2000

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0453  Tuesday, 7 March 2000.

[1]     From:   Harry Hill <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 6 Mar 2000 10:55:31 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?

[2]     From:   Judith Matthews Craig <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 6 Mar 2000 10:08:12 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?

[3]     From:   Alexander Houck <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 06 Mar 2000 10:05:57 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Harry Hill <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 6 Mar 2000 10:55:31 EST
Subject: 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?

Sarah Boswell asks whether or not she is wasting her time training as a
classical actress. No, she is not, if her training is technically
sound.  Playing almost any Shakespeare role, for instance, which means
arriving at emotions through the physicality of the words, will prepare
her for other masters such as Tennessee Williams, Pinter and Mamet, not
to mention the lusciousness of O'Neill.

Harry Hill

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Judith Matthews Craig <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 6 Mar 2000 10:08:12 -0600
Subject: 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?

Having just listened to a debate on the classics list in which
classicists debate whether their profession is analogous to a dildo-a
substitute for the real thing-I would say that your choice of profession
has surprising rewards.  Training in the classic languages leads to
superior analytical ability which enables one to outperform others on
tests for which he has no background, etc.  I don't know what an actress
trained for the classics could do, but I can attest for myself that my
knowledge of the classics (in translation) has enriched my life to the
extent that I am learning basic Latin and hope to translate the
excitement I find in the classics to Shakespeare criticism.

Judy Craig

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Alexander Houck <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 06 Mar 2000 10:05:57 -0800
Subject: 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0449 Future of the Classics-Is there one?

>Have the classics got any relevance in today's society and have they
>got a future?  Which therefore brings around the question - am I wasting
>my time training to be a classical actress?

I would have to say that you are not wasting your time training yourself
as a classical actress as long as you are not determined to restrict
your acting brilliance to only the "classical works".  If you focus only
on the works of Shakespeare then your resume will be one sided, but what
a wonderful side to be on.

In my experience, actors and actresses that have experience or training
in the classics are endowed with respect because directors know how much
work goes into creating a full classical character.  The training you
have received can help you in all areas of acting, but your specialty
will be the classics.

Alex Houck
Santa Clara University

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.