#Owen Humphreys

[agelessphotography]

Aurora borealis appear over Vestrahorn mountain in southeast Iceland, Owen Humphreys, 2022

[sitting-on-me-bum]

Illuminated waves at sunset

By Owen Humphreys

Shipwrecked Mariners’ Society Photography Prize

[sheltiechicago]

North Tyneside, UK

Waves crash over Tynemouth pier on the north-east coast of England

Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA

[ifreakingloveroyals]

19 May 2018 | Prince Harry lifts the veil of Meghan Markle during their wedding ceremony in St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle in Windsor, England. (c) Owen Humphreys - WPA Pool/Getty Images

[kulturado]

The Story: Missed Friday's Northern Lights? The global light show, in photos

The Writer: Associated Press

(photo above by Owen Humphreys of St. Mary’s Lighthouse in Whitley Bay, England, photo below by Patrick Pleul at East Brandenburg, Poland, May 10, 2024) 

[shrodie]

Artist: Anonymous

(Context: Nellie's VA does a good Owen Wilson impression)

[nerds-yearbook]

In 1915, a time traveler from an undisclosed time in the 20th Century travelled back to the RMS Lusitania and tried to convince the Captain to alter course to prevent the ship from being sunk by a German U Boat. He was unable to prevent history from happening as normal. ("No Time Like the Past", The Twilight Zone, TV)

[une-sanz-pluis]

After Catherine died, Gloucester summoned Tudor before the council under a safe conduct; he sought sanctuary at Westminster. He maintained his innocence of any charge and was released, but on his way to Wales was arrested. His goods, worth £137 10s. 4d., were seized and he was consigned to Newgate prison, whence he escaped in January or early February 1438. After his recapture by John, Lord Beaumont (d. 1460), he returned to Newgate, and was then transferred to Windsor Castle (14 July) in the charge, soon afterwards, of Edmund Beaufort. Released in July 1439 on a £2000 recognizance, he was pardoned all offences on 12 November. Thereafter he was a member of the king's household; his two sons were in the care (1437–42) of the earl of Suffolk's sister, Katherine de la Pole, abbess of Barking, at the king's expense.

Ralph Griffiths, "Tudor, Owen [Owain ap Maredudd ap Tudur] (c. 1400–1461)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004, updated 2008)

[notalisonyet]

The Big Sleep (1946 film)

There’s a well-known plothole in the Humphrey Bogart film The Big Sleep: Who killed chauffeur Owen Taylor? It’s hard to figure out who in the movie had the motive and was still alive when he meets his end.

A few years back I wrote a hypothetical explanation to solve the unsolved crime, and now I’ve posted it on my WordPress blog: https://notalisonblog.com/the-big-sleep-1946-missing-chapter/

My version sort of qualifies as fan fiction, since it includes a long section of prose with a character’s POV. Call it a literary supposition.

[ebony1442]

Revisiting this, I find that I do not have this sort of opinion on other Great Detectives. Every version of Miss Marple is equally a manifestation of the frighteningly smart, eminently sensible elderly spinster that susses out the lies with nosy curiosity, be it Margaret Rutherford, Angela Lansbury, Julia McKenzie, or Joan Hickson. All of them conjure up Jane Marple equally well. Both William Conrad and Maury Chaykin brought the pre-eminent American Great Detective, Nero Wolfe, to life in all his grumpy, opinionated, and sedentary manner. Both Humphrey Bogart and Clive Owen embody the cynicism, anger, and resolution of Sam Spade. Robert Mitchum and Liam Neeson both manifest Phillip Marlowe in all his hard-boiled magnificence. It is only Holmes and Poirot where I have the dissatisfaction.

Maybe it is the popularity of these two, over the others, or maybe there is more to reinterpret in the First Consulting Detective and the Fussy Little Belgian. Miss Marple is so inherently an icon of the British rural imagery, and Spade and Marlowe are iconic as the origins of the American movie detective. And if you changed anything about Nero Wolfe, he would cease to be Nero Wolfe. Perhaps there is less that authors feel needs to be changed. Or perhaps they are just not as well known.

