The White Queen - General Discussion

[David T. Cole]

Discuss The White Queen Here!

[BizBuzz]

If you ask @SilverStormm really nice, she can be your personal guide on what to watch next @ethalfrida .  She was the one that got me interested in TWQ, and I binge watched it in a week.  I am in LOVE with Brit history.

 

My next series is Monarchy by David Starkey, again recommended by SS.

 

You could actually leapfrog Henry VII and Elizabeth and go straight to their son Henry VIII and watch The Tudors.

[ethalfrida]

(sniffing)... Okay.

@SilverStormm, please advise. How is Game of Thrones? Suitable replacement?

[Meredith Quill]

@ethalfrida I'm biased as I'm a HUGE Game of Thrones fan! However, GoT is fiction not fact (but watch it anyway, it rocks!). However, if you're after real historical drama, I definitely recommend the David Starkey Monarchy series, which is a docu-drama on all British monarchs from Saxon times. Or for pure drama, either, The Tudors which revolves around Henry VIII, as mentioned by @BizBuzz, or for a different time period; The Pillars of The Earth which is set in 12th century England.

[ethalfrida]

Thanks bunches, SilverStormm. Can't wait to jump into all of them! Fiction or non-fiction... either will work just fine. (headed out to get popcorn)

[Constantinople]

But if you ask @SilverStormm really nice, she can be your personal guide on what to watch next @ethalfrida .  She was the one that got me interested in TWQ, and I binge watched it in a week.  I am in LOVE with Brit history.

 

My next series is Monarchy by David Starkey, again recommended by SS.

 

You could actually leapfrog Henry VII and Elizabeth and go straight to their son Henry VIII and watch The Tudors.

Henry VII never gets any love. He's always a supporting player in someone else's story, never the lead. At least, I can't think of any movies or television shows where he was the lead. 

 

(sniffing)... Okay.

@SilverStormm, please advise. How is Game of Thrones? Suitable replacement?

The Black Adder, the first season of Blackadder, provides an alternative history of what happened to Richard III and how Henry Tudor became king, but even then Henry is a supporting player.

And it's a comedy.

[Constantinople]

 

And it didn't do your kids any favors either.

[BizBuzz]

^ok, that was pretty funny.

[blackwing]

I know it was said that Starz was going to produce "The White Princess", the story of Elizabeth of York who married Henry VII, without BBC.  Has there been any further news?  I have searched and can't find any more info.

[blackwing]

I'm watching for the first time.  Up to episode 6.  I know this is the story of Elizabeth Woodville, but this miniseries is apparently based on 3 of Phillippa Gregory's books, one of which is the Red Queen, told from the point of view of Margaret Beaufort.  As such, I would have expected a more sympathetic portrayal of Margaret Beaufort.  Thus far, I have almost no sympathy for her.  Is it because of the writing?  Even though 3 books are used in this series, it seems clear that the protagonist is Elizabeth Woodville.  

 

Or is it the acting?  I find the actress who plays Margaret Beaufort to be horrifically bad.  One, although not ugly, she's far less attractive than the actress who plays Woodville, and is almost what I would call "plain".  Two, she seems extremely bitter all the time and always seems ready to lash out at whoever is talking to her.  And three, the actress has this very distracting habit of not closing her mouth when she's not talking.  Gaping mouth is never a good look.

[ethalfrida]

 And three, the actress has this very distracting habit of not closing her mouth when she's not talking.  Gaping mouth is never a good look.

Agreed. A lot of actors do that and I believe I first noticed it in Dallas. It is so annoying.

[Meredith Quill]

I believe this was mostly based on The White Queen which is why it was told from Elizabeth Woodville's POV for the most part. In reality also, Margaret Beaufort was a bitter woman who saw her son's rise to power as a vehicle for herself; when her son Henry married Elizabeth of York (Edwards & Elizabeth W's eldest daughter), Margaret, now a Countess, was reluctant to accept a lower status than the dowager queen Elizabeth (Woodville) or even her daughter-in-law, the queen consort!

She wore robes of the same quality as the queen consort and walked only half a pace behind her. Despite this, Margaret could not do anything that Elizabeth forbade; Elizabeth outranked Margaret as a Queen to a Countess.

Another indicator of her overblown ego: Margaret had written her signature as M. Richmond for years, since the 1460s. In 1499, she changed her signature to Margaret R., no doubt to engender a belief of her royal authority (R in royal terms standing for regina – queen in Latin as customarily employed by female monarchs), blatantly emulating the usual Victoria or Elizabeth R, as used by female monarchs.

She also had a huge influence during the whole Perkin Warbeck debacle, which, to this day I believe he may have been who he claimed he was....we'll never know, but it was in her and Henry's interests to prove him false, otherwise, he was a threat to Henry's reign.

