I’m sorry but Catherine Parr wasn’t an accomplice of Seymour’s abuse to Elizabeth (once again I have to say - go and read sources before typing, people!) and it’s neither fair, nor accurate to portray her as an unsympathetic character in Becoming Elizabeth. There’s no need to vilify Catherine in order to portray Elizabeth sympathetically in this situation. If Becoming Elizabeth goes that path [i.e. portray Catherine as a cold bitch only caring for power], it will be a big disappointment for me.
I think it would be a great shame if Becoming Elizabeth villainised Catherine Parr because for all the talk of feminism it would erase a warm and loving maternal relationship.
It would also not help the show’s historical accuracy because villainising Catherine Parr allows Seymour apologists to say “that’s not accurate, she wasn’t like that.” And they’d be right- on that point. But then they could extend that to “the showrunners don’t care about historical accuracy, the whole storyline is made up.” Do not give the apologists any ammunition, Anya Reiss.
ALL OF THIS !!!!!!!!!!!.
Looking at Catherine’s actions after she was aware of the abuse was that she sent Elizabeth away for her protection, she understood what that move was, it was not a Henry like move out of sight out of mind, or sending away the problem. After all Thomas was her husband and the wife had to obey and support her husband. If going by her deathbed comments she was a victim of Thomas too not to the extent of Elizabeth but yes she still was, sometimes I wonder if the speed of their marriage was the result of more than just love/lust.
The only people Catherine was ever openly villainous to after Henry’s death was Edward Seymour and Anne Stanhope, but that also was an extension of the brothers relationship and the disrespect they showed towards the wishes of Henry VIII. I have said before this had nothing to do with Elizabeth so it is unlikely we will see it played out.
If they do villainize her it looks like Firebrand is going to be project to watch,
I’m not the biggest Catherine Parr fan. However, if this is supposedly a “love to hate” sort of character, I think they might take the approach of Catherine trying to rationalize what she might see happening. Seymour is going to definitely gaslight her and she is going to try to rationalize that he’s correct.
She had finally married for love, after all, and she had brought Elizabeth into her house with the full intention to continue to be a mother to her and protect her. She would never do anything to put Elizabeth in danger.
I think we will be upset as an audience that she refuses to see that the man she loves is endangering a girl she views as a daughter.
She will be complex and just as much a victim to Seymour as Elizabeth is.
It’s not just about the Seymour-Elizabeth situation though. What was that phrase of Catherine in the trailer about having her pawn in the game for? It’s as if she sees her royal wards only as some pieces of material and nothing more, no afection, nothing. I can’t imagine the real Catherine Parr referring to either Elizabeth or Jane Grey in such terms. Not to mention that this talk about pawns and game itself sounds distinctly like modern day trashy Tudor fiction a la Philippa Gregory, and not something the historical fugures themselves would have spoken, they simply didn’t express themselves and their ambitions that way.
I’m sorry but Catherine Parr wasn’t an accomplice of Seymour’s abuse to Elizabeth (once again I have to say - go and read sources before typing, people!) and it’s neither fair, nor accurate to portray her as an unsympathetic character in Becoming Elizabeth. There’s no need to vilify Catherine in order to portray Elizabeth sympathetically in this situation. If Becoming Elizabeth goes that path [i.e. portray Catherine as a cold bitch only caring for power], it will be a big disappointment for me.
I think it would be a great shame if Becoming Elizabeth villainised Catherine Parr because for all the talk of feminism it would erase a warm and loving maternal relationship.
It would also not help the show’s historical accuracy because villainising Catherine Parr allows Seymour apologists to say “that’s not accurate, she wasn’t like that.” And they’d be right- on that point. But then they could extend that to “the showrunners don’t care about historical accuracy, the whole storyline is made up.” Do not give the apologists any ammunition, Anya Reiss.
I’m sorry but Catherine Parr wasn’t an accomplice of Seymour’s abuse to Elizabeth (once again I have to say - go and read sources before typing, people!) and it’s neither fair, nor accurate to portray her as an unsympathetic character in Becoming Elizabeth. There’s no need to vilify Catherine in order to portray Elizabeth sympathetically in this situation. If Becoming Elizabeth goes that path [i.e. portrays Catherine as a cold bitch only caring for power], it will be a big disappointment for me.