I sometimes feel that Jeremy Brett and David Suchet have cursed me to never enjoy other actors' portrayals of their respective Great Detectives. I love Robert Downey, Jr., but he is not Holmes; he is a pulp action hero version of Holmes, whirling through melees and explosions that Holmes would have predicted and let Lestrade resolve with the combined might of Scotland Yard. Branagh and Ustinov are geniuses, but they are too comfortable in the world to be the fussy little Belgian. They lack the discomfort with the messiness of the day-to-day that Suchet imparts in every gesture. (Poirot does not _chase_ the fleeing villain on foot, Msr. Branagh; that is what Japp and Hastings are for.)

Despite this, though, I enjoy the other visions of Holmes and Poirot. They show that even such iconic, important archetypal characters can be re-interpreted and show some new and fun.

[endlich-allein]

Rammstein, part 2/2, RDS Arena, Dublin, 23-06-2024 © Owen Humphreys

[sitting-on-me-bum]

Northumberland, UK

The aurora borealis, also known as the northern lights, appears over Bamburgh lighthouse on the north-east coast of England

Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA

[heartofstanding]

After reading your article, marriages like Eleanor and Humphrey, Katherine and John, Henry VIII and Ambeline are described as women seducing men, and men being victims... But marriages like Owen Tudor and Catherine, Richard Woodville and Jacqueta in Luxembourg, will have completely ignored the subjective initiative of women, and the description of men seducing women should be class/gender discrimination?

Hi anon, I think you're asking about what kind of narratives there were around the marriages between men and women of significantly higher status, the inverse of the type of relationships I was talking about in this blogpost I made on my sideblog that focused on Eleanor Cobham, where women married men of much higher status than themselves.

There seems to be comparatively little scholarship in this area and it would be fascinating to see what commonalities and links a study would produce. The marriage of men to women of significantly higher status than themselves does appear to have been fairly common but does not seem to have generated the same amount of commentary and infamy as the relationships between women who married men of significantly higher status. I don't mean that they didn't contract comment but that there was little sustained comment - who remembers Alice de Lacey and Eubulus le Strange? Katherine Woodville and Sir Richard Wingfield? The only high profile case I can think of is Joan of Kent and Thomas Holland.

From what I could find, there does not seem to be the equivalent narrative of the man of lesser status seducing or bewitching the high-status woman into marriage. Instead, what seems to be the common theme is, as Katherine J. Lewis says, "a standard medieval antifeminist notion: that women were naturally inclined to lust and rendered irrational to it."

Lewis was talking specifically about the case of Catherine de Valois. One contemporary chronicler remarked that she was "unable to fully control her fleshly passions" when she married Owen Tudor and even chastises her for keeping the marriage secret "so she did not claim honourable title [of marriage] during her lifetime". Tudor was described by another chronicle as "no man of birthe nother of lyflode", implying his unworthiness. But there seems to have been little rancour or blame directed at Tudor.

It's not until the 16th century where the image of Catherine as governed by her lust became the dominant narrative around her remarriage, perhaps because the rise of the Tudor dynasty and Henry VIII's marital life lent itself to it. One notable example is Edward Hall, who in 1548 described Catherine as:

beyng young and lust, folowyng more awne appetite, then frendely counsaill and regardyng more her priuate affecion then her open honour

