狼厅

对于这段历史，我知之甚少，唯一于两三年前，有涉猎 The Other Boleyn Girl(另一个波琳家的女孩) 英文原著。

因为是原著，对于眼花缭乱的未知的形容词名词，我都懒于一一查证，只读了个大概。

故，此篇小评，仅从我个人感受出发，略谈一二。

该6集迷你剧，以主人公Thomas Cromwell (托马斯·克伦威尔) 的视角， 呈现了 Henry VIII (英王亨利八世) 第一次废后风波。

Cromwell 追随的原主公 Thomas Wolsey (托馬斯·沃尔西) —— 时任大法官，国王首席顾问，因未能如亨利八世所愿，与罗马教廷成功协商英王的离婚请愿，骤然失宠，同时被英王与仇家驱往苦寒之地。

Wolsey 颓然失势，大厦将倾，身边仅留Cromwell 一忠臣不离不弃。

为向英王求情以期主公重获帝心，Cromwell 前往宫廷，会见帝王， 而Wolsey则发往谪迁之地。

Cromwell 不愧为Wolsey 的得力谋臣，他极快地获得了帝王的喜爱，为主公谋得了些许补助。

同时，Cromwell 也得到了自己敌人，英王的情妇以及欲结婚对象——Anne Boleyn (安‧波林) 的召见。

Cromwell 获得了未来王后的喜爱，并领了新差。

正当Cromwell 疲于两边周转时，噩耗袭来，英王以叛国罪逮捕 Wolsey, 欲押往伦敦塔，而 Wolsey 却在途中因病过世。

Cromwell 得知后大为悲痛，却将哀恸深埋于心，赴往英王的宴会。

宴席上，权臣为了庆祝昔日权宦 Wolsey的坠亡，特排了话剧，将 Wolsey恶意丑化魔改。

Cromwell 掩于人群中，将所有饰演者的脸深深烙印心中。

为抱旧主大仇，Cromwell 决心加入下议院，逐步攀登，接近帝王。

Cromwell 如愿得到了帝君的喜爱，并委以重任。

Cromwell 修立法案，使亨利成功废后并迎娶新后。

英王对新后十分宠爱，然好景不长。

新后始终未能为英王诞下王子，随着母族干政，权倾朝野，英王逐渐失去了耐心。

英王授意Cromwell 协助自己，废黜新后。

Cromwell 展开调查，成功发现新后与多人通奸，其中甚至包括她的亲兄弟。

Cromwell 将通奸者一一捕获，发现他们与深埋记忆中仇人的脸庞逐渐重合。

最后，新后被问斩，Cromwell 得以赴命。

———————————————————————————————-—————————————第一集，初始的黑底白字，在古朴的琴声下，历史的肃穆感向我铺面袭来。

在断断续续哀婉的琴声后，有一刹那的寂静，我纳罕着，期待着；随即，画面陡然转变，正片开始，主题曲 Wolf Hall 倏然奏响。

伊始印象最深的，就是这部剧肃穆沉重的背景音乐，和忧郁暗沉的影片色调。

鉴于对历史了解甚少，无法评说是否真实还原历史。

但就个人观感，我愿意相信，这样的历史是真实的。

我愿意相信，那个时代人们的衣着生活是那样的，那样的朴素乏陋，又因着几百年岁月的浸染，显的端庄神圣。

我像一个窥探者，透着历史沙漏中的间隙，得以窥见，千百年前，一代权臣的蛰伏，破出，与展翅。

我也如撒旦，透过人面人心与人行，得以知晓人内心深处的欲望与黑暗。

分享Debbie Wiseman的单曲《Wolf Hall》:https://y.music.163.com/m/song/31192013/?userid=304436804(来自@网易云音乐)

