Shakespeare in the Park

A Midsummer Night's Dream at Regent's Park Open Air Theatre

Unlikely as it seems given the weather, people have been performing outdoors in Britain for hundreds of years, well before the building of purpose-built theatres in Elizabethan London. The medieval mystery cycles were performed in many towns and cities on mobile wagons. Performed annually, the York mystery cycle can this year can be seen in the grounds of St Mary’s Abbey until 27 August. Every few years they revive the popular authentic tradition of taking to the streets performing on mobile wagons.

The RSC's outdoor theatre

During Shakespeare’s day performances of secular plays took place in many outdoor locations from inn-yards to roughly circular auditoria like the Globe and the Rose. But there’s a long tradition of more informal outdoor performances. These days outdoor productions are more popular than ever. One of the most famous venues is the Delacorte Theatre in New York’s Central Park which has been operating since 1962, though this year no Shakespeare is being produced. In the UK it hasn’t been a bad summer for outdoor Shakespeare in spite of an awful start. If you want to catch some outdoor Shakespeare you’ve still got time as several productions are still running over coming the Bank Holiday weekend. A few of them are free or included in the price of admission, but always check the websites for details.

  • The Oddsocks Company is performing Julius Caesar at Athelhampton House and Gardens in Dorset on 24 August and still has a couple of performances in September.
  • The Festival Players are performing Richard III at Woodchester Mansion, Gloucestershire on 24 August, at The Jewry Wall Museum in Leicester on 25 August and at Oakham Castle, Rutland on 26 August.
  • In Stratford-upon-Avon Cymbeline‘s being performed on 25th, and both Perdita and Florizel and Henry IV Part 1 on 26th,at the RSC’s outdoor performance space, the Dell.
  • Also in Stratford there are several performances at Hall’s Croft this week: Romeo and Juliet on 25th, Shakespeare’s Queens on 26th and The Tempest on 27th.
  • In London, A Midsummer Night’s Dream is still playing at Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre, but not over the Bank Holiday weekend.
  • Shakespeare’s Globe has a full repertoire with Henry V, The Taming of the Shrew, and Richard III, and their touring productions of As You Like It is being performed over the weekend at Tutbury Castle, Burton-on-Trent and of Hamlet at St Donat’s Arts Centre, Vale of Glamorgan.

If you need convincing about how much fun outdoor Shakespeare can be, take a look at this video about Green Stage, who perform Shakespeare in the park in Seattle, Washington.

While on the subject of catching things before they’re over, lovers of Shakespeare on stage should taken in an exhibition called  Jubilee: Dressing the Monarchy on Stage and Screen at Bath’s Assembly Rooms. It includes the Richard III costume worn by Sir Antony Sher in 1984 as well as  costumes worn by Dame Helen Mirren, Dame Peggy Ashcroft and Richard Burton CBE at Stratford, and costumes from recent films on the monarchy such as The Queen and The King’s Speech.  I’m sure I’m not the only one to have missed hearing about this exhibition which is only on until 2nd September.

Share
Posted in Shakespeare on Stage | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Shakespeare in the Park

Emptying the stage: experimenting with Shakespeare

It is up to us to capture [the audience’s] attention and compel its belief. To do so we must prove that there will be no trickery, nothing hidden. We must open our empty hands and show that really there is nothing up our sleeves. Only then can we begin.

This quotation from Peter Brook’s 1968 book The Empty Space appeared in the programme for his 1970 A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Last week I saw two Shakespeare productions in Stratford-upon-Avon that reminded me of Brook’s theory of performance.

The productions were Troilus and Cressida, a collaboration between the RSC and The Wooster Group in the Swan Theatre, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream (As You Like It), performed in Russian with surtitles in the Royal Shakespeare Theatre.

A Midsummer Night's Dream (As You Like It)

A Midsummer Night’s Dream began with the cast noisily removing a full-size tree that was lying across seats in the auditorium, followed by a metal fountain that sprays the audience with water. If you’re expecting to see the forest outside Athens, or Theseus’s court, you can forget it, they seemed to be saying. Instead we were in the world of slapstick, mime and circus. It soon became clear the only part of the play being performed would be the story of Pyramus and Thisbe, the play which the mechanicals perform for the court at the end of Shakespeare’s play. The cast lined up in front of us, motionless, while the screen behind them played an announcement for us to read. The actors had spent so long analysing and discussing every aspect of the story that they hadn’t had time to rehearse. The play wasn’t ready, so what we were going to see would be a rehearsal. The audience was already charmed.

