Location: Tamzin Merchant

Discussion: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?Reported This is a featured thread

Showing 61 - 80 of 87  |  Show  posts at a time
Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next
Honey-Beezz
Honey-Beezz
62. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 7 2009, 6:44 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 7 2009, 6:44 AM EDT
"yes indeed it is, but thats all it is Fiction, however even in that book, it is henrys paranoia along with Bishop Gardiner that led him to "Believe" that his rose without thorn Cathryn howard was sleeping with her cousin Thomas culpepper, yes they were cousins, read David starkeys or Joanna Dennys books on miss howard and you will find out yourself. Since there is no real proof surrounding that scandal, it irks me so much that official websites and authors such as alison Weir actually print that slander against her, saying she lay with two men before henry, now francis she did sleep with and was to marry him but again this was before she even went to court, so it was highly unfair that francis was killed."
Katherine's "flirtations" before Henry were well-known;the women in her dormitory knew what Katherine was up to. In fact,she seemed to think it a fine thing. The letters written to Culpepper from her can be taken as nothing else than intimate knowledge .If left to herself,Katherine Howard would just have been a woman going from man to man,a disgrace to the Howard family,but alive.
7  out of 9 found this valuable. Do you?    
howardfan
howardfan
63. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 7 2009, 7:26 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 7 2009, 7:26 PM EDT
"Katherine's "flirtations" before Henry were well-known;the women in her dormitory knew what Katherine was up to. In fact,she seemed to think it a fine thing. The letters written to Culpepper from her can be taken as nothing else than intimate knowledge .If left to herself,Katherine Howard would just have been a woman going from man to man,a disgrace to the Howard family,but alive."
what? prey tell me where you read that from? it certainly was not in joanna dennys book as the letters were indeed intimate but there is no actual proof that they were sexual together, thats the problem with the world, everything lovely and beautiful such as an adoration for someone is turned into a sexual romp. It is not always the case and this is the point that David starkey was trying to make, that while they were close probably due to the fact they had grown up as cousins and were already familiar with each other, there is nothing to suggest a torrid affair ever took place between them, i mean kitty new what happened with anne, who also falsely accused of incest with her brother as well as affairs with her courtiers. Also if you read these books i suggest, you will read that when she confessed, she admitted to premarital sex before marriage but denied sexual relations with her cousin culpepper, why would she lie about one thing and not the other, if the penalty for lying to the king about being a virgin in the first place would surely be imprisonment and most likely death seeing as though her betrothed francis from before kitty met henry, was also killed very brutally.
2  out of 20 found this valuable. Do you?    
howardfan
howardfan
64. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 7 2009, 7:31 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 7 2009, 7:31 PM EDT
"I don't think there's a question that in real life Katherine Howard was sexually promiscuous, both before and after the marriage. I have read nothing that suggests otherwise. Not a judgment, just a fact. "
try reading David starkeys book on henrys six wives, he is more learned than the likes of ditty alison weir who draws her own conclsions, i mean she suggested the notion that George boelyn was gay when there was no evidence to suggest it, but because Retha M warnicke wrote about the assumption he may be, she indeed agreed, she also agreed with an earlier historian named Strickland who assumed Kitty howard was guilty of sex with thomas culpepper her COUSIN not that it was abnormal to admire and even be intended to ones cousin back then but still, in reality katherine howard idolized henry and wanted to please him, she just did not tell him about her 'supposed' romp with her music tutor when she was 13 or her betrothal which was never official, but was consummated with Francis Derham
2  out of 22 found this valuable. Do you?    
sweetladyjaneseymour
sweetladyjaneseymour
65. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 7 2009, 8:31 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 7 2009, 8:31 PM EDT
I thought that lying about your virginity was just grounds of an annulment or something similar. Perhaps she did lie, i would in her situation. Better to admit a bit of the truth (pre-marital sex) and deny the affair so you look more credible by admitting part of the truth. Anything could have happened with the pre-marital sex but admitting to an affair would certainly be the death sentence, as she knew full well with her cousin. The fact that she did have a relationship with Culpepper, sexual or not, still makes me lose respect for her considering what had happened to other Queens. I can relate to her as a young woman who didn't want an old husband but i feel like screaming to her "Are you out of your mind! He's the King, he's going to see it as betrayal either way!" And in the end, it is still an affair, she was having relations with other men when she was a married woman, no matter how innocent and courtly it was. 3  out of 3 found this valuable. Do you?    