帧帧都是伦勃朗，英剧的步调和美剧很不同，主演诠释了一位刻板聪明，以卑微的身份而立足于皇室，即使一直被当枪使，却能打出自己的一片天地的牛人。

就是由于表情一直刻板，而使得每个眼神和微表情都是戏，很欣赏这个演员。

不觉得最后突出主角的复仇是在简单化主角，我觉得这正对应了剧里别人对他的信仰的怀疑。

一直贯穿着一些宗教的内容，有人说他是路德派，宗教改革阶段对于人来说肯定充满了各种矛盾。

主角虽没有否认过肯定过任何说法，而且也留存着改革派的圣经，也都读过，看得出很感兴趣，但他的信仰在最后做了交代。

他尊敬的主教，他的上帝，他带着复仇的情绪审判了那些 他觉得背叛了的人。

至于他非常识时务的不对改革派做评价并且感兴趣，那是一个聪明人，在面对命运，面对那个时代最好的选择吧。

从上大学以来，很少看这种历史纪实类电视剧，因为觉得历史无关对错，只有选择，记得一句话，以史为鉴，可以知兴替，但是生在现在这个时代，这个太平盛世，仿佛知道兴替也没有太大的意义，因为社会不需要改变了吧，或者说不需要我们改变了，我们做的就是享受生活就好但因为她在追这个剧，很想要和她多一些话题讲，所以认认真真的看完了整体评价来说，整部剧的节奏很紧密，也许因为太紧密了，需要静下心来慢慢的理解，有的时候还需要倒回去重新看一遍才能看明白一些细节，虽然只有六集，但是蕴含的信息量真的很多，看完第一集以后，我又去恶补了一下这部剧的历史背景，才在心里大致明白了主要在讲什么，看历史剧就是这样，不了解这段历史就很容易忽略一些东西，了解以后又没有了未知的乐趣，需所以还是需要仔细斟酌整体拍摄很好，至少很有看下去的欲望，克伦威尔的成长背景并没有大篇幅展开介绍，而是零散分布在几个细节里，还有他回忆的片段中，让他始终充满了神秘感，大家都不知道他经历了什么，也不知道他的过往，他是绝情的，冷血的，能隐忍，有能力，又有野心，又恰逢乱世，崛起是必然，感触最深的就是他和主教的感情，真的感情有那么深吗，可能未必，但是可能是失去了才知道珍惜，也可能是兔死狐悲怕步上切尔西的后尘，在切尔西离开后，在他心里，才真的撤销了对切尔西的算计，留下了真实的情感，开心难过兼而有之，但至少在他心里留下了很深很深的印记之前的我很向往成为克伦威尔这样的人，孤家寡人，永远是理中客，虽然偶尔会孤独，但其实孤独的时候内心也是骄傲的可是后来遇到了她，让我可以把理智抛之脑后，我就知道，我这辈子都做不成这种人了，因为我渴望和她一起生活，一起开心，一起难过，一起过平凡但又幸福的生活，纵使世间纷扰再多，又与我何干，我只要能和她在一起就好，之前觉得这话有些矫情，现在发现说的确实很对，她是我的软肋，也是我面对这个世界的铠甲人生就这么长，开心和幸福最重要啦

