Originally posted by Karen 2nd November 2005


Stephen Jeffreys has us meet Elizabeth Barry next. The first of the 2 Elizabeths.

The Wits, Jane and Alcock (Rochester's manservant) make their way to the Playhouse where they find the teen aged Mrs Barry running lines with Mr Harris, a fellow actor in the company and with Molly Luscombe, the stage manager.

Here we see the "Pygmalion" suggestion with the wager made by Rochester with Etherege. We also see one of the quotes from the teaser about those who do not like you. I can't wait to see how much of the dialog makes it from play to film.

Anyway, what do we learn about Mrs Barry at first meeting? What else is uncovered about Rochester? What does all this exposition tell us?

Deppraved

My first impression of Mrs. (what? is she married, or do they just address all women of a certain age as "Mrs."?) Barry at the first meeting is that she is a woman who has ambitions, thinks for herself and follows her own instincts. She is willful and a bit jaded. It seems she has been hurt, and used, and it has hardened her to a degree. She is a good mental match for our Lord Rochester, no?

It seems Rochester IS capable of seeing a woman as other than a mere plaything, and deep down he yearns to find one he can respect and admire.

All this exposition shows us what it was like to be in showbiz in the latter part of the 17th century. Luscombe's warning to Barry about heeding the advice of those who came before you shows that a woman's place in the theater was tenous and also it suggested to me that Barry thought it was time to shake things up a bit and make room for change.

I sure hope I answered the question(s). I'm always very insecure about my answers and wow, these discussions are challenging!

Lufirel

Interesting thoughts deppraved. In answer to your question I think women did refer to themselves as Mrs. when they performed upon the stage.

So Lizzy, eh? The first time we see her she seems, in my opinion, cold and a bit arrogant. Like Rochester she doesn't seem to think that she has to play by the rules, which might help to explain his attraction. She certainly doesn't welcome the help of her fellow actor Mr. Harris, and event after she is given it she still performs her part the way she wants to. Consequently she comes off as strong-willed to the point of pig-headed, fiercely independent, and, yes, jaded. It does seem that she has been hurt by men in the past, although Mr. Jeffereys merely hints at this point rather than pursuing it.

As I indicted above I think she is like Rochester in quite a few ways. They are both strong willed and have a definite disdain for their companions. In fact now that I think about it, and at the risk of getting ahead of our discussion, she and Rochester sort of switch positions during the play. At this point Rochester is at the center of his world, admired by his fellow wits and in favor with the King, and Lizzie is a completely unknown (and bad) actress. But by the end Lizzie is a star attraction and Rochester is utterly falling apart from his disease. Although the way they develop is different, however, at this point in time both she and Rochester seem to me to be damaged individuals who are not using their full potential.

Why was Rochester attracted to her? Her iciness? Her haughtiness? Her rebellious nature which made her say the speech the way she wanted to rather than the way she was taught? Probably all of the above. Most of all though I think he appreciated he lack of affectations (of which Rochester has few has few kind words). Knowing Rochester he might also have appreciated the irony of a lover and wit of his caliber falling for the worst actress on the English stage (not to mention the challenge of turning her into the best actress).

Hibblette

I look at Barry on a Personal note.

I am an Actress. It's been a while since I've done stagework or even film-but I am an actress.

And yes I have met my share of Johnny Wilmots.

I totally understood her attitude towards him all through this play.

I believe the Mrs is because of the sense of properness and the sense that she is not a young maid without her escort. A married woman was still not as free as a man was but she did have certain respectability that came with the title of Mrs.

So the Mrs. gave her a respectability. And although the raunchiness was all around they still (even the cads) had this thing about respectability. Which is what is so odd about all of them-even Rochester wanted the respectability.

Hmmmm perhaps this is the time when have your cake and eat it too started. I never understood it as a child but-here we have a bunch of people who wanted a certain kind of freedom and yet at the same time they wanted to not be looked down upon.

I think her appeal to him was that she wasn't fawning over him. A rake such as Wilmot this would be an affront. And he does go for the manipulation of this young woman and he does try to break her.

Karen


Yup....he seemed to have whatever and whoever he wanted.

She didn't much seem to want him.

Mairimaih


perhaps too the contradiction of her appealed, she was able to pay the 'truth' on the stage, and break hearts with the tenderness ofher characters on stage, but she was known as the 'coldest hearted whore' off it, bought for £5 by anyone.. though in this portrayal of her I am reminded totally of Rochesters poem 'A ramble in St Jame's park .. where he promises ;
And disobedience cease to please us

Edited for PG13 reasons


He certainly seems, in real life to have grown to hate her, and he did take their daughter away from her, and raised her on his estate. I think the depth of love he felt for her turned to this level of bitterness and anger. I think especially as he opened up to her, and showed in his letters a depth of feeling she rejected, partly as he was away from her very sick, and too poor to provide financially for her, something she apparently hated and reacted strongly to after their daughter was born, when all he was genuinely able to send her was a box of trinkets rather than cash,
Of course this isn't remotely touched on in the film, but it does colour their relationship to me as I watch it in the film

Karen

I guess there's only so much that can be covered in a film. I can't help but wonder how they are going to get Shantaram into 1 film. LOL

Hibblette

And since the beginnings of story telling there is never going to be a story that captures exactly what happened in anything.

There is always something that will skew it.

For example do you honestly think King Richard went through the battlefield exclaiming "A Horse, a horse my kingdom for a horse."?