KingsRose
KingsRose
66. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 7 2009, 8:38 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 7 2009, 8:38 PM EDT
I've read Joanna Denny's book too and really enjoyed it (I also love Lacey Baldwin Smith's book, A Tudor Tragedy). I found Starkey's take on Catherine different from others I had read but not without merit. While I have my own ideas of Catherine's guilt/innocence, we can never really know what went on behind closed doors. A lot of women did corroborate the story of Catherine's less-than-virginal past, which perhaps makes it more believable that she did have a dalliance with Culpeper (that letter doesn't help her, certainly). But who knows? Maybe those women lied? A conspiracy to get that foolish little girl off the throne? Personally I don't see her as quite this innocent, but terribly naive. Still, it's impossible to know - even from confessions - what sins were really committed, and what was a person's true intent. That's what historical is for (as long as it seems believable). :) 3  out of 3 found this valuable. Do you?    
howardfan
howardfan
67. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 8 2009, 12:26 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 8 2009, 12:26 AM EDT
"I thought that lying about your virginity was just grounds of an annulment or something similar. Perhaps she did lie, i would in her situation. Better to admit a bit of the truth (pre-marital sex) and deny the affair so you look more credible by admitting part of the truth. Anything could have happened with the pre-marital sex but admitting to an affair would certainly be the death sentence, as she knew full well with her cousin. The fact that she did have a relationship with Culpepper, sexual or not, still makes me lose respect for her considering what had happened to other Queens. I can relate to her as a young woman who didn't want an old husband but i feel like screaming to her "Are you out of your mind! He's the King, he's going to see it as betrayal either way!" And in the end, it is still an affair, she was having relations with other men when she was a married woman, no matter how innocent and courtly it was."
what about henrys many affairs? that seemed to be okay because 1. he was the king and 2. he was a male, who had all power back then. It was considered a bad wanton thing for a woman to lay with a man before marriage but it was perfectly acceptable for a man to be known as a "bachelor" able to lye with whores, since good mannered women of the day would never do such a thing...unless they kept it under wraps and in kittys case she did try to, and offcourse she had a strong relationship with thomas he was her childhood cousin and supposedly very handsome, and after reading joanna dennys book as well as David starky and alison weirs take i am still not convinced she was having a sexual affair, was she attractive? yes, did she enjoy male attention"? it would appear so. Was she young, scared and naive? YES
1  out of 21 found this valuable. Do you?    
Honey-Beezz
Honey-Beezz
68. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 8 2009, 7:00 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 8 2009, 7:00 AM EDT
"what about henrys many affairs? that seemed to be okay because 1. he was the king and 2. he was a male, who had all power back then. It was considered a bad wanton thing for a woman to lay with a man before marriage but it was perfectly acceptable for a man to be known as a "bachelor" able to lye with whores, since good mannered women of the day would never do such a thing...unless they kept it under wraps and in kittys case she did try to, and offcourse she had a strong relationship with thomas he was her childhood cousin and supposedly very handsome, and after reading joanna dennys book as well as David starky and alison weirs take i am still not convinced she was having a sexual affair, was she attractive? yes, did she enjoy male attention"? it would appear so. Was she young, scared and naive? YES"
no one denies Henry's affairs;men were able to do what and where and when they wanted to,that's been the standard for centuries. But, whether Katherine had sex with Culpepper or not,by their intimacy and what letters Katherine could write were enough to condemm her. Also Jane Rochford went to her death as a assistant to their closeness. Why would Jane go to her death for a flirtation? I don't remember reading anything about K and thomas being acquainted as children,Katherine being housed at her grandmother's rather lax household. Yes,Katherine was young,maybe not too bright,did not deserve death;but she was guilty of Very Bad Judgement.
1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you?    
sweetladyjaneseymour
sweetladyjaneseymour
69. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 8 2009, 7:09 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 8 2009, 7:09 AM EDT
"no one denies Henry's affairs;men were able to do what and where and when they wanted to,that's been the standard for centuries. But, whether Katherine had sex with Culpepper or not,by their intimacy and what letters Katherine could write were enough to condemm her. Also Jane Rochford went to her death as a assistant to their closeness. Why would Jane go to her death for a flirtation? I don't remember reading anything about K and thomas being acquainted as children,Katherine being housed at her grandmother's rather lax household. Yes,Katherine was young,maybe not too bright,did not deserve death;but she was guilty of Very Bad Judgement."
You beat me to it Honey-beezz, very good post :) Howardfan i never defended Henry's affairs, they were dispacable and his poor wives did not deserve it. Also, i never condemned Katherine's pre marital sex. I was merely saying she wasn't too bright getting involved in an extra marital relationship, sexual or not. As Honey says there was something between them which shouldn't have happened. The King can do what he pleases but the Queen cannot, its just how it went and she knew that. She was silly to get involved with Culpepper, even if it was completely innocent and they weren't even in love. She was just a very silly little girl.