一、喜新厌旧的亨利八世今年，在读有关克伦威尔的小说《狼厅》。

这本小说，拿过布克奖。

实话说，作者的闪回式碎片写作，加上略晦涩的翻译得略难懂。

冲着戴米恩的亨利八世去的。

戴米恩在《国土安全》、《亿万》里，演的都是大男主，精明强干，十分有人格魅力。

但是，这部剧里，戴米恩完全就是个工具人，沦落为里朗斯的陪衬。

港真，戴米恩，真的，不适合演风流倜傥的花花公子。

他是那种，哪天爆出来桃色新闻，你第一反应一定是：“啥？

不可能！

他对美色完全不感冒。

”或者是“啥？

还有能破他金身的人？

我倒要看看，是哪个美女，这么牛。

”他身上有那种“终日只顾打熬气力，不以这女色为念”的豪雄调调。

所以，他演亨利八，特别没有说服力。

毕竟，亨利八世是个负心汉，他的宫闱秘闻养活的文人，不知凡几、若恒河沙数。

二、权斗高手亨利八世这部剧，虽然以克伦威尔为主线，但我想写亨利八世。

一则，我最近在读另一本克伦威尔的传记，打算把对克伦威尔的看法放在那篇读书笔记里。

二则，亨利八世，这个人，实在值得大书特书。

先说结论：此君，真雄主也！

我一向对宫闱秘闻没啥兴趣，对亨利八、克伦威尔的私生活也不咋关注。

虽然，亨利八世声望不佳，但从功业上看，他是英帝国的奠基人，无疑了。

亨利八世，跟唐高宗李治的路数有点像。

不是长子，不是王位第一继承人。

看起来，也不是那么靠谱。

但，就是这么不靠谱的人，总能干出罔顾世俗人伦的大事件。

李治，力排众议，娶了自己爸爸的后妃。

亨利八世，力排众议，休妻、杀妻、停妻再娶，这种事情，干了不知道多少回。

亨利八世，面临的问题与李治类似，就是父亲给自己留下一个王朝的同时，也留下了一个勋贵集团。

王朝想要发展，就要削藩王、清勋贵。

王权与贵族群体之间有着不可调和的矛盾，这是主要矛盾，宫闱秘闻，那都是边边角角的花絮。

孰轻孰重，一望便知。

他要进一步巩固王权，就必须要起用克伦威尔这样的寒门士子，同时，拿婚姻问题大作文章，解除外患。

第二任王后，安·博林及其家族，主要功能跟武则天及其家族的作用一模一样，就是用来抗衡贵族。

坏事让克伦威尔、安·博林家族做，自己坐享其成。

一旦这些工具人完成了历史使命，立刻换掉。

所以，在亨利八世一朝，他回收了教会的税源，对勋贵阶层进行了一轮又一轮的大清洗。

无非，就是确立了王权的集中地位，同时，让新生代、少壮派迅速崛起。

当然，大清洗必定带来人心动荡。

但亨利首开了先例，给英帝国的崛起奠定了钱脉、权脉的基础，打通了下层寒门上升通道。

这不是雄主，是什么？

根据两届布克奖得主，希拉里·曼特尔(Hilary Mantel)的热销历史小说《狼厅》Wolf Hall和《提堂》Bring Up the Bodies改编，讲述了亨利八世统治下的都铎王朝宫廷权力斗争的故事。

根据两届布克奖得主，希拉里·曼特尔(Hilary Mantel)的热销历史小说《狼厅》Wolf Hall和《提堂》Bring Up the Bodies改编，讲述了亨利八世统治下的都铎王朝宫廷权力斗争的故事。

亨利八世的王后常常难以善终，凯瑟琳王后在孤寂愤懑中死亡，安妮·博林王后在战栗胆怯中被斩首……但她们的死亡又有着不同常人之处：一个死后回避了男性的凝视；一个死后禁止男性的触碰。