[blackwing]

Had no idea Margaret Beaufort was so crazy.  I am realising just how ignorant of this period of English history I really am.  I'm much more versed in the Tudor period.  I need to get a book.  Going to buy Alison Weir's "Wars of the Roses".  I find her a bit biased at times but overall generally reliable.

 

Loving this series.  Really hope Starz comes through with The White Princess.

[Peper81]

Blackwing, I'd like to recommend Alison Weir's book on Elizabeth of York. I enjoyed it more than her War of the Roses book simply because I felt I got to know more about the people. Another good one is Winter King by Thomas Penn about Henry VII. I read both of these books back to back and it really helped to give a balanced perspective. I will say that it really made me wish someone would make a series on Elizabeth of York.

Edited August 16, 2014 by Peper81

[blackwing]

Thanks, I'll check it out.  I've read some of her other Tudor books (Children, Henry VII, Life of Elizabeth) and enjoyed them.  Heard she was a bit biased in her Anne Boleyn book so haven't tried it yet.  I really want her to write a full book about Mary.  She touched on her in the Children book but not enough for my liking.

 

Finished the series.  On the whole, I really enjoyed it.  I do confess that I kind of lost interest after Edward died and Elizabeth was shoved aside.  The actor who played Richard irritated me, if his eyes bugged out anymore they'd be like Jim Carrey in the Mask.  

 

Regarding the Princes in the Tower, I found it interesting that Gregory plainly states that Richard didn't do it.  And it seemed like from her viewpoint, he wasn't lying.  He had real panic when he was searching the Tower and opening all the doors.  So Gregory seems to suggest the culprit was either Buckingham or Lady Margaret.  Anne wished them dead and pretty much commanded that one guy to do it, but he claims he did not.  I know the popular theory held by most seems to be that Richard ordered it.  But I suppose we will never ever truly know.

 

I did take issues with the Richard III / Princess Elizabeth affair.  History doesn't really confirm it one way or the other, and she has them having full blown sex.  Which is absolutely disgusting.  Her father was his brother.  

 

I am disappointed this show didn't get more nominations at the upcoming Emmys or any big wins at the Golden Globes.  Rebecca Ferguson and Janet McTeer got Globe nominations, and they got passed over for Emmy consideration.  Ferguson in particular was a revelation.  You could really see her transform from an innocent country girl, into a powerful Queen, and then a protective mother and dowager.  

 

One thing I really enjoyed is seeing how the characters aged.  Edward IV was really the picture of a youthful exuberant king.  As the series progressed, I'm not sure what they did, but he looked older.  Puffier in the face and with less sparkle in his eye.  It was especially noticeable in the episode right before the one in which he died.  Anne Neville was transformed from this teenage looking girl into a tired and defeated queen.  They added dark circles under her eyes and she just looked old at her end.

 

I haven't read any of Gregory's books, as I've always thought of them as "chick lit" with medieval costumes and background.  I'm curious if Margaret and Anne come across more sympathetically in their books than they do here.  Margaret in particular was a bit insane.  She holds herself out as this paragon of piety, and I found it laughable that she's constantly praying to God to send her a sign, and thinks that if God loves her that Edward and Elizabeth's two sons will meet a bad death.  She is actively praying for others' deaths.  Hated Anne Neville intensely and this is horrible, but I actually cheered when her son died and then when she died.  She was a hateful person.

 

This series was done very well.  Really really hoping Starz will continue it without BBC, but it doesn't seem like chances are good if there has been no news.

Edited August 16, 2014 by blackwing

[Meredith Quill]

For anyone who may be interested, this is a documentary series about England's early Queens called 'She Wolves' consisting of 3 episodes. All 3 are available to watch on youtube via the linked text.

[blackwing]

I was all set to buy Weir's Wars of the Roses but then I read some reviews and they say the book ends with the Battle of Tewksbury.  Which kind of stinks.  I wanted to read more about Edward IV and Richard III.  I know her "Princes in the Tower" book sort of touches on them, but it seems more focused on the murder mystery.  Any good recommendations for a book which covers this time period that's as easy and fun to read in the same "readable history" manner as Weir?

[Meredith Quill]

I cannot recommend any sorry, I know the history but that's all. If you find any, let us know how you get on:)

[Peper81]

Blackwing, the Elizabeth of York book does touch on that time period because that was what she lived through but it is filtered through the eyes of how that time period effected Elizabeth. Weir does take a lot of time to talk about Richard III in this book because of the profound affect it had on Elizabeth.

I can't speak about this book: Elizabeth: England's Slandered Queen by Arlene Okerlund but it's on my wish list. It's about Elizabeth Woodville and I think it's possible that it might interest you too if your looking into that time period. Clearly, my focus is mostly on the Queens and/or women as opposed to the Kings/men so my recommendations usually have that as the focus.