Do you find this valuable?    
howardfan
howardfan
70. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 8 2009, 8:53 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 8 2009, 8:53 PM EDT
yes she was silly, but then again had she been born nowadays she would not have been classified as silly for sharing a mutual admiration for culpepper and if you read joanna dennys book "A tudor conspiracy" it talks about Kathryn and Culpeppers relationship before court, and how they were cousins as Kathryns mother was named Jocasta Culpepper, aunty to young Thomas


i agree that even a close relationship is pushing your luck, especially back then when a queen was to be dutiful at all times no matter what, although alot of non catholic reformers wanted her out so they would have found a way to dispell her from court in the end, like they did with anne and anne of cleves whom Henry did not even like in a sexual marital way that is
0  out of 17 found this valuable. Do you?    
tudorcrazy
tudorcrazy
71. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 8 2009, 10:37 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 10:44 PM EDT
She was a sexually abused teen.No one here mentions the fact that she had no parents, and was raised in a dorm for royal bastards. She had no education to speak of, and was way too naive of the power of politics to even understand court life. She could hardly read or write. I thought the scene with her reading Cromwell's letter absurd. She wasn't that literate. As far as the actress they picked to portray her, it just did not cut it for me. I have not one complaint in my over 460 threads about the production, and the historical license taken by the writers. However, I think this was a poor choice for Kitty Howard. She was not young enough, not bubbly, too skinny, and you don't get the impression of her being overwhelmed by Henry's attention. I thought she was too brazen, and way too forward. After all, she was really like 15. She was sexually active, and it mystifies me why she wasn't just a dalliance. They make it a forgone conclusion that Henry was horny, but not that he would marry this girl. Sorry, Henry was married to KOA and Anne Boleyn, some of the brightest, most educated women of their time, raised to dazzle the royal courts they lived in. Kitty was brought forward as a distraction for Henry's pain in his leg, and his failure as a husband to Anna of Cleves. I just picture Kitty Howard as way more cute and fun, and refreshing. The girl they picked did not have the right ambiance portrayed in history. Just a miscast as I see it. In addition, we are talking about the English reformation, something that Henry took VERY seriously. Both KOA and Anne B were very devote in their own way. This character didn't seem to be affected by the religious turmoil around her. 2  out of 2 found this valuable. Do you?    
howardfan
howardfan
72. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 9:41 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 9:41 PM EDT
"She was a sexually abused teen.No one here mentions the fact that she had no parents, and was raised in a dorm for royal bastards. She had no education to speak of, and was way too naive of the power politics to even understand court life. She could hardly read or write. I thought the scene with her reading Cromwell's letter absurd. She wasn't that literate. Asfar as the actress they picked to portray her it just did not cut it for me. I have npt one complaint in my over 460 threads about the production, and the historical license taken by the writers. However, I think this was a poor chice for Kitty Howard. She was not young enough, not bubbly, too skinny, and you don't get the impression of her being overwhelmed by Henry's attention. I would have thought she was too brazen, and way too forward. After all, she was really like 15. She was sexually active, and it mystifies me why she wasn't just a dalliance. They make it a forgone conclusion that Henry was horny, but not that jhe would marry this girl. Sorry, Henry was married to KOA and Anne Boleyn, some of the brightest, educated women of their time, raised to dazzle the royal courts they lived in. "
wow best post ever, Tudorcrazy i agree wholeheartedly with you.
Katherine was brought up poor, with her grandmother until she died, could barely read or write and new little of foreign languages and policies like her well educated wealthy cousin Anne or KOA who was extremely well educated being a princess and all to begin with.
Jane seymour was not extremely literate either And this scene which i am yet to see when Kitty reads a letter from cromwell, is rubbish, i have studied Kathryn howard through the books i have read, Cromwell was already Dead when she took the throne as Queen and being Catholic her Uncle (the bastard Thomas howard) had been one of the people whom plotted The protestant reformer Cromwells demise and Kitty was led to believe he was a traitor to the king.
3  out of 28 found this valuable. Do you?    
howardfan
howardfan
73. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 9:48 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 9:48 PM EDT
carrying on from my post, i think that Henry would be welcoming the less literate, more simple type of female, also Jane and Katherine were meant to be well shaped and well endowed (large breasts) with womanly child bearing figures, as anne was known to be thin. Anne and KOA both held their ground as best they could for a woman in their separate yet similar situations, Jane and Kitty would be a delight to the king, at least at first in what the king portrayed as innocent and sweet.