And so the story began, played out by two 15′ high unwieldy puppets, skeletal figures, requiring the concentration of all the actors to move them. The simple act of Pyramus giving Thisbe a bunch of flowers took several minutes. Thinking about Peter Brook’s statement, there was very little up the actors’ sleeves, and they were certainly capturing the audience’s attention. The fun continued with singing, a quartet of ballet dancers and of course the performing dog. This playful approach, vividly theatrical and very funny, was communicated without the need for the spoken word.

Over in the Swan, it seemed to me they’d had the same problem, too many discussions about theory, not enough thought given to the actual performance.

Troilus and Cressida

Troilus and Cressida‘s a notoriously difficult play about the Trojan War, neither comedy nor tragedy. The Trojans were played by the Wooster Group, Greeks by a group of RSC regulars, the two groups rehearsing separately. The Wooster Group’s performance style was, well, unusual. Dressed as American Indians, all miked, they reproduced the movements displayed on monitors positioned round the stage showing a film about an Inuit tribe which became a Hollywood romance for the love scenes between Troilus and Cressida. They spoke in flat monotones. I was told afterwards that over their earpieces the actors were hearing words in the accent being used, but not Shakespeare’s words. No wonder  the actors seemed so disconnected from the audience: their job was to reproduce what they could see and hear, and speak their lines, not to interpret them. They may not have been using illusions as such, but they did exclude the audience.

In a famous moment, Hamlet says the point of playing is “To show… the very age and body of the time his form and pressure”. The presentation felt to me like a warning against the over-use of technology in our time leading to losing the power to communicate, and the danger of copying the behaviour seen in Hollywood films.

It was ironic that the play was being performed in the Swan Theatre, the RSC’s most dynamic  performance space. The RSC regulars, playing the Greeks, brought an energy to the stage completely lacking in the Wooster Group. For me, though, it was too late. I was already too bored to be engaged.

I have to leave it to others to explain what this production says about the nature of theatre. It felt to me like a blind alley, but some people have loved it, and here’s a link to Andrew Cowie’s review which is followed by many responses.

Share
Posted in Shakespeare on Stage, Stratford-upon-Avon | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Sight and blindness in Shakespeare

One of the most striking items discussed in the BBC’s radio series Shakespeare’s Restless World earlier this year is the reliquary containing the eye of an executed Jesuit priest. It appealed in a number of ways: its gruesome history, the fact that it was taken from a corpse, the artistry and beauty of the object, made of silver with an eye-shaped window. The object has further impact because of its connection to the real historical event of the 1605 Gunpowder Plot and the persecution of Catholics. The priest, Father Edward Oldcorne, was executed in April 1606 in the aftermath of the Plot by hanging, drawing and quartering. You can listen again, read a transcript and look at the photographs here.

Its most obvious link to Shakespeare is that political one, the circumstances surrounding Macbeth. But it also has resonances for anyone interested in Shakespeare simply because of the many references Shakespeare makes to eyes and sight. The most striking occur in King Lear where the physical act of seeing is a metaphor for understanding and self-awareness. Sometimes words aren’t enough, and then Shakespeare translates the metaphor into action. After dozens of references to sight and blindness, Shakespeare stages the horrific scene where the Duke of Gloucester has his eyes ripped out onstage. Although Gloucester has misjudged one of his sons because he has been deceived by the other, it’s the King who has made the much larger mistake of banishing the daughter who loves him: “Hence and avoid my sight”, in favour of the two who just say they do. Behind that action stands a whole series of misjudgements. He has, as one of his daughters says, “ever but slenderly known himself”. “See better, Lear, and let me still remain/The true blank of thine eye” warns Kent.

It’s not just in King Lear that eyes are important. Elsewhere they are the organs of sight but also the windows of the soul. In classical medicine sight was the most valued of the five senses. In Shakespeare’s time it was suggested by some scientists that eyes sent out spirits themselves, that might do harm, though in As You Like It the power of Phoebe’s eyes to hurt her lover Silvius is the power of rejection.
Thou tell’st me there is murder in mine eye:…
Now do I frown on thee with all my heart,
And if mine eyes can wound, now let them kill thee.
                        …Now mine eyes
Which I have darted at thee, hurt thee not,
Nor I am sure there is no force in eyes
That can do hurt.

For those in love, eyes have a different meaning. Looking into another’s eyes, one sees one’s own reflection, and in The Tempest, the lovers “chang’d eyes”. There are far too many examples of Shakespeare’s mentions of eyes to list them all, but it’s worth mentioning that the havoc of A Midsummer Night’s Dream is caused by the flower love-in-idleness making people fall in love with the next living thing they see.