He describes Tudor, on the other hand, as a "goodly gentilman & a beautyful person, garnished with many Godly gyftes, both of nature & of grace" - so the issue here is not that Tudor is a social-climber but that Catherine is at the mercy of her sexual desires. Probably the most extreme example of this is Nicholas Fox's claim that Catherine "bey[ed] like a very dronkyn whore" in bed with Tudor - a factoid often gleefully repeated by historians and commentators to proclaim Tudor's sexual prowess despite the fact that Fox made the claim in 1541 and is far from a reliable source. The fact that it has been almost universally used to celebrate Tudor by demeaning Catherine shows how long-lasting this type of narrative is. Polydore Vergil similarly describes Catherine dismissively as "yonge in yeres, and thereby of lesse discretion to judge what was decent for estates" and then focuses on Tudor's lineage and good qualities. Kavita Mudan Finn notes that he "succeeds in suppressing what on the surface to appears to be her agency - a second marriage of her own free will - by literally changing the subject to Owen, and by extension, Henry, Tudor". This same suppression of Catherine's agency appears again in Michael Drayton's Englands Heroicall Epistles where Catherine appears to be acting on her own initiative, wanting Tudor for herself, but Drayton has Tudor displace Catherine's agency by citing destiny as the impulse behind their union. Catherine "is reimagined as a 'a Royall Prize' for Tudor to claim", per Finn. In short, Catherine appears to be cast as oversexed and/or uncontrollable while Tudor's individual qualities and descent are celebrated and their union is seen as governed by destiny and fate.

Joan of Kent has fared similarly to Catherine in that she is primarily remembered as governed by her lust. Famously described as Froissart as "a woman more beautiful and amorous than any in the realm" and by Adam of Usk as a "woman given to slippery ways", Joan had married Thomas Holland clandestinely, then been convinced by her family to marry William Montagu (the son of the Earl of Salisbury). Around eight years later, Holland then petitioned the papacy to return Joan to him, resulting in a public scandal. When Holland died in 1360, Joan made another shocking match, this time marrying Edward of Woodstock, Edward III's eldest son and heir known to history as "the Black Prince". Joan was sometimes referred to the "Fair Maid of Kent" or "the Virgin of Kent", probably sarcastically. Thomas Austin's wife was alleged to claim that Joan's son with the Prince, Richard II, was "nevere the prynses son and ... his moder [i.e. Joan] was nevere but a strong hore". Froissart recorded a conversation between Richard and his usurper, Henry IV, where Henry alleged that a bastard gotten in adultery. W. Mark Ormrod also suggested that various narratives about Joan in the Peasants Revolt built on her carnal reputation and may have reflected even more salacious tales floating around. Thomas Walsingham emphasises Joan's other alleged, inordinate appetites around the time of her death - gluttony ("hardly able to move about because she was so fat") and a love of luxury.

It is, however, very difficult to determine how much of Joan's reputation was shaped to her marriage to a man of significantly lower status or how much it was shaped by her marriage to the man, at the time, was to be the next king of England and to whom her marriage was both scandalous and unconventional. Likely, her reputation was formed by both marriages, both feeding the other. The deposition of her son also meant that her reputation was used as a way of slandering him. Thomas Holland, on the other hand, barely seems to be mentioned, let alone criticised - even if he was in his mid-20s when he married the 12 year old Joan. In fact, Henry Knighton's chronicle positions Holland as seduced by her, crediting Holland's "desire for her" as the cause that she had been divorced from her second husband, Montagu.

Jacquetta and Richard Woodville do not seem to have drawn the same level of commentary. Lynda J. Pidgeon notes that "the marriage ... aroused no comment from English chroniclers until after the couple’s daughter, Elizabeth, married King Edward IV in 1464". though it was recorded in by continental chronicles, such as Enguerrand de Monstrelet, who recorded recorded:

In this year [1436], the duchess of Bedford, sister to the count de St. Pol, married, from inclination, an English knight called sir Richard Woodville, a young man, very handsome and well made, but, in regard to birth, inferior to her first husband, the regent, and to herself…

This has similar echoes to Hall's and Vergil's comments about the marriage of Catherine and Owen Tudor - Jacquetta marries from "inclination" a man inferior to herself but who is otherwise "very handsome and well-made". Hall includes the story of their marriage immediately after his account of Catherine and Tudor, which, as Finn says, "hints at a growing interest - and indeed, anxiety - about women's desires". Like Catherine, Jacquetta is described as marrying Woodville "rather for pleasure then for honour" and "without coū∣sayl of her frendes". Her family is said to disapprove but can do nothing - sentiments also found in Monstrelat and Jean de Wavrin. Rather than dwelling on Woodville's qualities as he does with Tudor's, Hall describes Woodville "lusty" and notes that he was made Baron Rivers, which may indicate . He does, however, mention the marriage of their daughter, Elizabeth, to the future Edward IV, a subject which he promises to return to.