Remember when he first met Kitty, she was only skilled in music and he fell in love with the way she played the virginal or so i have read, she was also a "Virgin" to him, since she had little or no knowledge of her sexual abuse from her music tutor, and her consummation to her mock marriage with Francis dernhem.

so this female who is in the tudors, from what i have seen is not cutting it with me either
Lynne Frederick's or even Emily blunt suffice as decent portrayals of the young woman, i also liked Lynne Frederick's portrayal as an innocent woman, who may not have been a virgin when she married, but protested her innocence, regarding her and her cousin Culpepper's relationship. I admired how in that film with Lynne, nothing was even shown to suggest they were sexual, just close companions who i do believe loved each other, they were just both trapped.
2  out of 27 found this valuable. Do you?    
sweetladyjaneseymour
sweetladyjaneseymour
74. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 10:20 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 10:20 PM EDT
I don't think Kitty and Jane were as ill educated as people think. I can't imagine Queen Katherine or Anne allowing an ill educated woman like Jane into their services. Also, Henry wrote letters to Jane so this makes me think that she must have been able to read. And didn't Kitty write some love letters to Thomas Culpepper? Do you find this valuable?    

frogy23
75. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 10:56 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 10:56 PM EDT
I like the actress well enough for the points they wanted to convey about Henry's need for something very different to excite him sexually and his mid-life-crisis state of mind. I don't pretend to know the real history, but I do hope, as she will be in the production for a number of episodes, that Hirst gives some depth or explanation to her character. Sexual abuse or whatever route he takes. Hirst does so much well in this show but too often he fails to develop the characters and now with all but a few characters gone from previous eps., he needs to provide more depth. The Seymores and Brandon were far too shallow and their motives unexplained -- or maybe it was just mediocre acting. Do you find this valuable?    
tudorcrazy
tudorcrazy
76. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 11:25 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 11:25 PM EDT
KingsRose it's hard to disagree with you, since you are the EXPERT here. It's not the actress, but the script AND the actress.
My posts are quite clear about my opinion of Kitty Howard, although I have only read Weir, Denny, and seen Starkey. But wow, Kitty Howard was the wild card in the pack, and they don't introduce her character properly. They make it seem like Sir Frances Bryan and Brandon went to the a shelter to pick a puppy to rescue.
She was a very mixed up neglected CHILD, who had royal linage. This is not addressed clearly. She was likely to be young enough to produce an heir. They did not take Henry's character and taste into consideration, just like Cromwell did with Anna of Cleves. Anna was too sheltered, and too unfamiliar with England to satisfy Henry's tastes for passion. They got this point across with Joss Stone who did justice to the only survivor of his loves.
This Kitty is too forward, and not cute enough to hold define Henry's attention past the first sexual attraction. It seems unlikely he would marry this girl, when in fact he was totally in a midlife crisis, and a different portrayal would have shown the audience that he was smitten.
This character lacked depth, and glamor. I think Kitty was much more alluring, and much sexier in a more innocent way. She rocked, and didn't even know it. Anne B knew it, KOA knew it, and so did Jane S. Anna was grateful to survive his attentions.
I picture him a king like in The Arabian Nights, in that beyond the sex, he needed to be fascinated by being lured in installments, clever seductions. She did that, even though she had no agenda. He was a brilliant man who had more than just a huge sexual appetite. He needed someone to compete with intellectually, who spoke several languages, was up to date on the religious issues of the times, and musical. Kitty was none of these, so they needed to show how her uncomplicated nature attracted him.
Do you find this valuable?    
tudorcrazy
tudorcrazy
77. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 11:27 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 11:27 PM EDT
you are so right. She couldn't even read a letter like that! Portrayal of Kitty all wrong. Do you find this valuable?    
tudorcrazy
tudorcrazy
78. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 9 2009, 11:37 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 9 2009, 11:37 PM EDT
I disagree. Kitty was far less educated than Jane, possibly dumber too. The dowager Duchess only provided these royal bastards with a roof over their head, and a minimal exposure to any skills like sewing and music.
Remember that Anne B was raised in the sophistacation of King Frances's court, her father was a supportive role model who demanded excellence. She was groomed for a socially climbing family.
Kitty H had no parents to speak of. No one was looking to raise her up, or groom her as a stepping stone to the king's favor. KOA was an annointed queen, and there is NO comparison. Yes, she wrote Culpepper some letters, but I think they were more like notes passed in class in school.
