1995

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0631.  Tuesday, 22 August 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Bradley S. Berens <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 21 Aug 1995 07:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0630 Q: *WT* Production
 
(2)     From:   Chris Stroffolino <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 21 Aug 1995 13:22:46 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0630  Q: *WT* Production
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bradley S. Berens <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 21 Aug 1995 07:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 6.0630 Q: *WT* Production
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0630 Q: *WT* Production
 
For Dale Lyles,
 
While I think that your B&W costumes in the first part of the play vs. color in
the second is a good idea, I -don't- think that cutting Time's monologue is
particularly necessary or a good idea.
 
First, by cutting the speech you are not going to make the play any less flatly
improbable, and it's a good speech.  Any audience that has already accepted
"exit, pursued by a bear"--which will always be a flatly disengaging "look,
guys, it's a *play*" event unless you have a pet grizzly--will have no troubles
accepting that Time came by to catch the last act.
 
Second, if you cut the speech you have stolen from yourself an interesting
question: who says it?  In Jack O'Brien's 1992 production at the Old Globe in
San Diego LEONTES gave Time's speech, and I for one certainly perked up at
that!  Who gives the speech is a neat doubling question and a good part of the
performance.
 
By the way, what *are* you going to do about the bear?
 
Break limbs,
 
Brad Berens
Dept. of English
U.C. Berkeley
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Chris Stroffolino <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 21 Aug 1995 13:22:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 6.0630  Q: *WT* Production
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0630  Q: *WT* Production
 
I'm really ENJOYING these directorial posts coming up recently on the list.
Dear Dale Lyles--at the risk of sounding like a "purist" let me ask you WHY are
you afraid of the audience thinking Hermione is insane? WHO SAYS she doesn't
hold a grudge for 16 years--certainly Paulina, in many ways H's spokeswoman,
expresses a distrust of Leontes even in the final scene, and wouldn't it be
perhaps more effective to play the last scene in such a way as to show the
audience a bons between the two woman--and keep the audience guessing about
what they\ were really doing those 16 years? I say this because what you
suggest about a flashback that DOESN"t ALLOW LEONTES a FULL REIGN OF TERROR
seems to miss the point--the point is that, unlike Othello, Leontes needs no
IAGO, and that the "terror" is the "winter" of the title-- Are you afraid this
will SCARE audiences away (like the "mechanicals" in Midsummer's Night afraid
that a LION will scare the ladied)--- Besides, from stripping the extreme rage
and violence away from the first half, the second half might become
weaker--this play is not a comedy--it seems you want to make it into MUCH
ADO.... I hope you don't take these comments too critically--I'm just trying to
get to your assumptions underlying the decision you're making. I do think that
you're right to question Hermione's seemingly unquestioned faith, but I think
there is a way to show her as a more complex character WITHOUT making Leontes
seem less violent (besides, it's usually more fun for actors to go with the
extreme rage....). Thanks again, look forward to reply, chris stroffolino

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.