In 1975, the BBC began an ambitious project to film every play in the Shakespeare canon. Their philosophy: since Britain was the land of Shakespeare, the BBC needed to produce “definitive” versions. They set out the following rules: only British actors could be cast; only period-appropriate costuming could be used; only minimal edits could be made to the text. Special attention was paid to the two history cycles, starting with Richard II in 1979 and ending with Richard III in 1983. These used consistent casting to form a cohesive narrative for each tetralogy. This representation of Britain was designed to echo Shakespeare’s in every way.
Over 30 years later, the BBC would once again film the first Henriad as a representation of Britain in the year London hosted the Olympics, then produce the next tetralogy four years later. However, the land of Shakespeare now looked quite different. The cast, while naturally dominated by British actors, also included non-Britons; people of color played several roles previously occupied by whites; some costumes now might be more attractive, but less period-appropriate; vast edits were made to the texts.
While the changes in the cast show the BBC’s overt desire to project an image of a diverse Britain, those modifications are only the tip of the iceberg. Even the differences in the costuming and the changes to the text reflect cultural shifts: the devaluing of traditionalism, the prioritizing of impressive visuals, and the increased importance of the international market. The choice of text edits is also telling: for instance, the loss of Jack Cade’s subplot in Henry VI Part 2 shows that issues of class are being deemphasized.
In short, I will explore the way these two adaptations present Britain and how each one reflects the differing cultural values of its time.
About the presenterNancy Kerns
I am an associate professor at Blue Mountain College.