If you find anything else, please let me know. I do love this time period and I love the readable history books.

[turbogirlnyc]

Had no idea Margaret Beaufort was so crazy.  I am realising just how ignorant of this period of English history I really am.  I'm much more versed in the Tudor period.  I need to get a book.  Going to buy Alison Weir's "Wars of the Roses".  I find her a bit biased at times but overall generally reliable.

 

Loving this series.  Really hope Starz comes through with The White Princess.

 

I've read a lot of Alison Weir and yes, she is extremely (in my opinion) bias in every one of her books. Anne Boleyn can do no wrong, nor can Elizabeth I, etc.  She is very bias against the Woodvilles (especially Elizabeth). I became interested in this period because of The White Queen. I've read books more recent books about the Woodvilles and Elizabeth because they've been cast as the most "infamous family in England" by most historians. Anyway, Alison Weirs' War of the Roses is bias towards Margeret and against Elizabeth. One surprising thing about Alison Weir is that she believes Richard III guilty of the murder of the Princes in the Tower (Elizabeth Woodvilles & Edward VI's sons). I think that particular book is "The Princes in the Tower" though.

Edited August 21, 2014 by turbogirlnyc

[blackwing]

Thanks again for the book recommendations, I will have to check some of them out when I have time.

 

Missing this show a lot, I thought it was very well done for a historical drama.  I shouldn't have raced through the disks so quickly!  Probably one my favourites in recent years.  Much better than the Borgias and the Tudors.

 

Currently watching the re-airing of Turn: Washington's Spies on AMC.  Wow, talk about confusing.  Way too many characters.  Four episodes in and I don't know some of the characters names, can't tell them apart, and can't tell who is on which side.  Didn't have any issues at all like that with the White Queen.  Sniff.

 

Looking forward to seeing Rebecca Ferguson in the next Mission Impossible.  Not really sure what Max Irons is doing next, but I think it's great that this son of two famous actors is making a name for himself.

[EMc]

I JUST finished rewatching this and stumbled on this thread. I found TWOTR a bit hard to follow/choppy. I much preferred the one on the wives of H8.

I am glad it wasn't just me that REALLY didn't like the actress playing MB. I love Janet McTeer, and I think RF acquitted herself nicely.

I've watched almost everything go this ilk (English royalty/period drama) that I can get streaming. I would love other suggestions. I'm having trouble getting into The Borgias.

[DoughGirl]

I was all set to buy Weir's Wars of the Roses but then I read some reviews and they say the book ends with the Battle of Tewksbury.  Which kind of stinks.  I wanted to read more about Edward IV and Richard III.  I know her "Princes in the Tower" book sort of touches on them, but it seems more focused on the murder mystery.  Any good recommendations for a book which covers this time period that's as easy and fun to read in the same "readable history" manner as Weir?

The Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Penman.

That is all.

[blackwing]

The Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Penman.

That is all.

 

Seems to be fiction?  Would be subject to the same biases that Phillippa Gregory and others invariably inject, and of course any liberties they choose to take in the sake of making for a better novel.  I still take issue with the scenes of Richard III and Elizabeth of York actually getting together.  Richard knew that the allegations that Elizabeth Woodville's children were bastards was not true.  I find it hard to believe that a young woman would actually sleep with her father's blood brother.  But obviously things could have been different back then.

 

I am about to start reading Conn Iggulden's "Wars of the Roses: Stormbird".  Not sure how many books this series is intended to be, but I would imagine at least 3.  The main players in this book appear to be Henry VI, his wife Margaret of Anjou, Richard Duke of York (father of the future Edward IV and Richard III), and William de la Pole (Henry VI's favorite and protector).

[DoughGirl]

Seems to be fiction?  Would be subject to the same biases that Phillippa Gregory and others invariably inject, and of course any liberties they choose to take in the sake of making for a better novel.  I still take issue with the scenes of Richard III and Elizabeth of York actually getting together.  Richard knew that the allegations that Elizabeth Woodville's children were bastards was not true.  I find it hard to believe that a young woman would actually sleep with her father's blood brother.  But obviously things could have been different back then.

 

I am about to start reading Conn Iggulden's "Wars of the Roses: Stormbird".  Not sure how many books this series is intended to be, but I would imagine at least 3.  The main players in this book appear to be Henry VI, his wife Margaret of Anjou, Richard Duke of York (father of the future Edward IV and Richard III), and William de la Pole (Henry VI's favorite and protector).

One thing about Sharon Penman is that she does her research and sticks as closely to known facts as possible while still having her point of view. You won't find Richard III and Elisabeth of York "getting together" here. Sunne in Splendour is a truly excellent book, in itself, and for learning about these characters. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

Alison Weir is too biased for my taste and a bore as well.