Do you find this valuable?    
howardfan
howardfan
79. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 10 2009, 5:35 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 10 2009, 5:35 AM EDT
"I disagree. Kitty was far less educated than Jane, possibly dumber too. The dowager Duchess only provided these royal bastards with a roof over their head, and a minimal exposure to any skills like sewing and music.
Remember that Anne B was raised in the sophistacation of King Frances's court, her father was a supportive role model who demanded excellence. She was groomed for a socially climbing family.
Kitty H had no parents to speak of. No one was looking to raise her up, or groom her as a stepping stone to the king's favor. KOA was an annointed queen, and there is NO comparison. Yes, she wrote Culpepper some letters, but I think they were more like notes passed in class in school."
Definitely, so it is impossible to look at these letters Sonnets or the calibre of lettering that Henry would have written, when he wrote his love letters to Anne B or even the letter Anne B wrote to henry VIII from the tower, there was a well educated, bilingual and court seasoned woman with an upbringing in hever castle, then the french court, as opposed to poor kathryn who was dirt poor since his father was very heavily in debt yet according to Dennys book, a veteran of the battle of bosworth, so the king pitied him rather than have him executed her father, however was not equipped to raise the children he had to Jocasta and they were scattered all over the place, they did not all go to live with Kittys grandmother, so this would be incredibly lonely for kathryn as well, since it is also understood that her nan was a bit of a tyrant, and the females within the dorms were not exactly the clean cut purity maidens such as the women in court or the seymour girl, even Anne of cleves was said to be a virgin when she married henry and she had no musical ability, but she was educated
0  out of 24 found this valuable. Do you?    
tudorcrazy
tudorcrazy
80. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 10 2009, 11:15 AM EDT | Post edited: Jul 10 2009, 11:15 AM EDT
"I don't think Kitty and Jane were as ill educated as people think. I can't imagine Queen Katherine or Anne allowing an ill educated woman like Jane into their services. Also, Henry wrote letters to Jane so this makes me think that she must have been able to read. And didn't Kitty write some love letters to Thomas Culpepper?"
I think Jane had to be more worldly, than Kitty, as she had parents, and brothers concerned with her advancement. That does,'t mean she was educated. It meant she shared a tutor, and had a minimum education for her class. Deportment, embroidery, music, religious studies, remember she was a Catholic, dancing were all necessary skills. Kitty had no parents, or ambitious brothers to put her forward. I absolutely think she was busy learning music, and "puffing and blowing" while the old Duchess went to bed early. Sounds like summer camp without the staff! No Kitty was far less educated than Jane, Jane had strong moral opinions, which Henry was all too anxious to end. She meddled with his daughters, and the Pilgrimage of Grace. I'm convinced if she had survived childbirth, she would have become a much more vocal and pivotal character, and would not remained his favorite. She might have even been killed/
Do you find this valuable?    
Honey-Beezz
Honey-Beezz
81. RE: Katherine Howard's portrayal this season?
Jul 10 2009, 2:21 PM EDT | Post edited: Jul 10 2009, 2:21 PM EDT
"I think Jane had to be more worldly, than Kitty, as she had parents, and brothers concerned with her advancement. That does,'t mean she was educated. It meant she shared a tutor, and had a minimum education for her class. Deportment, embroidery, music, religious studies, remember she was a Catholic, dancing were all necessary skills. Kitty had no parents, or ambitious brothers to put her forward. I absolutely think she was busy learning music, and "puffing and blowing" while the old Duchess went to bed early. Sounds like summer camp without the staff! No Kitty was far less educated than Jane, Jane had strong moral opinions, which Henry was all too anxious to end. She meddled with his daughters, and the Pilgrimage of Grace. I'm convinced if she had survived childbirth, she would have become a much more vocal and pivotal character, and would not remained his favorite. She might have even been killed/"
When you look at the portrait of Katherine Howard(if that is the real K),she does have an appealing look;so it would be understandable for Henry to fall in love with her. Also,while Jane might not have been the scholars QKof A and Anne Boleyn were,she had a strong family upbringing and strong in the Catholic faith. Certainly Katherine H. had none of that,and I am not knocking Katherine H. for that. Just the actress(and this is nothing against the actress herself) but the role Hirst chose her to play. I felt they did an injustice to the KH playing her quite so loose and dumb. I could see KH as a pretty girl who is out of her depth,welcomes the flattery and other perks a Queen receives,but knowing nothing else except having a good time. At court,flirtations went on all the time,but under manners and expected behavior. But,never a Queen!!
Do you find this valuable?    
Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next