tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post7942440979503822400..comments2023-12-13T07:27:11.469-04:00Comments on Henslowe's Diary ... as a Blog!: 3 March, 1592 - Harry VIDavid Nicolhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01991853514927714672noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-49620286818479641882019-03-10T15:48:38.767-03:002019-03-10T15:48:38.767-03:00Because I'm an idiot. Fixed!Because I'm an idiot. Fixed!David Nicolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01991853514927714672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-49653380629279698352019-01-09T17:08:33.627-04:002019-01-09T17:08:33.627-04:00Hi David. Huge admiration for this blog. Why doesn...Hi David. Huge admiration for this blog. Why doesn't "xvj" mean sixteen shillings?Michael Peveretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17090710369630916194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-51830460764611525092016-04-27T10:38:55.009-03:002016-04-27T10:38:55.009-03:00Followup: the promised mini-essay: http://henslowe...Followup: the promised mini-essay: http://hensloweasablog.blogspot.com/p/what-do-box-office-figures-mean.htmlDavid Nicolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01991853514927714672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-33322882725814270542016-04-22T08:45:52.571-03:002016-04-22T08:45:52.571-03:00Well, perhaps it's more accurate to say that i...Well, perhaps it's more accurate to say that it's about balancing novelty with familiarity, i.e. new plays about already popular characters. If you look at the top 10 films of last year, 7 of them are new stories (novelty) about pre-existing characters or ideas (familiarity) - <i>Star Wars 7, Jurassic World, Avengers 2, Furious 7, Minions, Hunger Games 3B, Cinderella</i>. This seems a good analogy for audiences flocking to see yet another Henry VI play.<br /><br />I'm not saying you're wrong though - the main thing I'm learning from this project is how little we know!David Nicolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01991853514927714672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-75141310934759954982016-04-21T18:16:56.967-03:002016-04-21T18:16:56.967-03:00I agree with you about Stern's book. It's ...I agree with you about Stern's book. It's amazing to think how marketing was such a developed practice 400 years ago....<br />And of course novelty is prized... but would yet another play about H VI really be seen as novel? Seems to me there must be some other element there.... I do suspect that the price was different on opening night. <br />Thank you for your kind response. Joe Sthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01459147434551989356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-81483401809665318582016-04-21T12:14:39.812-03:002016-04-21T12:14:39.812-03:00Hi Joe,
Thanks for these excellent questions! The...Hi Joe,<br /><br />Thanks for these excellent questions! The high box office for premières is something that intrigues me too.<br /><br />Your first question is whether they might be explained by Henslowe charging higher prices for premières. This possibility has been bugging me too, and I'm in fact in the middle of writing up a new post provisionally entitled 'Why you shouldn't necessarily take this blog too literally'. So, instead of answering the question, I'll just say 'watch this space', as there'll be a post on this subject in a few days.<br /><br />However, if the high box office receipts for premières are indeed indicating packed theatres, it must be because the audience valued novelty. That isn't too strange, if one thinks about the way popular movies work today - they tend to have a big opening weekend before slowly fading away as increasing familiarity causes audiences to dwindle. <br /><br />Your other question is about why audiences would choose to go see a new play that they didn't know much about, e.g. why would they flock to see a play about an infamously unsuccessful king like Henry VI? In the specific case of <i>Harry VI</i>, it's probably because (as I explain in the post), the play was deliberately written to capitalize on familiarity with two existing plays about Henry VI, so that excitement and anticipation would be easy to arouse.<br /><br />But beyond the specific case of <i>Harry VI</i>, we have to remember the power of marketing. The new plays would be advertised across London on playbills and via vocal 'cryers' in public places. These advertisements would make the new play's content clear and enticing. The best discussion of this is in Tiffany Stern's book <i>Documents of Performance in Early Modern England</i>. No playbills have survived from the period, but they likely looked something like the title pages of the printed editions of plays, which often feature enticing descriptions of their content. For example, the title page of the original publication of <i>Henry VI Part Two</i> calls it in full <i>The first part of the contention betwixt the two famous houses of York and Lancaster, with the death of the good Duke Humphrey, and the banishment and death of the Duke of Suffolk, and the tragical end of the proud Cardinal of Winchester, with the notable rebellion of Jack Cade and the Duke of York's first claim unto the crown</i>. If the playbills and cryers said similar things, you'd know exactly what you were getting. So, in answer to your question, I don't think the audience simply went to see "a new play about Henry VI"; I think they went to see a play that had been marketed as something like "A new play of Henry VI, with the funeral of the brave king Henry V, and the heroic exploits of the great Lord Talbot against the French, with the defeat of the mad French demon-conjuring witch named Joan of Arc and the wooing of the beautiful Lady Margaret". I'd go see that. David Nicolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01991853514927714672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-69447062552512251392016-04-21T02:49:05.551-03:002016-04-21T02:49:05.551-03:00This blog tends to emphasize how much money was re...This blog tends to emphasize how much money was received at each performance--logically, since that is one of the main bits of information that Henslowe records in these entries. <br />So here's a question: what makes for a great opening night? It seems that opening nights made more money than subsequent performances. Did Henslowe charge more on opening night? <br />A more difficult, but to me more interesting question: how did audiences decide that *this play* (Harry VI) was one they wanted to see, not knowing much (anything?) about it? They were not, at this point, excited to see a play by Shakespeare, a completely obscure figure. And why would they want to see a play about Henry VI (rather than a more successful king)? Joe Sthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01459147434551989356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1897349795852037725.post-69516153452835449772016-04-13T03:49:32.530-03:002016-04-13T03:49:32.530-03:00I very much appreciate this fine summary of the re...I very much appreciate this fine summary of the relevant scholarship on the order of the three H6 plays. <br />Bravo.Joe Sthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01459147434551989356noreply@blogger.com