[jimene79]

I've read many of the books on Richard III as I find him a fascinating character and The Sunne in Splendour is definitely my favorite.  I think Sharon Kay Penman is the best author - including Gregory and Weir.  While I wouldn't cite her in a history paper, I do appreciate that she does attempt to explain where she's filling things in with her own opinions etc. and what's more establish fact.

[turbogirlnyc]

The Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Penman.

That is all.

 

TSIS is a great book as is Here Be Dragons and all the Sharon Kay Penman Welsch Princes' books. I took issue with TSIS because again, the Woodvilles were evil and Richard III was a paragon. I'm also more of a Elizabeth of York fan and not so much for Anne Neville. It's a splendidly written story for sure. I've done further reading on the Woodville clan and choose to believe they aren't the evil people Tudor history makes them out to be.

 

Just wanted to also say that I'm also a huge fan of Janet McTeer. She's extremely talented and I wish to see her in more films. On a side note, she is the narrator in Disney's Maleficent (sp?) with Angelina Jolie. I'd recognize her soothing voice anywhere! It's worth watching if only to hear the narration!

 

Edited to add that I just purchased Phillipa Gregory's 6th installment to the War of the Roses series. The King's Curse is about Margaret Plantagenent Pole, George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence's daughter. I'm not far into it yet but I know how it ends thanks to all my reading on Henry VIII and HBO's The Tudors. It has a good rating on Amazon which means nothing, I know. But I have all the other books in the series and I believe this is the final book. Fingers crossed for a Starz mini series on The White Princess. I love coming here because I'm the only person I've ever met that adores topics such as these.

Edited September 23, 2014 by turbogirlnyc

[Meredith Quill]

I love coming here because I'm the only person I've ever met that adores topics such as these.

 

Well now you have the merry band of us fair few ;)

[Constantinople]

Finished the series.  On the whole, I really enjoyed it.  I do confess that I kind of lost interest after Edward died and Elizabeth was shoved aside.  The actor who played Richard irritated me, if his eyes bugged out anymore they'd be like Jim Carrey in the Mask.

I felt the same way. The actors playing Richard, Anne & Margaret didn't have the same pizazz for me as Elizabeth Woodville.

 

I did take issues with the Richard III / Princess Elizabeth affair.  History doesn't really confirm it one way or the other, and she has them having full blown sex.  Which is absolutely disgusting.  Her father was his brother.

I agree this should have been left out give the lack of historical evidence. But some royal families, notably the Habsburgs of Spain, did have uncle-niece marriages with attendant children. 

 

TSIS is a great book as is Here Be Dragons and all the Sharon Kay Penman Welsch Princes' books. I took issue with TSIS because again, the Woodvilles were evil...

The Woodvilles are evil. It's in their name.

Among others, Woodvilles is an anagram for Evil Old Sow and Do Slow Evil.

In any case, when they marry one of their 19 year old male relatives to a 65 odd years old Dowager Duchess, they should expect some blow back.

[DoughGirl]

Henry VII never gets any love. He's always a supporting player in someone else's story, never the lead. At least, I can't think of any movies or television shows where he was the lead.  

Probably cause he's a bloody bore.

Excellent program on Richard III on PBS. Secrets of the Dead. I believe it's still available on their website.

[turbogirlnyc]

I felt the same way. The actors playing Richard, Anne & Margaret didn't have the same pizazz for me as Elizabeth Woodville.

 

I agree this should have been left out give the lack of historical evidence. But some royal families, notably the Habsburgs of Spain, did have uncle-niece marriages with attendant children. 

 

The Woodvilles are evil. It's in their name.

Among others, Woodvilles is an anagram for Evil Old Sow and Do Slow Evil.

In any case, when they marry one of their 19 year old male relatives to a 65 odd years old Dowager Duchess, they should expect some blow back.

 

Fair enough. And she did outlive him. Karma took care of that one. The last name was Wydville and was modernized as Woodville. I sure hope my last name isn't an anagram for dirty old whore or something like that. Not much I can do about my father's or husband's last name.

 

I'm not claiming the family didn't have faults. But Sunne In Splendor is written from Richard III's point of view. I'm still undecided on his "innocence". Why kidnap your royal nephews and behead their uncle and stepbrother? Why lie about "stockpiles of weapons" that were clearly from Edward IV's reign. I could go on  but in the end, Richard denied his nephew his birthright and imprisoned the princes. Wrong on all levels. Sure, Richard was scared of Woodville's influencing the boys but in my mind, his actions were drastic.

[blackwing]

I agree, I've never bought into this modern day attempted rehabilitation of Richard III.  My opinion is that he may not have been the one to actually carry out the murder, but surely he knew of it and either ordered it or approved of it.

