Question to RM's and Shakespeare buffs...

[thehefner]

I was speaking with Chaz, a friend from school. I like Chaz. He's a hell of a film buff for a sophmore (his DVD collection dwarfs mine, and it's all good stuff) and quite a talented actor on stage. I was telling him about my ideas for KING LEAR, ideas I have yet to tell anyone here in the group. As I was speaking about these ideas for the first time, I started to feel the same rush of excitement that zipduda seemed to have when telling me his ideas for T&C. When I hit him with the twist I have plotted at the end, his response was less than impressed.

"I dunno," he said, "I don't really like it in Shakespeare when people... well, the words are the most important thing and I don't really like it when directors, like, try to add twists or modernize it and to give these ideas precesence over the words," or something to that effect. I asked him if I was doing that, and he replied, "Yeah, a bit, I think," which, of course, means yes, absolutely.

Well, I was understandably deflated. Still am, it's only been five minutes since he said this to me. But as I think about it, I wonder if my ideas are really taking precesence? I mean, by that law, the Area 54 12th Nite, the four-Hamlets Hamlet, and the black-white-reversal Othello should all be wrong and distracting over the words. Are they? Of course, the words are the focal point. But what about the ideas? I mean, I love the RMs for the fun we have with these plays, but do we do disservice to them with some of the choices we make? Normally I'd say no, of course not. But right now, my faith is shaken.

I look forward to telling my ideas to someone in the group and letting them decide. You know, I seriously doubt anyone would think what I have planned could distract from the words. Far more prestigious troupes have done far riskier things than I. I heard that the four-Hamlet version of Hamlet was actually very good, and my Lear is kind of a notch below that. But yeah, normally I'd just ask Tazira and tomperdue on this, but I'd like all your opinions on this. I don't think having fun with Shakespeare is wrong, I just don't know how to defend it.

Comments

Hmmm...

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Well, according to my drama teacher in London, she seemed to infer that the language WAS what the groundlings loved. By that, people were far more used to listening that watching (no TVs and whatnot). After learning that Richard II was one of the most popular plays ever during that era, it kind of makes sense (there is NO action in the play whatsoever until the very end... it's all beautiful, powerful, heartbreaking poetry). But then again, I also heard that Titus was the most popular, and whoop, we're back at the other end of the spectrum.

But thankee, I appreciate the support and shall strive to stick to my course until more opinions go against me and I eventually capitulate, kicking and screaming, whereupon I shall post my whining rants right here on LJ. Huzzah! No, wait... I mean, FIRE BAD!