Blindness was, and is, a terrible affliction. In King John Hubert was supposed to inflict it on young Prince Arthur in order to prevent him being capable of taking the English throne.  For Shakespeare’s contemporaries, illnesses affecting the eyes were common, and ointments such as the egg-whites applied to soothe Gloucester’s eyes in King Lear  were standard treatments. Unlikely as it sounds, cataract surgery was attempted, and during the seventeenth century prosthetic glass eyes were developed.

Michael Cronin as the blinded Gloucester and Timothy West as Lear

Lear’s suggestion that Gloucester gets glass eyes could refer to these, or to spectacles, also known as eye-glasses. This blog sets out the history of spectacles, which were relatively common by Shakespeare’s day. The Worshipful Company of Spectacle-Makers was formed in 1629, only a few years after his death. Spectacle-wearing was associated with age. In As You Like It, Shakespeare’s old man is “the lean and slipper’d pantaloon,/With spectacles on nose”, and Benedick in Much Ado About Nothing” is still young enough to be able to “yet see without spectacles”.

The eye reliquary now on display in the British Museum as part of their exhibition Shakespeare: staging the world is a reminder of Shakespeare’s inventive references to eyes in both tragedy, comedy and romance.

Share
Posted in Legacy, Shakespeare's World | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sight and blindness in Shakespeare

Becoming a courtier: Castiglione, Shakespeare and Richard III

The Book of the Courtier

Earlier this week Amanda Vickery, in her radio programme  On… Men, looked at the concept of the ideal man, defined in Italy in the sixteenth century, which remained a standard for centuries. You can listen again here for a few days.

It was a book published in the Italy of 1528, using the relatively new technology of printing, that caused the spread of this idea throughout Europe. It was written by Baldassarre Castiglione and it was called The Book of the Courtier.

Castiglione was a nobleman who spent many years at the Ducal palace of Urbino, the setting for the book and the most refined and elegant palace in Renaissance Italy.

The Palace of Urbino

The book demanded that noblemen should be more than warriors, with social as well as physical skills, and to be cultivated: to be a musician, to appreciate art, to have beauty of countenance and person, to wear fashionable clothes made of silk, to be graceful but also manly.

The distinguishing feature for a sophisticated gentleman was what was called “sprezzatura”, or nonchalance. A gentleman should never show the effort required to be charming. He needed restraint and strenuous self-control.

Listening to the programme I was reminded of the beginning of Richard III. At the end of a period of vicious civil war, peace is established under the leadership of Richard’s eldest brother. But Richard has none of the attributes that Castiglione suggests a courtier needs.
Grim-visaged war hath smooth’d his wrinkled front;
And now, instead of mounting barbed steeds
To fright the souls of fearful adversaries,
He capers nimbly in a lady’s chamber
To the lascivious pleasing of a lute.
But I, that am not shaped for sportive tricks,
Nor made to court an amorous looking-glass;
I, that am rudely stamp’d, and want love’s majesty
To strut before a wanton ambling nymph;
I, that am curtail’d of this fair proportion,
Cheated of feature by dissembling nature,
Deformed, unfinish’d, sent before my time
Into this breathing world, scarce half made up,
And that so lamely and unfashionable
That dogs bark at me as I halt by them.

As he can’t become a courtier he decides to be a villain, to dissemble, the usual behaviour of the medieval figure called the Vice. Needing a wife he aims to marry the widow of a man he killed during the wars. The wooing of Lady Anne is an extraordinary scene. It isn’t graceful: she spits at him, he offers her his sword for her to kill him. But he finds that even without the smoothness of the courtier he’s able to persuade her using “the plain devil and dissembling looks”.  Her first husband was one of Castiglione’s ideal men:
A sweeter and a lovelier gentleman
Fram’d in the prodigality of Nature,
Young, valiant, wise…

And when she has accepted his ring, he tells the audience that he’s going to become a courtier after all:
I’ll be at charges for a looking-glass,
And entertain a score or two of tailors
To study fashions to adorn my body.

Raphael's portrait of Castiglione which hangs in the Louvre

Castiglione’s book would have been known by many people in Shakespeare’s time. Between 1528 and 1616, 108 editions of the book were published, and it was translated into Spanish, French, German, Polish and English. The English translation was published in 1561, just a few years after the accession of Elizabeth 1, by Sir Thomas Hoby. This is a link to a nineteenth century translation by Leonard Opdyke.

It was read by men of good breeding everywhere. But increasingly people in Elizabethan England who were not landowners were becoming wealthy and aspired to reach the status of gentlemen. They needed advice, and the book enabled them to learn how to behave. After Shakespeare’s day, in the 1630s, another book on the same subject, Peacham’s The Complete Gentleman, was published containing information aimed at the English reader, which was being read by quite humble people by the end of the 1600s.