 

I'm about two-thirds of the way through Conn Iggulden's "Wars of the Roses: Stormbird" and I have to say I'm a little disappointed.  Even though there's an index in that back identifying the characters, the index isn't detailed enough.  There's too many characters, they're all seemingly named Thomas or Richard.  The book gets a little muddled and confusing, and sad to say, I am finding it a bit boring.  I mean, how can you make battle scenes boring?  I will finish it out and see if the next installment is any better.

[blackwing]

Finally finished it.  I seriously hope the next book is better.  This book starts when Henry VI is King.  There aren't very many plot developments.  The main piece of action concerns Jack Cade and the Kentish rebellion.  Margaret of Anjou married Henry.  Henry goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs.  The book ends with the Kentish rebellion put down and Margaret pregnant.

 

My main issues with this book are that I felt the characters were a little underdeveloped.  I had a hard time figuring out who I was supposed to root for.

 

After "The White Queen" I am really interested in Edward IV so I really hope the next book is better.

[turbogirlnyc]

Finally finished it.  I seriously hope the next book is better.  This book starts when Henry VI is King.  There aren't very many plot developments.  The main piece of action concerns Jack Cade and the Kentish rebellion.  Margaret of Anjou married Henry.  Henry goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs.  The book ends with the Kentish rebellion put down and Margaret pregnant.

 

My main issues with this book are that I felt the characters were a little underdeveloped.  I had a hard time figuring out who I was supposed to root for.

 

After "The White Queen" I am really interested in Edward IV so I really hope the next book is better.

 

I am interested in Edward IV as well. Maybe I should look into the book(s) you mentioned. I'm not sure if there's more information about Edward IV that I haven't read about. I sure hope so!

[blackwing]

I just finished Dan Jones' "The Wars of the Roses: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors".  It picks up from his previous work ("The Plantagenets: The Warrior Kings and Queens Who Made England") and starts with Henry V and goes through the accession of Henry VIII and touches a little bit on his reign.  I'm assuming a book on the Tudors is next.

 

I liked this book very much, there was a lot of discussion about Henry VI, Edward IV, Richard III and Henry VII.  He touches only briefly on the Princes in the Tower.  If I had a complaint, it's that the book looks pretty much only at the political intrigue and the various claims, uprisings, battles and beheadings that were involved in how each king acquired and retained his power.  I wish there had been a little bit more about these kings as individuals.  He touches a little bit on it, but in the end, I felt like I didn't really know that much about them - what did they like to do for enjoyment, etc.

 

Next book up is going to be Peter Ackroyd's "Foundation".

[brisbydog]

For all those wanting to watch something on Henry VII, I do recommend The Shadow of the Tower series. It is from the 1970's, produced around the same time as Keith Mitchell's Henry VIII and Glenda Jackson's Elizabeth R. It picks up right after the Battle of Bosworth to chronologically would go right after the White Queen. It is all about the writing and the acting, no big production values, but I thought it was excellent and the actor playing Henry VII is terrific.

 

Also just devoured the first 2 episodes of Wolf Hall. It is like the Anti Tudors. Damien Lewis looks creepily like the young Henry VIII portraits, and the attention to period detail is amazing.

[Meredith Quill]

Has anyone watched this funeral for Richard III in Leicester Cathedral, "The King Laid To Rest"?  I don't know if "The Burial of the King" , or "The Return of the King" are different, longer programs.  I'm going to watch it later.

 

Yes I watched all of them, was amazing to witness the 're-burial' of the last Plantagenet king! I think The Return of the King was the procession through the streets of Leicester into the cathedral and The Burial of the King was the actual service. I watched them all one after the other so they've all kinda melded into one for me now.

[Meredith Quill]

Yeah the poem Benedict Cumberbatch read was specially written for the occasion by the current Poet Laureate Carol Ann Duffy. It was a nice touch I thought.

[ulkis]

TSIS is a great book as is Here Be Dragons and all the Sharon Kay Penman Welsch Princes' books. I took issue with TSIS because again, the Woodvilles were evil and Richard III was a paragon.

 

Do you think so? I knew nothing about the Wars of the Roses when I read "the Sunne in Splendour" and I didn't think they came across as evil at all. At least, I don't think Elizabeth did, but maybe I would have to re-read. Foolish, maybe, not not evil.

 

But then, when I finished that book, I was much more struck and interested in Edward and Elizabeth than Richard.

[Megan]

I watched the entire series this weekend..I liked it, it was fun.

 

In this universe did Elizabeth of York kill her brother? Arthur died and Henry VII had no male heirs.

 

She paused watching the paper burn, but she still accused Margaret Beaufort. Richard made the comment about not cursing too far being that they all inter-marry and they'd more than likely curse their own line eventually. Richard was right if Margaret or Elizabeth of York did it... Arthur came from both of them. Though technically, the curse couldn't have worked if Margaret was behind the murder... Henry lived to have Arthur.