The continuation of Monstrelet's chronicle links Jacquetta and Woodville's marriage to that of their daughter, Elizabeth Woodville's marriage to Edward IV, "thus linking these two unorthodox women together", per Finn. Here's what this continuation says:

After the death of the duke, his widow following her own inclinations, which were contrary to the wishes of her family, particularly to those of her uncle, the cardinal of Rouen, married the said lord Rivers, reputed the handsomest man that could be seen, who shortly after carried her to England, and never after could return to France for fear of the relatives of this lady.

It is likely that Jacquetta's unconventional second marriage helped render Jacquetta's reputation suspect and tempting to speculate that that it rendered her vulnerable to the accusations that she had used witchcraft to make Edward IV marry her daughter, Elizabeth Woodville. The unpopularity in France and Burgundy of her first marriage to John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford and Regent of France may have also played into this view. Ricardians have certainly framed her as her as a seductress and her family as scheming, power-hungry social climbers in that regard - while also treating her as driven by her lust for Woodville. However, there is no evidence that this was the view of Jacquetta at the time, either in England or in France.

Richard Woodville is unique amongst the three men I've mentioned in that he seems to have been reviled as a man "brought up from nought", along with the rest of his and Jacquetta's prodigious offspring. This view has been spurred on by Ricardian historians that have reviled Elizabeth Woodville, where the entire family is depicted as a brood of grasping social climbers. An invasive species, if you will. I think it is likely that Jacquetta and Richard Woodville's marriage has helped furnish this view, particularly for Woodville himself. However, this particular image of Woodville and his children only seems to emerge with Elizabeth's marriage to Edward IV and the tensions between Edward, Woodville, George, Duke of Clarence and Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick ('the Kingmaker'), rather than Woodville's marriage to Jacquetta.

In short: the tendency seems to be depict the high-status woman as indulging in her own sexual desires and acting on her own will, disregarding reason, counsel and sense, while the man of lesser-status is considered handsome but bears little or no responsibility for seducing the woman. He is of less interest to contemporary chroniclers. Woodville seems to be an exception, rather than the norm, in being seen as guilty of social climbing and there it is the marriage of his daughter, not his own marriage, that gave that reputation. Owen Tudor, as the patriarchal originator of the Tudor dynasty, was celebrated by Tudor-era writers for his qualities and Welsh lineage - it would be easy to conclude that had he not been the grandfather of Henry VII, he would be entirely forgotten.

There do not seem to be any contemporary claims than Tudor, Holland or Woodville seduced, bewitched or raped their wives, whatever historical fiction novelists or pop historians claim. However, it should be noted that there are many cases where other high-status women could be abducted and forced into marriage. One example is Alice de Lacey, Countess of Lancaster. For those cases, I suggest reading Caroline Dunn's Stolen Women. It is far too long and complicated subject to summarise in a tumblr post.

Sources:

Caroline Dunn, Stolen Women in Medieval England: Rape, Abduction, and Adultery, 1100–1500 (Cambridge University Press, 2017)

David Green “‘A woman given to slippery ways’? The reputation of Joan, the Fair Maid of Kent”, People, Power and Identity in the Late Middle Ages: Essays in Memory of W. Mark Ormrod (Routledge, 2021, eds. Gwilym Dodd, Helen Lacey, Anthony Musson)

Katherine J. Lewis, “Katherine of Valois: The Vicissitudes of Reputation”, Later Plantagenet and the Wars of the Roses Consorts: Power, Influence, and Dynasty (eds. J. L. Laynesmith and Elena Woodacre, Palgrave 2023)    