Shakespeare himself was one of those Elizabethan social climbers who became a gentleman. What comments we have about his personality indicates that he took on board the advice of Castiglione’s book to be charming and self-controlled, to have his own “sprezzatura”.

Share
Posted in Plays and Poems, Shakespeare's World | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Becoming a courtier: Castiglione, Shakespeare and Richard III

O this learning, what a thing it is!

The Shakespeare Institute

Last week the biennial International Shakespeare Conference was held at the Shakespeare Institute in Stratford-upon-Avon. With only space for two hundred and thirty, places are strictly limited. Now technology is being used to open this exclusive conference up to anyone who wants to catch the lectures. A number of sessions have been recorded and made available in full online including Kiernan Ryan on Staging the Future: Shakespeare’s Universal Theatre, Dympna Callaghan on Shakespearean Lyric and Richard Wilson on Shakespeare’s Olympic Game.

One day perhaps we’ll get live broadcasting and the ability for people not in the room to interact by asking questions, but I’m probably a bit ahead of the game here!

Recording of seminars from the Shakespeare Institute have appeared on the Backdoor Broadcasting site over the last couple of years. If you like the idea of hearing lectures given by specialists from the comfort of your own home, take a look at their site: as well as Shakespeare there’s a huge range of other material available free.

Another way you can listen to university lectures is via the ITunes U channel, and some universities are posting complete courses there. I haven’t had the chance to check this out properly, but for those of you on Twitter, have a look at @iTunesU where they release information about courses on every subject from The Culture of Ancient Greece to Astronomy.

Daphne Koller

Technology is making the whole world of education more open and democratic. Why should higher education be limited to a few brief years, and to those who can afford to pay for it? This link takes you to a 20-minute lecture by Daphne Koller from Stanford University. It’s her aim to deliver courses to anyone, anywhere, who has the desire to learn, completely free.  What’s really interesting is her discussion about how important it is to move beyond lectures to engage people, and how they are finding ways of building in interaction and mentoring to students wherever they are.

I find the subject of online education fascinating:  here are just a few of the discussions I’ve picked up recently:

  • Melissa Highton from the University of Oxford has reported on some research showing how technology is changing the way people study, in particular how undergraduates and postgraduates are using social media tools. Many students use Facebook to share lecture notes, 25% of taught postgraduates use YouTube to support their studies, and 48% of taught postgraduates keep their own blogs.
  • The recently-published JISC report Researchers of Tomorrow: the research behaviour of Generation Y doctoral students has been looking at the behaviour of students born between 1982 and 1994. Their findings show that these digital natives are insufficiently trained in using digital information environments so they don’t use technology to its full potential. They find copyright confusing (don’t we all?) and are constrained by the difficulty of accessing resources, which may explain the additional finding that even research students are tending to use secondary rather than primary sources.
  • Great efforts are being made to increase the amount of digitised primary material held in European Museums, Libraries and Archives, as explained in this post. The challenge is not just to digitise material, but to ensure it’s fully accessible.
  • In the USA there’s an initiative to create what’s being called The Digital Public Library of America. The current aim is to “specifically support the creation of the infrastructure for a national open-access digital library,” by working together in regional hubs. It isn’t clear yet what shape the Digital Public Library might take, but it’s interesting that this attempt to open up access is being given significant funding.
  • The Open Knowledge Foundation is dedicated to opening up access to information, and runs a project called Open Shakespeare where you can find an accessible version of Shakespeare’s text as well as lots of material about his work, all of which is available for anyone to use.

In many levels of education social media tools are being creatively re-used. The idea that people around the world, of any age or background can simultaneously follow a free university-level course and feel supported while they do so, is inspiring. Hopefully everyone including life-long learners will be able to “study what [they] most affect”, and suggest:
Here let us breathe and haply institute
A course of learning and ingenious studies.

Share
Posted in Legacy | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Updating Timon: Simon Russell Beale at the National

Programme for Timon of Athens

Theatre programmes don’t often include an article written by the leading man in the production. Most actors and directors let their work speak for them, and drawing attention to their past successes might be courting disaster. Actors can be a superstitious lot.

Simon Russell Beale, though, is not most actors. And the piece in the National Theatre’s current programme for Timon of Athens wasn’t written specially, but is an extract from a lecture he gave to the British Psychoanalytical Society in 2009 on the subject of acting Shakespeare. In it, he analyses leading roles which he has played, giving us a peep into his working methods.

His approach is based on a full understanding of the text, ensuring he can “support his reading with carefully reasoned argument”. He’s always looking for the chink in the armour of Shakespeare’s characters, chinks that Shakespeare has put there. Talking about Othello, in which he played Iago, he describes how in the source for the play Iago and his wife have a child, a detail which Shakespeare deliberately omits. He found their barren marriage and “Iago’s unspoken blame of his wife, irresistible” in performance.