 

I did like Margaret's actor, her mannerisms really fit the whole crazy, but hiding/controlling it well.

 

The Neville sisters were dumbasses, and George was crazy. George killed the dog right?

 

And if Elizabeth, Jacquetta and Elizabeth of York had such crazy powers, the whole make it rain INSTANTLY scene, why didn't they use them more?

Edited November 30, 2015 by Megan

[slf]

Finally finished this yesterday and egads, the actress playing Anne Neville, Faye Marsay, was atrocious. She had this way of delivering her lines where it sounded like she was whimpering all the time. And the way Anne was written made her a complete idiot yet we were supposed to view her as the naive victim of her father's scheme until she eventually grows a backbone and shows she's got some steel (having Margaret of Anjou compliment her was too much for me, I laughed my ass off). I also disliked the weird performance Aneurin Barnard gave as Richard lll. Like, dude, you can speak above a whisper. These two were portrayed as an epic pair of lovers but they had no chemistry, I always suspected he had ulterior motives with her (which the real Richard lll might well have), and she was such a wet rag of a person I felt like the show suffered for focusing on them so much.

I mean, I know it's based on a Gregory novel which are generally the most heavily biased piles of crap in all of historical fiction but seriously? Richard lll consummates a relationship with his niece? (What the hell purpose does this serve? She's been declared illegitimate and they weren't married?!) Anne Neville more likely to have killed the boys than Richard lll? Margaret Beaufort a rampaging psycho? Henry Tudor a whiny mama's boy? Elizabeth of York at odds with her mother and willing to go behind her back? LOL.

What a soap opera! It was fun in some places; I liked Elizabeth Woodville and Jacquetta, and Margaret of Anjou could be fun. The magic was cool if inconsistently used. Jasper Tudor was one of the few interesting and well-acted male characters, Stanley was another. It was a visually gorgeous production.

I can't believe it got a sequel though, especially considering how awful that book was (yay, more rape!).

[BooBear]

Just finished watching this. About 1/2 way through I had to look up of this was a romance novel because of all the lovely sex with pretty people in gorgeous beds. If that is how the 1400s were.. well I might just put that on my time travel list.

- My favorite part was Ann and Richard. I loved the actor who played Richard. I thought he was very good looking and I loved a portrayal of a nice guy with a steady head for most of the series. I had no problem with Ann or Fay Marsey either.  I do believe that Richard loved Ann but did not desire her. Some guys are just not sex hounds. I enjoyed a bit of an introvert depiction.  Interesting tid bit.. he was in the TV Mini Series "Thirteen" that started the actress that is starring in the white princess. It must be me but, I am just not too upset about the depiction of him sleeping with his niece. I get the feeling he was a little out of it at that time. And similar things happen all the time even today.  I also think it was left in to have some reason for Princess Elizabeth of York to be upset at the start of the "White Princess".

- I did not really like Elizabeth Woodville. Come on she clearly knew her power over men and only came up with that "give me my land back" to tempt the King. Then she refused to give it to him unless they got married. Men are such fools. Well you live by the "seductress" and die by it. Of course he started fooling around.  She started a lot of trouble but never seems to feel bad about it or think it was anything but her absolute right. Everything about her screams that she is the classic user who set her sights on getting the king. 

- I happened to really enjoy Margaret Beaufort's portrayal. I actually am a little sad to see the ads for the White Princess with Michelle Farley. I think the younger Margret was better. I did find it funny the blaze' way she had about her marriages. Like she was going out to get a paper.  The actor who played the adult  Henry... not inspiring. 

- George and his wife were annoying throughout the entire thing. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Elizabeth Woodville: These are not the queen's rooms.
Thomas Stanley: The king's mother, my wife, has those as first lady of the court.
Elizabeth of York: Perhaps [Henry] does not need me as he means to wed his mother.

Elizabeth W: Lady Margaret.
Margaret: My lady, the king's mother now. I am called "your grace" and I receive a royal bow.
Elizabeth W: Indeed. Does it bring you the joy you'd hoped it would?
Margaret: It is God's will. It is God who put my Henry on the throne.
Elizabeth W: And God who puts my daughter on the other throne beside him.

Elizabeth W: Today you will marry a king.
Elizabeth Y: In a dress fit for a harlot. Today I am a whore and a martyr because that is what he has made me.

