the name or composer, but it was the finale of the first half
of the 8 hour stage production of Nicholas Nickleby, back in about, oh,
'81 -- '82.
England arise, join in the chorus!
This is a new-made song you should be singing!
See in the sky, flutt'ring before us
What the great bird of peace is bringing!
Oh --
Look upon our smiling land
Where the wealth of nations stand
Where prosperity and industry walk ever hand in hand
Every larder filled with grain
Every meadow blessed with rain
Green and fertile is (I never quite got this part...)
Everyone does all he can
To further God's almighty plan
The beneficence of heaven aid the skillfulness of man
Where so many blessings crowd,
'Tis our duty to be proud
Up and answer, English yeoman!
Sing it joyously aloud:
Ever more upon our country
God will pour his rich increase
And victorious in war,
Shall be made glorious in peace.
Ever more upon our country
God will pour his rich increase
And victorious in war
Shall be made glorious in peace.
Can you tell I've watched all 8 hours of Nicholas Nickleby about a dozen
times through? I was singing along last night. I probably have a word
or two wrong, but I'm damned close.
-----------------------------------------------
BTW, according to the closed captioning on the show, the song
is called "The Patriotic Song."
Patty
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter wrote:
> In article <3cefe4d1$0$1413$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
> Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
> >
> >Patty Winter wrote:
> >
> >> In article <3ced91f8$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
> >> Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The song of course was fake.
> >>
> >> Actually, it wasn't.
> >
> >Yes it was.
> >
> >> Someone on the West Wing group identified
> >> it as being from "Nicholas Nickleby."
> >
> >Then have that person isolate the lyrics.
>
> Well, you could have looked it up in the West Wing newsgroup if
> it meant that much to you, and you would have discovered that she
> had posted all the lyrics.
Patty, you are my link to them--I won't be looking elsewhere.
Where in the Dickens does this monstrosity appear?
Okay. Here is a SECOND Nickleby search tool:
http://www.bibliomania.com/0/0/19/44/frameset.html .
NOW have Ms. Carpender isolate these lyrics or
let's just allow that they are fake.
Whoever wrote them and for whatever purpose:
They have no business in Wars of the Roses.
(Whose POV do they reflect, for instance?)
> Can you tell I've watched all 8 hours of Nicholas Nickleby
> about a dozen times through? I was singing along last night.
> probably have a word or two wrong, but I'm damned close.
I'll await a rerun. I thought I heard "sincerity" but
the only thing close here is "prosperity."
It is way too 20th century for me.
> BTW, according to the closed captioning on the show, the song
> is called "The Patriotic Song."
That does it!
Shakespeare never touched the concept of patriotism.
(I believe that is a soft "a" in the British pronunciation?)
West Wing is faking it.
It is not Shakespeare, it is not Dickens AND NOW I
UNDERSTAND WHY TOBY, JED, ET AL WALKED OUT!
I think NN played Chicago in a 2-day 12-hour
production in '82 - '83. I guess if you load up
Dickens with enough FAKE SONGs, you can
run all weekend.
Thanks, Patty
Greg Reynolds
"Every larder filled with grain"
(but don't get caught!)
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter wrote:
> Don't know the name or composer, but it was the finale of the first half
> of the 8 hour stage production of Nicholas Nickleby, back in about, oh,
> '81 -- '82.
>
> England arise, join in the chorus!
(snipped lyrics, delightful as they may be)
Patty, I found this essay by Alix Coleman, August 2,
1981, declaring the song to be entitled "England Awake"
but I cannot find any attribution.
http://www.alecks29.org/nick10.html
> Andrew Snell filmed one of the playís big ensemble numbers,
> television. Belting off the packed stage come song, mime, recitation
> and movement. Other delights are Fanny Squeersí awful tea party
> and the companyís rendering of England Awake, a patriotic song.
> then, Nickleby & Co. stands back to examine the RSCís
> achievement. Trevor Nunn talks eloquently, and old film clips point
> up the differences between his and the more usual renderings of
> Dickensí novels.
That last line is telling! The differences between his
renderings and more usual renderings of Dickens. My, my.
Well, that was fun.
Let's start working on Nessie next!
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter
Er, the song isn't in the original Dickens, it's in that
lengthy production of NN that was all the rage a decade
or so ago.
>Okay. Here is a SECOND Nickleby search tool:
>http://www.bibliomania.com/0/0/19/44/frameset.html .
>NOW have Ms. Carpender isolate these lyrics or
>let's just allow that they are fake.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't
seen that production. She has. Are you saying that
"Les Miz" is fake because the songs weren't in
Hugo's original book?
If you have any further problems with the stage
production of NN, please take them up with the
creators of the show.
Patty
Greg Reynolds
Patty Winter wrote:
> In article <3ceffcc1$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net>,
> Greg Reynolds <eve...@core.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Where in the Dickens does this monstrosity appear?
>
> Er, the song isn't in the original Dickens, it's in that
> lengthy production of NN that was all the rage a decade
> or so ago.
>
> >Okay. Here is a SECOND Nickleby search tool:
> >http://www.bibliomania.com/0/0/19/44/frameset.html .
> >NOW have Ms. Carpender isolate these lyrics or
> >let's just allow that they are fake.
>
> I have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't
> seen that production. She has. Are you saying that
> "Les Miz" is fake because the songs weren't in
> Hugo's original book?
I'm saying that if Bartlett is all enthralled about this
RSC production of Shakespeare because it will have
songs from Les Miz OR Nicholas Nickleby, it makes
no sense whatsoever. And West Wing typically makes
sense.
> If you have any further problems with the stage
> production of NN, please take them up with the
> creators of the show.
There's nothing wrong with voicing them right here.
I feel that WW confused RSC productions, and that
NN "songs" don't belong in Shakespeare. And this
all makes me think that the company shown was
indeed the RSC, who in history gave us both the
Wars of the Roses and *the patriotic song.* Otherwise,
there is no connection to this dreadful song. And I
don't care for Jed promoting such a meaningless
feature of the plays when there is so much else that
a responsible, knowledgeable man could promote.
Thanks, Patty.
Greg Reynolds
John W. Kennedy
> What's interesting about that list is that it's all men, yet
> we clearly hear some lines from Queen Margaret during the
> excerpt from 3H6.
Normally (except in animation) a voice only heard is uncredited.
John W. Kennedy
In the early US, the idea of any kind of Federal police force (or any
police force at all) was thought suspect, smacking of tsarist tyranny.
Since the Treasury Department had an obvious need that only a complete
idiot could deny, the Treasury ended up running almost everything --
even intelligence -- until organized crime in the 1920's and the death
of isolationism in the 1940's made it clear that the Justice Department
and State Department needed divisions of their own. The Executive
Protection Service is a fossil from the earlier era, as is the very name
"Secret Service".