We’ve recently seen him playing Falstaff in the BBC Hollow Crown series: Beale was neither a warm father-substitute nor a scheming opportunist, but a survivor, aware of his value to the prince as entertainer . At the moment when he realises that Hal may drop him when becomes king: “Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world”, there was real anxiety in his eyes. No matter how confident his character appears, there’s always an insecure, vulnerable human being underneath.

I remember seeing this when he played Richard III at The Other Place in Stratford. The face he showed to the public was jovial, but to the audience he revealed himself as a monster. When one of the little princes, his nephews, jumped on his humped back, unseen to the child his uncle’s face blackened and he struggled to stop the mask slipping. Without knowing it, the boy had found the chink in Richard’s armour.

As Ariel in The Tempest in 1993 Beale was unemotional, expressionless. But towards the end of the play, just before being given his freedom by Prospero, Beale spat in his face. There was an audible gasp from the audience. This wordless gesture made sense of his performance in the rest of the play, the hidden anger of the servant towards his master. It was an extraordinary theatrical moment which was so hated by some that when transferred to London it was cut.

Timon feasting his "friends"

Timon of Athens is a play of riches to rags. A wealthy man, he delights in sharing his fortune with his “friends” who, predictably, desert him when he falls into debt. The second half of the play finds him living in the wilds, impotently raging against mankind. In all its a play for our time. The National Theatre’s production is beautifully judged: we recognise almost every scene as a place in modern London, beginning with the champagne reception for the opening of “The Timon Room” in the National Gallery under El Greco’s painting of Christ casting the Moneychangers out of the Temple. The set takes us to different parts of London: the HSBC tower in Canary Wharf, the Houses of Parliament, the street of elegant eighteenth-century houses in which Timon lives.

Timon is represented as a man without family or emotional ties, and in a lovely touch his usually male steward is played by Deborah Findlay who at first could be taken for his wife. Only gradually does it become clear that their relationship is professional and she’s his Personal Assistant.

Simon Russell Beale as Timon

The play starts with the tent city that we saw outside St Paul’s Cathedral in 2011. When Timon loses his money and social position he goes on the streets with them, filling his shopping trolley with bits of cardboard and plastic. The “roots” which he digs out of the ground in Shakespeare’s play become, of course, the leftovers of ready meals and takeaways which he finds in binbags.

This is a spot-on production of what’s probably Shakespeare’s least popular play, and one which will make many converts, but occasionally the modern parallels are strained. In the second half the military leader Alcibiades threatens his own city before successfully negotiating a peace with its leaders. Here it isn’t clear if he’s the leader of the tent city protesters, orchestrating the London riots, or a leader of the IRA. In the final scene the parallel is clear: he abandons his followers and ends up wearing a business suit sharing the conference table with London’s politicians. Timon’s death is barely noticed.

In one of his final scenes, Timon spits at his PA. She doesn’t deserve it: she’s remained loyal to him and refused to join in the mudslinging practised by the cynic Apemantus. He’s exhausted all his words, and perhaps the spit expresses his anger at his own naivety as well as the behaviour of the rest of mankind.

This production is to be screened nationwide on 1 November as part of National Theatre Live.  You’ll find more information about the production here.

Share
Posted in Plays and Poems, Shakespeare on Stage | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Updating Timon: Simon Russell Beale at the National

Opening the Olympics: Danny Boyle’s debt to William Blake

Danny Boyle’s Olympic opening ceremony has set off so much discussion that John Wyver of Illuminations has now posted three blog posts each listing ten different pieces that have appeared in the press looking at the event from different viewpoints. Here’s the third one, but you can find them all by checking back on his blog.

It was a celebration of individuality rather than conformity: no massed ranks of perfectly synchonised bodies, but a gloriously eclectic mix that marked the eccentricity, creativity and achievement of Great Britain.

One of the most influential figures was the unseen but not unheard poet William Blake. His poem Jerusalem (actually the preface to his poem dedicated to John Milton), was put to music by Sir Hubert Parry in 1916 and has since become an unofficial English National Anthem. Not only were his “green and pleasant land”, and “dark satanic mills” physically created in the arena, but the “chariot of fire” and “burning gold” was reflected in the forging of the Olympic rings. Chariots of Fire was adopted as the title of the 1981 film about athletes in the 1924 Olympics: the iconic music was performed live during the ceremony, Rowan Atkinson as Mr Bean imagining himself in the scene where the athletes run along the beach at St Andrews.