[MrsE]

On 6/8/2016 at 3:31 AM, slf said:

Finally finished this yesterday and egads, the actress playing Anne Neville, Faye Marsay, was atrocious. She had this way of delivering her lines where it sounded like she was whimpering all the time. And the way Anne was written made her a complete idiot yet we were supposed to view her as the naive victim of her father's scheme until she eventually grows a backbone and shows she's got some steel (having Margaret of Anjou compliment her was too much for me, I laughed my ass off). I also disliked the weird performance Aneurin Barnard gave as Richard lll. Like, dude, you can speak above a whisper. These two were portrayed as an epic pair of lovers but they had no chemistry, I always suspected he had ulterior motives with her (which the real Richard lll might well have), and she was such a wet rag of a person I felt like the show suffered for focusing on them so much.

I mean, I know it's based on a Gregory novel which are generally the most heavily biased piles of crap in all of historical fiction but seriously? Richard lll consummates a relationship with his niece? (What the hell purpose does this serve? She's been declared illegitimate and they weren't married?!) Anne Neville more likely to have killed the boys than Richard lll? Margaret Beaufort a rampaging psycho? Henry Tudor a whiny mama's boy? Elizabeth of York at odds with her mother and willing to go behind her back? LOL.

What a soap opera! It was fun in some places; I liked Elizabeth Woodville and Jacquetta, and Margaret of Anjou could be fun. The magic was cool if inconsistently used. Jasper Tudor was one of the few interesting and well-acted male characters, Stanley was another. It was a visually gorgeous production.

I can't believe it got a sequel though, especially considering how awful that book was (yay, more rape!).

Gregory is one of the "Anyone but Richard" brigade;  the elevation of Richard to the status of romantic hero demands that he not be guilty of, well, anything really, but as they all have serious crushes on him it's essential that this be vindicated by EoY, who is written as a complete idiot, falling for him.  However, I'm not sure that him deflowering her (on the eve of Bosworth no less!) is in the least bit romantic.  She was unmarried and although bastardised (yeah, she really didn't mind that) would still have been expecting to make a decent match, and in fact RIII is known to have been exploring a match with with Portuguese royal house for her;  that's not going to wash if she's been tupped by her uncle, never mind the risk of pregnancy which she'd have had to deal with alone had he been killed.  If he did it (of course he didn't) it would have been the most selfish thing imaginable.   That's not even considering the incestuous nature of it all.  No, it's ridiculous and does their hero no favours.

And of course Beaufort was not a card carrying loony either, or her son a tantrum prone socially inept cry baby.

The White Princess is an even worse book.  Ghastly.

[MrsE]

On 8/11/2014 at 6:58 PM, SilverStormm said:

I believe this was mostly based on The White Queen which is why it was told from Elizabeth Woodville's POV for the most part. In reality also, Margaret Beaufort was a bitter woman who saw her son's rise to power as a vehicle for herself; when her son Henry married Elizabeth of York (Edwards & Elizabeth W's eldest daughter), Margaret, now a Countess, was reluctant to accept a lower status than the dowager queen Elizabeth (Woodville) or even her daughter-in-law, the queen consort!

She wore robes of the same quality as the queen consort and walked only half a pace behind her. Despite this, Margaret could not do anything that Elizabeth forbade; Elizabeth outranked Margaret as a Queen to a Countess.

Another indicator of her overblown ego: Margaret had written her signature as M. Richmond for years, since the 1460s. In 1499, she changed her signature to Margaret R., no doubt to engender a belief of her royal authority (R in royal terms standing for regina – queen in Latin as customarily employed by female monarchs), blatantly emulating the usual Victoria or Elizabeth R, as used by female monarchs.

She also had a huge influence during the whole Perkin Warbeck debacle, which, to this day I believe he may have been who he claimed he was....we'll never know, but it was in her and Henry's interests to prove him false, otherwise, he was a threat to Henry's reign.

I'm not trying to be awkward, but what is your source for her influence on the Warbeck issue?  And why do you think he was who he claimed to be?  Why, for example, was he brought up by an official in Tournai, (where people had known him as the son of that family since his birth) rather than  with Margaret of Burgundy who would have welcomed him with open arms?  The letter he sent to the crowned heads of Europe made no mention of how he came to be in Tournai at all.

I'm not sure either where the notion that Henry's advancement was all about her comes from.  For years she worked to have his titles and possessions restored to him, but she was immensely wealthy in her own right. It wasn't until the death of EIV and RIII's shutting down of negotiations for Henry's safe return that she appears to have even considered him as king.  It was observed by a contemporary that though the king listened to his mother he did what he wanted.

Why is wearing robes of the same quality as the queen an issue?  EoY had done the same when Anne Neville was queen;  there is evidence to suggest that Elizabeth and Margaret worked well together, on at least one occasion joining forces to persuade the king to delay princess Margaret's departure for Scotland to join her husband, because they feared that she was too young to risk consummation.

It's an odd thing, this recent notion that Margaret Beaufort was a power mad religious lunatic.

