Part one of three

Last week to the first part of the revival of the 'Wars of the Roses' at the Rose of Kingston - having elected to do the three parts in three successive weeks, rather than attempting all three in one day. See reference1.

Lots of people there for a weekday matineé, with the stalls more or less full. Some ladies wearing a good deal of jewellery, quite a lot of eccentric looking ladies and some gents. who might have been resting or retired luvvies. One school party.

A stage similar in tone to that for Romeo (see reference 2), but with less scaffolding. Center stage occupied by the council table which popped up and down according to the scene. Flashing white lights and smoke. Generally effective - and may well have been influenced by the original staging back in the sixties of the last century. Costumes good, that is to say vaguely Tudor, with swords - which I much prefer to anything else.

Part one running from the funeral of Henry V to the execution - lynching by the mob in this version - of Suffolk. That is to say the whole of Part I and around half of Part II of the bardic original - my copy of which, as it happens, was once the property of Lochaber High School and was bought by me from a second hand book shop at the back of Fort William, in the course of a visit during a mild January, probably more than ten years ago now. See reference 3. A quick peek at Part II this morning suggests that the adaptor took quite a lot of liberties with the original, presumably with the virtuous intention of making the thing more presentable for a modern performance.

Casting generally good, with the warring lords far more convincing than those usually fielded by the Globe. Bishop of Winchester splendidly evil. The one exception was Suffolk, whom I found far too modern in style. He would not have been out of place as the compère of one of those hugging courses that HR people were so keen on at the time I left the world of work, around ten years ago now. But a far more serious weakness was Henry VI himself, very much on-message with the current fashion for playing Richard II as a pantomime twat. I found this rather tiresome: he may not have been a successful war lord, but he was not without merit. I shall consult the original on this matter.

Duchess of Gloucester splendidly silly. Queen Margaret adequate; a bit too tarty (not quite the right word, but I can't put my finger on a better) to be convincing as someone who gets her hands on the reins of power. Joan of Arc rather good, rather in the way of quaint Irene in the television adaptation of Mapp & Lucia. Burgundy a bit feeble.

The discrete colour coding of the two sides with neat white and red badges was helpful rather than irritating - unlike the rather louder colour coding often deployed by the Globe.

I started a little apprehensive of the length, three hours. In the event the first half seemed a little long but the second half was fine. Overall, a good show. Wound down with a refreshment at the nearby 'Ram', but returned to our own 'Shy Horse' for feeding - where, for once, I took a veggie burger. Good flavour and texture, despite a tendency to fall apart, only marred by an excessively crunchy exterior, possibly part of the attempt to hold the thing together without the assistance of egg, meat or fat.

Reference 1: http://www.rosetheatrekingston.org/.

Reference 2: http://psmv2.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/romeo-alpha.html.

Reference 3: http://pumpkinstrokemarrow.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=fort+william.