Programme note from the Opening Ceremony

Shakespeare’s part in the opening ceremony was more obvious but actually less important than Blake’s. The title for the whole show, Isles of Wonder is an approximation of words spoken by Caliban about the magical island in The Tempest. A line from this speech is inscribed on the huge bell which was rung at the beginning of the ceremony and Kenneth Branagh, dressed as Isambard Kingdom Brunel, delivered the whole thing.

Blake was a trained engraver who wrote poetry and prose, painted, drew, and took complete control of the books he wrote. Intensely spiritual, he invented his own eccentric mythology and has always been seen as a genuine original, impossible to pigeon-hole or pin down.

 

Pity

He engraved scenes from Shakespeare as part of the Boydell Shakespeare Library project, but rarely took them as inspiration for his own paintings. He was commissioned to produce a portrait of Shakespeare as part of which he included two scenes from Macbeth, and his 1795 illustration Pity is assumed to be inspired by lines from the same play.

His most direct reference to Shakespeare is the painting Fiery Pegasus, or A spirit vaulting from a cloud to turn and wind a fiery Pegasus, a pen and watercolour picture from 1809 which Siri Vevle spoke about earlier this year at the British Shakespeare Association conference. The quotation that inspired the image is the description of Prince Hal, ready for battle, from Henry IV Part 1:
I saw young Harry with his beaver  on,
His cuises on his thighs, gallantly armed,
Rise from the ground like feathered Mercury,
And vaulted with such ease into his seat
As if an angel dropped down from the clouds
To turn and wind a fiery Pegaus,
And witch the world with noble horsemanship.

Blake’s description was “The Horse of Intellect is leaping from the cliffs of Memory: it is a barren Rock: it is also called the Barren Waste of Locke and Newton”, and the painting is a rejection of reason in favour of creativity and imagination. For Blake the most important thing was “the Human Imagination: which is the Divine Vision & Fruition / In which Man liveth eternally”.

With his view that “All things exist in the human imagination” it’s no wonder that Blake, along with Shakespeare, was so central to the Olympic Opening Ceremony with its celebration of humanity.

As an aside, I recently came across a Blake painting I’d never seen before, at Arlington   Court in Devon. It was found on top of a cupboard in a pantry in 1948. It was still in its original frame, having been purchased from Blake by the owner of the house in 1821. To add to its mystery it has no fixed title, known as either The Circle of the Life of Man or The Sea of Time and Space. With its prominent male and female figures, on the shore  of a stormy sea, a spirit flying above the waves it immediately reminded me Shakespeare’s The Tempest. You’ll find more images by Blake at the William Blake Archive.

Share
Posted in Legacy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Opening the Olympics: Danny Boyle’s debt to William Blake

Round the globe with Much Ado About Nothing

Meera Syal and Paul Bhattacharjee in the 2012 RSC productions

What are we learning from the World Shakespeare Festival?

A few weeks ago Sonia Massai headed a panel entitled Global Shakespeares. In her subsequent post on the RSC’s MyShakespeare site she says “‘Global Shakespeares’ can only be understood in relation to the very specific sets of circumstances and traditions within which specific productions are directed and produced.”

Massai knows only too well that performance histories traditionally concentrate on UK productions. Shakespeare’s Globe’s G2G festival earlier in the year brought productions to the UK that were entirely the creation of the country and culture that made them. They were performed in their native languages, with summaries in English being provided forLondon audiences. This year has been a unique opportunity for Britain to see what the rest of the world is doing with “our” Shakespeare.

In the past week the RSC has opened a different sort of production as part of the World Shakespeare Festival. With an all-Asian cast Much Ado About Nothing is led by Meera Syal and Paul Bhattacharjee as the sparring couple Beatrice and Benedick. It’s being described as an Indian production, but as director Iqbal Khan comes from Birmingham and Meera Syal fromWolverhampton, and with several other well-known TV actors in the cast, it’s more complicated than that.

The play is set in modern Delhi, as seen through Anglo-Indian eyes. When it was announced, we expected it to feature Bollywood-style singing and dancing, great music and masses of colour. How could it not? And the current production certainly doesn’t disappoint on that score.

In an interview the director explains how using an Indian setting helps to explain some elements of the play that don’t easily fit in modern Britain: “the relationship between masters and their servants… the idea of bloodlines… the formality of engagements and …courtship rituals”.

The concept works, but sometimes the execution points up the director’s lack of experience on the Courtyard stage, the gulling scenes in particular. In Beatrice’s scene, it’s a neat idea for Hero to be gossiping to Ursula on her mobile, but with Hero out of sight much of the time and Beatrice concealed from part of the audience it leaves the stage almost empty. In the parallel scene in which Benedick is fooled about Beatrice’s love for him, Benedick dodges around the set, finally appearing at the very highest level, invisible to part of the audience. Not being able to see how Beatrice and Benedick react to the news they overhear undermines both scenes.