Kavita Mudan Finn, The Last Plantagenet Consorts: Gender, Genre, and Historiography, 1440-1627 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012)

W. Mark Ormrod, "In Bed With Joan of Kent: The King's Mother and the Peasants Revolt", Medieval Women: Texts and Contexts in Late Medieval Britain (ed. Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, Rosalynn Voaden, Arlyn Diamond, Ann Hutchison, Carol Meale, and Lesley Johnson, Brepols 2000)

Lynda J. Pigdeon, Brought Up Of Nought: A History of the Woodville Family (Fonthill 2019)

[ifreakingloveroyals]

19 May 2018 | Prince Harry looks at his bride, Meghan Markle, as she arrived accompanied by Prince Charles, Prince of Wales during their wedding in St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle in Windsor, England. (c) Owen Humphreys - WPA Pool/Getty Images

[thepastisalreadywritten]

King Charles III views the flowers and tributes outside the Atkinson Art Centre Southport to meet members of the Southport community following the July 29th knife attack in the town, during which three young girls were killed.

20 August 2024

📸: Owen Humphreys / PA Images via Getty Images

[kwebtv]

David Soul (born David Richard Solberg; August 28, 1943 – January 4, 2024) Actor and singer known for his role as Detective Kenneth "Hutch" Hutchinson in the television series Starsky & Hutch from 1975 to 1979; Joshua Bolt on Here Come the Brides from 1968 to 1970. As a singer, he scored one US hit and five UK hits with songs such as "Don't Give Up on Us" (No. 1 in US, Canada, and UK) in 1976 and "Silver Lady" (No. 1 in UK) in 1977. He also starred in the 1979 hit TV movie adaptation Salem's Lot by Stephen King.

Soul first gained national attention as the "Covered Man" appearing on The Merv Griffin Show in 1966 and 1967, on which he sang while wearing a mask. He explained: "My name is David Soul, and I want to be known for my music." The same year, he made his television debut in Flipper.

In 1967, he signed a contract with Columbia Pictures and following a number of guest appearances, including the episode "The Apple" from the second season of Star Trek, he landed the role of Joshua Bolt on the television program Here Come the Brides with co-stars Robert Brown, Bobby Sherman and Bridget Hanley. The series was telecast on the ABC network from September 25, 1968, to September 18, 1970. In 1972, he co-starred as Arthur Hill's law partner on Owen Marshall: Counselor at Law. Following numerous guest-starring roles on TV, including The Streets of San Francisco.

His breakthrough came when he portrayed Detective Ken "Hutch" Hutchinson on Starsky & Hutch, a role he played from 1975 until 1979. During his career he made guest appearances on Star Trek, I Dream of Jeannie, McMillan & Wife, Cannon, Gunsmoke, All in the Family, and numerous TV movies and mini-series, including Homeward Bound (1980), World War III, and Rage (1980), a TV movie commended on the floor of the U.S. Senate and for which he received an Emmy Award nomination. Soul also starred with James Mason in the 1979 TV miniseries adaptation of Stephen King's Salem's Lot, which was edited and released as a theatrical feature film in some countries.

He continued to make guest appearances in various television series. He starred in the miniseries The Manions of America as Caleb Staunton in 1981. He starred in the short-lived 1983 NBC series Casablanca, playing nightclub owner Rick Blaine (the role that was made famous by Humphrey Bogart in the 1942 film Casablanca), and co-starred in the NBC series The Yellow Rose during the 1983–1984 season. He also starred in the television adaptation of Ken Follett's wartime drama The Key to Rebecca (1985) directed by David Hemmings. He later starred as the infamous Florida robber Michael Platt in the TV movie In the Line of Duty: The F.B.I. Murders (1988), which depicted the 1986 FBI Miami shootout, subsequently used as an FBI training film. Soul also directed the episode "No Exit" of the 1980s TV series Miami Vice. (Wikipedia)

IMDb Listing