所以，如果说摩尼教是全体无身体，天主教是部分无身体（教士阶层无身体），清教徒是好像没（as if not）身体，那么，国教运动前后的王后有几个身体？

肯定不是2个，她们并不拥有不朽的政治身体，但也不是1个，她们的身体总被赋予特殊的政治与宗教意义。

也许有1.5个，多出的0.5个显示出其不充分的政治权力，但也许只有0.5个，缺少的0.5个源自肉身的意义总是被无限的政治化。

但也许只有1个。

王后死了，不可挽回，不会复活，没有不朽的天国，没有身穿白衣的圣体，身体彻彻底底地灭亡了。

甚至是0个！

王后从未拥有自己的身体，甚至死亡这一本该证明身体实存的事件也被用于证明身体的匮乏。

王后之死均与无法诞下子嗣有关，国王承认了王后缺乏身体，缺乏可以生殖的身体。

凯瑟琳死后，唯一可能的吊唁者是教宗的大使，一个同样被拒绝拥有身体的神父，然而他并未成行，为什么？

这既是因为国王的阻拦，另一具身体的阻拦，更是因为王后从来不曾有过身体。

博林临刑前后，侍女充当隔绝男性亵渎与污染身体的作用，不是为了保护身体的神圣与纯洁，而是为了强化身体空无的白色神话，空无的身体在常人的目光中消失，或者说从未存在。

死刑真的发生了吗？

王后真的尸首分离了吗？

也许王后的身体从不存在，唯有通过禁忌的设定，才能塑造不可触碰者的存在。

那么，国王为什么需要王后？

为什么需要既可交媾寻欢又可诞下子嗣的王后？

王后的身体是怎样的身体？

王后真的有身体吗？

我抱着很高的期望来看这剧的。

结果发现剧情就是亨利八世换老婆，到第5/6集基本就是cat fight，mock trial，津津乐道的断头台啥的。

上一部很喜欢的伊丽莎白迷你剧，也是这范儿。

大概用连续剧来演宗教改革神马的，确实没人看？

我错了，不该把这剧认作历史剧。

其实它是个肥皂剧。

不过肥皂剧真的很华丽啊，各种戏骨啊，各种细节考究啊，背景音乐很给力。

Damian Lewis每次出场都好帅啊，直接忽视国王陛下本人的各种渣本性。

I read New Yorker’s profile of Hilary Mantel in 2012 after she became the first female writer to win two Man Booker Prize. I was very intrigued by Mantel then, and put “Wolf Hall” on my to-read list. But never got around to do so.http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/15/the-dead-are-realBBC’s 6 episode “Wolf Hall” mini TV series got lots of praise. It is said that the screenwriter adapted Mantel’s work very nicely and captured the essence of the book.I fell in love with it after watching Episode one.The custom, setting, lighting were so well done, every frame looked like a painting. The acting was marvelous as well. Even though most of them were not familiar to the US audience. But supposedly all of the main characters were seasoned stage actors in England, and it showed.See the album link below for some interesting comparison between the actors in the TV series and their actual portrait from the 16th century. Mostly by Hans Holbein the Younger, who was the official painter for the court of Henry VIII.http://www.douban.com/photos/album/155586258/Apparently the soundtrack of the TV series was also a hit in Britain. Too early to tell how it will fair in the US. I myself really loved the music.http://music.163.com/#/album?id=3111229The Guardian had episode by episode explanation of the story line, it was very helpful for people who is not familiar with the Tudor history (such as myself), which was pretty complicated. http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/series/wolf-hall-episode-by-episode

Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn pop out for a stroll in ‘Wolf Hall’ (Pic: BBC)This Sunday (April 5), the recent BBC of Hilary Mantel's Wolf Hall and Bring Out the Bodies comes to PBS, starring Mark Rylance and Demian Lewis. It's the story of Thomas Cromwell, a lawyer and former mercenary from a poor background who ended up becoming an advisor first to Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, and then to Henry VIII. And in doing so became one of the most powerful men in England.It's particularly auspicious moment in British history, as Thomas becomes involved in Henry's attempts to legally dissolve his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, woo Anne Boleyn and sire a male heir. And in doing so, create a permanent rift between the English church's break and Rome, which is set against the background of protestant reforms, and leads directly to Henry's dissolution of the monasteries, claiming all the treasures found for this own coffers."Voila! The King of England will be a bachelor."Wolf Hall is a fascinating fictionalized account of a man who historians have often decried as cold, scheming and vicious.So before it all kicks off, here are ten useful snippets of information you may wish to get clear before immersing yourself in all the political shenanigans and dark, candlelit corridors:1. Almost nothing of note happens in a place called Wolf Hall. Actually, Wolfhall (or Wulfhall) is the site of a manor house, home of the Seymour family in Burbage, Wiltshire. The family's daughter Jane would go on to become Henry's third wife.2. Wolf Hall is mentioned in the Domesday Book as Ulfela, an Anglo-Saxon name, and it will have been a small village; a meeting point between several farmsteads. This later became Ulfhall and then Wulfhall. So the Seymour manor house was not named Wolf Hall, it was built in Wolfhall.3. There is a Cromwell family tie to Wolfhall too, as Cromwell's son Gregory later married Elizabeth Seymour, sister of Jane and (like Jane) one of the servants in Anne Boleyn's household.4. The original manor house at Wolfhall was a medieval timber-framed manor house with a long gallery, a 'Little Court', a 'Broad Chamber', a chapel, a kennel for hounds, and a tower (which was pulled down in 1569).5. Henry stayed there in 1535, during his marriage to Anne Boleyn, which may have been when he first began to pitch woo at Jane Seymour.6. He was not the first reigning monarch to use Wolfhall as a staging post. Edward I visited in 1302, on a journey across Wiltshire between Marlborough Castle to Ludgersall Castle.7. Although Thomas Cromwell was instrumental in clearing the way for Henry to marry Anne Boleyn, it was his skill as a match-maker that later caused his fall from grace. Having arranged the marriage between Henry and his fourth wife, the German princess Anne of Cleves, Cromwell was surprised to discover Henry did not take to Anne at all, and in fact had the marriage annuled on the grounds that it had not been consummated. He was later arrested for treason.8. The title of the book, and therefore the TV series, uses the name of the Seymour home as an atmospheric hint that we are in the realm of the Latin expression homo homini lupus, or "Man is wolf to man". In other words, this is a dog-eat-dog world, which Henry at the head of the pack.9. By 1571, the manor house at Wolfhall lay derelict, as the family had moved to nearby Tottenham House, taking some of the materials to build their new home. It was used for servants quarters for a while, and finally demolished in 1723. Some elements did survive into the early 20th century, including a barn which was said to have played host both to a wedding feast for Henry and Jane, and a subsequent feast just for Henry when he revisited after Jane died. But that burned down in the 1920s.10. There was a Victorian railway junction with the name of Wolf Hall, but that's gone now. However, there is still a dairy farm that uses the name转载自10 Little-Known Facts About the Real Wolf HallP.S.From WikipediaEpisodes TitleEpisode 1. "Three Card Trick"Episode 2. "Entirely Beloved"Episode 3. "Anna Regina"Episode 4. "The Devil's Spit"Episode 5. "Crows"Episode 6. "Master of Phantoms"