Meera Syal as Beatrice, Amara Karan as Hero, Madhav Sharma as Leonato

The wedding scene is more assured, all the more painful for the elaborate preparations made for the event and the dazzling costume Hero wears when she is disowned by Claudio. With such assured performers as Syal and Bhattacharjee the potential for interplay between Beatrice and Benedick will  grow as the production matures: at the moment their scenes lack flair and both seem vocally underpowered. The Courtyard’s a stage on which actors can take the audience into their confidence and their scenes will greatly improve once they’ve got the measure of it. There’s lots of information about the production here.

In his Guardian review Michael Billington suggested that “veteran playgoers” might remember that back in 1976 the RSC produced another Indian production of the play. They did indeed, and the differences between those productions eloquently highlights the changes in British society.

Judi Dench as Beatrice, Donald Sinden as Benedick, RST 1976

In John Barton’s production the main characters were living in a garrison town, part of the nineteenth-century British Raj. It wasn’t glamorous, an Indian setting simply suggested by a few drapes on the “Wooden O” set used for all the productions that year. The dislocation of the British characters away from their own country made it easier to believe in the misjudgements on which the plot depends.

Judi Dench and Donald Sinden were a mature couple, their reluctant romance both touching and funny. They drew on years of experience of both Shakespeare and the RSC: in the same season Dench played Goneril to Sinden’s King Lear. Irving Wardle commented that in Much Ado About Nothing they “offered simply two definitive performances operating in perfect partnership”.

The Watch, led by John Woodvine (Dogberry), RST 1976. Photographer: Tom Holte

The point of greatest difference, though, was in the playing of the Watch. In 1976  Dogberry was played by John Woodvine, dressed as a Sikh. The watch, all white actors “blacked up”, were drawn from the population of the town, Dogberry hugely proud of being in charge. His linguistic errors were caused by his “trying to follow the alien procedures of the British Raj” and hence provided a “plausible analogue to the procedural confusion of Elizabethan policemen” as described by Shakespeare.

Shakespeare continues to cross barriers both of time and place. The World Shakespeare Festival is showing how the world’s playwright can be reinterpreted by every generation and culture.

Share
Posted in Plays and Poems, Shakespeare on Stage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Round the globe with Much Ado About Nothing

Shakespeare and the Olympic arts of war

Minoan boxers

Although all sport is competitive, many of those which feature in the modern Olympics began as a way of training for warfare. Shakespeare brings several of them into his plays, including wrestling, archery and fencing.

Self-defence sports wrestling and boxing date back to the days of the Greek Olympics. Bare-knuckle boxing was a somewhat more refined version of hand to hand fighting made respectable in the 1840s with the Queensberry rules. Wrestling has always been more popular, less controlled, with a high risk of injury. In As You Like It, the hero Orlando fights with and defeats the Duke’s wrestler, a man who has a fearsome reputation for breaking the ribs of his opponents and coming close to killing them. The clown Touchstone comments on the roughness of the competition: “It is the first time that ever I heard breaking of ribs was sport for ladies”.

Many sports were seen as more suitable for the gentry. In his 1570 book The Scholemaster, Roger Ascham suggests a whole list of recreations: “to ride comely, to run fair at the tilt or ring, to play at all weapons, to shoot fair in bow or surely in gun …and all pastimes generally which be joined with labour, used in open place and on the daylight, containing… some fit exercise for war”.

Gervase Markham, writing in Countrey Contentments, said that the “most manly and warlike” of recreations is “the hunting of wild beasts”. In As You Like It the banished Duke, living in the forest, recognises that he and his followers are the invaders:
And yet it irks me, the poor dappled fools,
Being native burghers of this desert city,
Should in their own confines with forked heads
Have their round haunches gor’d.

Olympic equestrian events began as methods of training horses for battle, and several relate to hunting, in itself originating as ways of acquiring skills for war. Even some of the events on the track, like throwing the javelin, started life this way.

Longbow archers re-enacting a battle

Archery features in several plays, from the relatively genteel leisure pursuit practised by the Princess of France in Love’s Labour’s Lost  to the use of longbows at the Battle of Agincourt in Henry V where the archers won the battle for the English. It was rendered obsolete by the increasing use of firearms. William Harrison, in his 1587 Description of England states that archery was by then merely a pastime rather than a training for battle: “our strong shooting is decayed and laid in bed”.

It’s swordplay, though, that is most in evidence in Shakespeare’s works. In Romeo and Juliet, the young men of Verona know well the language and techniques of fashionable swordfighting.  Mercutio accuses Tybalt of being “a duellist, a gentleman of the very first house, of the first and second cause. Ah, the immortal passado, the punto reverso, the hay!”