“As a wealthy widow, Maud Parr was expected to remarry in order to ensure that her young family had a male protector. Maud however, was an independent and spirited woman and completely dismissed this route, instead choosing to pursue her own court career, just as she had done during her marriage. Maud was held in high regard by Henry VIII’s first wife, Catherine of Aragon, and, in her widowhood, she secured a prestigious and lucrative position at court as one of the queen’s ladies. In October 1519 Maud was recorded as one of a privileged group of ladies granted a permanent room at court. She was listed again as a member of the court the following month and the next year was chosen to accompany the queen to Calais to attend the most spectacular event of Henry’s reign, the Field of the Cloth of Gold. Maud was also friendly with the king and, in 1530, made him a gift of a coat of Kendal cloth. Maud was still listed as having had lodgings at court in January 1526 and, with only five other ladies, including the king’s own sister, was given the honour and privilege of a permanent suite of rooms. Maud was rarely at home during the early years of her widowhood although she maintained her own separate establishment in which her children resided”
—Catherine Parr: Wife, widow, mother, survivor, the story of the last queen of Henry VIII, Elizabeth Norton
Lady Jane Grey was born in 1537 and was the eldest daughter of Lady Frances Brandon and Henry Grey, the Duke of Suffolk and grandchild through her mother, to Charles Brandon and Mary Tudor, Queen of France. This, thanks to Henry VIII’s wishes, put Jane in line to the throne after Frances, Mary I and Elizabeth I.
Jane was brought up as a Protestant and she took her religion very seriously. She dressed in plain black clothes and had even had disagreements with Mary I over religion, including refusing to accept a Christmas present from her, during Edward VI’s reign. Jane was also very intelligent and was regarded as one of the most intelligent women of the day. She studied several languages, including Latin, French, Greek, Italian and Hebrew.
Early in 1547, Jane was sent to be brought up in the household of Thomas Seymour and his wife Katherine Parr, who had been previously married to Henry VIII. Elizabeth I was also living in the household at this time and Jane shared her tutors. This was probably a happy time during Jane’s life and it is often suggested she was very close to Katherine, who had acted as a loving stepmother to Henry VIII’s children. When Katherine Parr died following complications during childbirth, Jane was chief mourner at the funeral.
On 25th May 1553, Jane was married to Guildford Dudley, the son of the Lord Protector, John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. This marriage was part of the plot to put Jane on the throne and to keep his family powerful. John Dudley was to convince Edward VI to name Jane as his heir, which meant the Protestant faith could continue and the Lords who had pushed for it could keep their places, which would not happen if Mary I remained next in line. On 6th July 1553, Edward VI died. On 9th July Jane was proclaimed Queen, it is claimed that she was reluctant to take the crown from Mary, who was seen by many the rightful heir, but she eventually agreed in order to preserve her religion and because she had no other option.
Jane was Queen for nine days. During this time she refused to allow Guildford to be named King, determined not to give her power over to her husband. Mary I gained support and marched on London, as she came closer Jane’s councillors left her and defected to Mary to save themselves. Jane was imprisoned and Mary I was proclaimed Queen. Mary does not appear to have wanted to execute Jane. She held off from signing the death warrant as long as she could. It was only after a failed rebellion attempt to put Jane back on the throne and a demand from her future husband to have Jane executed before their marriage that she gave in and signed. Mary I gave Jane chances to recant her Protestant religion and become Catholic, even offering to spare her if she did. Jane refused.
On 12th February 1554, Guildford Dudley was executed for his part in the plot, Jane’s feelings about Guildford are not recorded. Jane was taken out next and was beheaded, aged 16 or 17.
FINALLY some interviews! Thanks to @annabolinas for finding these!
Right so some things to take away:
Jessica Raine read a biography of Catherine for this role! The way she speaks of her is with a tone of admiration and she talks about the hardship she’s faced so this makes me hopeful that Catherine will not, in fact, be portrayed as a one-note villain
Jamie mentioned that he intentionally didn’t watch other portrayals of Robert to make his portrayal his own which honestly I get - I would be pretty intimidated too if I felt like I had to follow in Tom Hardy and Jeremy Irons’ footsteps lol and its better for an actor to make his own sense of his role rather than trying to base it on something else. He’s an actor, not a historian after all.
Is that inscription by Catherine Parr that Jessica is talking about real??? I’ve never heard of it. Any thoughts @katherynparr?
Tom Cullen mentioning the huge codpiece he had to wear lmao lmao of course Seymour would
Jamie saying that he still couldn’t dress himself by the end of shooting yeah my guy that’s why Robert had manservants haha!
This whole emphasis on the script/story feeling modern is annoyingly anachronistic but we do have to remind ourselves that this is a show for entertainment, not a documentary. And unlike with Emma Frost and co, the BE crew doesn’t seem to be making pretentious, grandious statements about the people they’re portraying. They’re just telling a historical story for a modern audience and like eh, fair enough
Jamie Blackley talking about working with an intimacy coordinator … HMMMMMMMM
On that note, it does seem like the focus of the sexiness will be Thomas Seymour and Catherine Parr so if that’s true, that’s a relief (not that I ship them or something but it’s better than him and Elizabeth at the very bottom most least)