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/22/thomas-cromwell-fixer-wolf-hall?CMP=share_btn_fbCromwell, the fixers’ fixer: a role model for our timesMartin KettleThomas Cromwell is the politician of the moment. We seem entranced by him. How cunning and deep he is. How clever and calculating. With what skill he acquires, husbands and uses his power. How precise he is in his judgment of when to speak and when to stay silent, when to watch and when to act, absolutely ruthlessly if need be.We are a nation hooked on Cromwell, as a result of Hilary Mantel’s novels. And now perhaps in even greater numbers than before, thanks to the BBC’s dramatisation of Wolf Hall that began this week, whose centrepiece is Mark Rylance’s Cromwell: the outsider who mesmerisingly watches, plots and thinks his way into the heart of the English Tudor state.On one level, the current national embrace of Cromwell is easy to explain. The Tudors are box office. And Cromwell was a big Tudor figure. Mantel’s books expertly draw the reader into Cromwell’s reflective world, where his words are the tip of an iceberg of unspoken feelings and thoughts. After just one episode, Rylance’s portrayal is already a masterpiece of suggestion, tempting us to overlook Shakespeare’s advice that there’s “no art to find the mind’s construction in the face”It is sometimes implied that Mantel’s reimagining of Cromwell has overturned the way we see the reign of Henry VIII. But this shows what short memories we all have. This is not the first time in English history that Cromwell’s stock has been so high. After his death, many Elizabethans saw him as a heroic martyr to the English protestant cause. And after the second world war Professor GR Elton – uncle of Ben – placed him on a very different pedestal at the heart of what he called the Tudor revolution in government.Elton’s Cromwell was the man who blew away the medieval system of government based on the king’s household. He replaced it with a departmental bureaucracy that was the forerunner of the modern constitutional state. In Elton’s judgment, Cromwell was “the most remarkable revolutionary in English history”, and his intellect “the most successfully radical instrument at any man’s disposal in the 16th century”. Mantel’s Cromwell owes much to Elton’s heroic reinvention.Yet Cromwell, even in the Elton-Mantel version, is a very improbable hero for our times. Cromwell’s essential attraction is his mastery of statecraft, his ability to identify a political goal and achieve it unerringly but pragmatically. He is unsentimental, cold-blooded, secular, and ruthless. He is a master of detail and of small moves in the service of larger ones. It is not clear whether Cromwell ever read Machiavelli, but there have been few leaders in English or British political history who better embodied Machiavellian ideas. In short, he is the sum of much that the modern era dislikes, or affects to dislike, in its politicians.What is even more unlikely about Cromwell’s place in the sun, as Mantel’s readers and viewers will know, is that he was an enemy of a man who in so many ways is the sum of everything that the modern era admires, or affects to admire. Thomas More remains the incarnation of individual conscience, of rising above the quotidian, and doing the morally right thing in difficult and dangerous times. It is no surprise that in postwar Britain, it was More, especially as embodied by Paul Scofield in A Man for All Seasons, who ruled the Tudor roost.By rights, More ought to be the man for our season too. He is pre-emenintly the Tudor politician who embodies sticking to firm principles, upholding moral authority and obeying the dictates of conscience. He refuses to do the politically convenient thing because he believes it is wrong – and pays with his life. Not for him Cromwell’s cynical survive-the-day relativism. If anyone is the man for an age that feels tarnished by illegal wars, mistreated by the power of corporations and banks, betrayed by MPs’ expenses, demeaned by the banality of modern politics, it is surely More.And yet our age has embraced not pious, high-minded More, but aspirational, crafty Cromwell, who stands for everything we say we dislike about modern politics and statecraft. It is a very odd disjunction. It could simply be that we all love a costume drama with great actors. But it could also suggest there is some hope for politics yet.Politicians could hardly suffer from lower esteem than they do at the moment. A survey published this week by the Edelman PR company confirms the overwhelmingly negative picture of the past few years, with trust in the doldrums, and with the reputations of government, business and media all flatlining. “People are desperate for honesty and fair play,” the report concludes. This is one reason why support for the established political parties is so low and why a proportion of the electorate is now embracing parties that offer easy answers to complex and difficult real problems.Cromwell stands against all that. He stands for the art of politics, not for fantasy politics. It has often been said, including by RA Butler, who chose the phrase for the title of his memoirs, that politics is the art of the possible. I prefer Robin Cook’s characterisation that politics is also the art of the impossible. Cromwell was the vindication of that view – and his distant and later relative Oliver wasn’t bad at the game either. Cromwell knew precisely where he was trying to get, and he was pretty effective about getting there.There is no point requiring every politician to have Cromwell’s gifts. It would be a scary political scene if they did. But there is a great deal of point in valuing and celebrating the statecraft and the political calculation that Cromwell mastered so well. Honesty and fair play are all very well, but effectiveness and continued support count for more in the end.I read somewhere that the late Caroline Benn, wife of Tony, thought that political leaders fell into three categories: , which she called pedestrians, fixers or madmen. Allocating British prime ministers to the three categories is an entertaining exercise, especially if you remember that no category has all the virtues or all the vices. Tony Benn, apparently, was confident that if he had become prime minister he would have been one of the madmen.I like fixers. The pedestrians frustrate me. The madmen frighten me. True, fixers aren’t always the best politicians. But the best politicians are almost always good fixers. Think Lloyd George or Franklin Roosevelt. And Cromwell, a fixers’ fixer, is right up there too. As long as we understand that knowing what you want is utterly useless unless you also know how to get it, then politics will have a storied future as well as a storied past.