While fighting with personal weapons was common, rehearsing battles by jousting had fallen out of favour. John Stow in his Survey of London, comments that “The marching forth of citizens’ sons, and other young men on horseback, with disarmed lances and shields, there to practise feats of war, man against man, hath long been left off”.

Foils were originally developed as practice swords to train men for combat, and it was fencing, the refined version of swordfighting, that survived and remains an Olympic sport.

The best example is in Hamlet, where the Prince and Laertes fence against each other. Instead of a mere competition, Laertes and Claudius plan to turn it into murder. One of the foils will have an “unbated” point, which will also be poisoned.
I’ll touch my point
With this contagion, that, if I gall him slightly,
It may be death. 

Fencing was a sport for the gentry, but in order to be convincing, stage actors would have had to have learned some skills. There were several fencing masters in London who could have taught them like the Italian Vincentio Saviolo. There’s a fascinating page on the history of fencing here.

If you’d like find out more, the Wallace Collection in London is currently holding an exhibition entitled The Noble Art of the Sword: Fashion and Fencing in Renaissance Europe, until mid-September. The curator of the exhibition, Tobias Capwell, was interviewed on Radio 4’s Midweek on 1 August, and a summary and link to listen again is here.

Share
Posted in Legacy, Shakespeare's World | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Shakespearean voices

Cicely Berry

I’ve written several times about how much I love hearing Shakespeare spoken well, but what exactly does that mean? There are many aspects to speaking Shakespeare, and theatre companies now employ specialist voice coaches to help actors deal with the challenges. I’ve been to several sessions where professional voice coaches give ordinary people a glimpse into the sort of training stage actors undertake, and it always surprises me, as a person who normally sits in a theatre listening, how very physical a skill it is.

Cicely Berry was the first voice coach to work as a permanent part of a theatre company, and she’s written several books about her work with the RSC. She stresses the need for actors to find their own voice rather than falling back on accepted norms.  In this interview she comments that the directors she worked with in the 1970s all had very different approaches to speaking the text: Trevor Nunn was interested in emotion, Terry Hands wanted actors to speak loudly and fast, and John Barton wanted to wring every nuance and reference from the lines. Berry links the physical requirements of speaking (not just about volume) to the need to find the meaning of the words, describing it as “making meaning”.

Even before she began her work directors who were not themselves actors took an interest in speaking that went beyond elocution. Listen to Peter Hall, “iambic fundamentalist” and founder of the RSC in the sixties, being interviewed about Shakespeare and Pinter.

Lyn Darnley

Lyn Darnley is the RSC’s current Head of Text, Voice and Artist Development, a job title which indicates the complexity and scope of the role. She’s very interested in the physicality of speech:  “Spoken language is primarily a vibration capable of physically impacting upon us in the same way music does. So, Shakespeare’s language conveys much more than its literal meaning because it’s layered with sound, dynamic, explosion – language is actually very violent. Sometimes actors need to find that violence in the language”.

The stress on individuality results in hearing far more regional accents in the theatre than you would have done years ago. Sometimes, though, actors are called on to adopt specific accents. For the RSC, in 2011 The Merchant of Venice was set in the USA so all actors had to sound right, and this year the African Julius Caesar has been set very specifically in Kenya.

What though did Shakespeare originally sound like? The Globe Theatre among others has experimented with this along with other original practises like all-male productions. Modern Received Pronunciation (RP) is far from that Shakespeare spoke, though it remains the easiest for most people to understand. David and Ben Crystal have done massive amounts of work on Original Pronunciation, and have recently released a great CD of recordings showing how Shakespearean language sounded.

Ben Crystal as Hamlet

Hearing familiar speeches delivered in this unfamiliar accent, you begin to hear unexpected rhymes, different stresses and, certainly, a warmth and openness of vowel sounds that modern English doesn’t have. You can’t help trying to locate the accent: a few years ago there was a theory that some American accents were closer to Original Pronunciation than English ones, but to me, West Country and Irish accents dominate the pronunciation of the Crystals’ recording.

For a different sort of experience, have a look and a listen to Valerie Pye’s blog, Hearing Shakespeare. Valerie’s an American actor, director and voice coach with a special interest in Shakespeare, and on her site she writes about how she approaches Shakespeare’s speeches, including a recording of her performing them. I particularly liked the two versions of Constance’s speech grieving for her son from King John, completely different in mood, which she posted on 9 July under the title “have I reason to be fond of grief”.

Share
Posted in Legacy, Plays and Poems, Shakespeare on Stage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Shakespearean voices