[slf]

7 hours ago, MrsE said:

Why is wearing robes of the same quality as the queen an issue?  EoY had done the same when Anne Neville was queen;  there is evidence to suggest that Elizabeth and Margaret worked well together, on at least one occasion joining forces to persuade the king to delay princess Margaret's departure for Scotland to join her husband, because they feared that she was too young to risk consummation.

Not to mention the whole walking-half-a-pace-behind-EoY thing was acceptable; she didn't do anything wrong. I mean, we ultimately don't know much about the relationship between Elizabeth of York and her mother-in-law but what little evidence there is hardly suggests a combative relationship. It's true that Margaret was a very unyielding woman but it doesn't seem as though EoY minded or couldn't hold her own. While Henry loved and valued his mother it was his wife who was the most powerful woman in his life, whose influence mattered the most.

Quote

It's an odd thing, this recent notion that Margaret Beaufort was a power mad religious lunatic.

Indeed, and I find that many people try to divorce her religious devotion from the traumas she suffered. Her marriage at a terribly young age, the life-threatening labor and delivery, the years spent fearing for her son's life...religion was a refuge for her, a comfort. She was very devout but I've never seen any credible evidence that she was a quack.

[MrsE]

Even more disturbing is the idea that she was responsible for the deaths Edward IV's sons;  it's part of the "anyone but Richard" take on the matter, but it's not something that, as far as I'm aware, was ever even a consideration until very recently, and I think that Gregory has really stirred the pot on this.  If you start from the premise that the lovely, doe eyed hero Richard simply can't have done it you have to look for someone else who was around in 1483 to blame.  Margaret Beaufort?  Sure, why not.  Her son was king 2 years later, makes perfect sense tht she'd off the boys thereby, well, thereby putting RIII n the throne.  Buckingham?  Him too;  Anne Neville?  Certainly she might well have egged her husband on (Gregory believes this one). So, even if he did do it it wasn't really his fault.  The saintly hero was, apparently, a spineless idiot who would kill a couple of children because his wife told him to.   It's as counter productive as the Mills & Boon fantasy of Richard and EoY as lovers.  It isn't romantic, it's sordid and inexcusable - deflowering a woman who you can't marry, and that's quite apart from the incestuous nature of it.

[MrsE]

On 11/29/2015 at 11:56 PM, Megan said:

I watched the entire series this weekend..I liked it, it was fun.

 

In this universe did Elizabeth of York kill her brother? Arthur died and Henry VII had no male heirs.

 

She paused watching the paper burn, but she still accused Margaret Beaufort. Richard made the comment about not cursing too far being that they all inter-marry and they'd more than likely curse their own line eventually. Richard was right if Margaret or Elizabeth of York did it... Arthur came from both of them. Though technically, the curse couldn't have worked if Margaret was behind the murder... Henry lived to have Arthur.

 

I did like Margaret's actor, her mannerisms really fit the whole crazy, but hiding/controlling it well.

 

The Neville sisters were dumbasses, and George was crazy. George killed the dog right?

 

And if Elizabeth, Jacquetta and Elizabeth of York had such crazy powers, the whole make it rain INSTANTLY scene, why didn't they use them more?

Arthur did die but Henry VII had another son, Henry, Duke of York, who succeeded to the throne as Henry VIII.

The sorcery nonsense has no basis in fact, other than RIII believing he'd been bewitched. although whether he really believed that is doubtful.

[Megan]

16 hours ago, MrsE said:

Arthur did die but Henry VII had another son, Henry, Duke of York, who succeeded to the throne as Henry VIII.

The sorcery nonsense has no basis in fact, other than RIII believing he'd been bewitched. although whether he really believed that is doubtful.

I screwed up with my roman numerals. I meant that Henry VIII had no heirs that had children, at least I think thats what I was trying to say but it's been awhile since my post.

Also I meant the powers as presented in the series not IRL. IRL they had no magic powers.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Megan

[WatchrTina]

Just finished binge-watching this.  That was fun.  I'm about to re-watch the first ep of The White Princess now so this will add a whole new layer to my appreciation of that.

But sticking to the topic of The White Queen -- what an interesting take on the War of the Roses.  In this version, Henry VII owes all his success and his kingship to his mother's smarmy second husband riding into the fight at the last minute.  Is there ANY historical validity to that?  I guess it doesn't matter -- it made for good drama (except that, you know, we all already knew how Richard III dies -- "A horse!  A horse!  My kingdom for a horse!")

It must have been interesting for the history buffs to watch this and see that scene late in the episode where one of the "princes in the tower" turns up safe and sound.  I can just imagine them all thinking, "Hey, wait a minute . . . "  Smart move by the producers though -- intrigued viewers HAVE to tune in to The White Princess to find out how that loose thread gets tied up.