The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0051 Saturday, 18 February 2006
[1] From: Joanne Walen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 10:57:38 -0700
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
[2] From: Walter Cannon <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 13:23:12 -0600
Subj: RE: SHK 17.0032 Handsome Richard III?
[3] From: Donald Bloom <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 12:27:18 -0600
Subj: RE: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
[4] From: William Proctor Williams <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 21:41:05 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
[5] From: Stuart Manger <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Friday, 17 Feb 2006 10:44:52 +0000
Subj: Handsome R3
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joanne Walen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 10:57:38 -0700
Subject: 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Mario Baricelli in the RIII production at the Oregon Shakespeare
Festival in 1993(?) was a handsome actor whose "deformities" were metal
braces on his legs and the use of a wheelchair.
Joanne
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Walter Cannon <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 13:23:12 -0600
Subject: 17.0032 Handsome Richard III?
Comment: RE: SHK 17.0032 Handsome Richard III?
Shenandoah Shakespeare Express's 1998 production featured an
extraordinary performance with Kate Norris in the role of Richard.
While she didn't play Richard with a "deformity" (no hump or hunch), she
did have her arm in a metal brace which she used as a weapon in battle.
"Incredibly handsome man"? No. Striking, convincing, beautiful? Yes.
Walter Cannon
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Donald Bloom <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 12:27:18 -0600
Subject: 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Comment: RE: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Jack Heller writes:
>"I don't know of a Richard played by a handsome actor, but this question
>brings to mind an idea I once suggested to a director. A few sources
>I've seen raise doubts that the actual king was a hunchback and that he
>is known to have appeared unshirted on a public occasion."
I thought it was generally accepted that the hunchback and withered arm
were a total fabrication of Sir Thomas More's concocting (one of many).
He was a slender man of small stature, wasn't he? As best as I can
recall, in Josephine Tey's "The Daughter of Time" one of the characters
suggests that he may have appeared slightly deformed because of an
overdeveloped sword arm-he was, after all, a considerable fighting man.
Is there any contemporary evidence on this (aside from the notoriously
mendacious slanders of his enemies)?
Cheers,
don
[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: William Proctor Williams <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 2006 21:41:05 -0500
Subject: 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0043 Handsome Richard III?
Thanks to all of you for the help. I think Jack Heller gets closest to
what my student had in mind. I take it her idea is that Richard is the
consummate deceiver and the deformities are no different than his other
deceptions. If you follow her line of thinking then no lines need to be
cut and Jack Heller's notion of staging the deception would work very
nicely. I'll pass it all on with credit.
William Proctor Williams
[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Manger <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Friday, 17 Feb 2006 10:44:52 +0000
Subject: Handsome R3
Can anyone explain why a student or director or a teacher would want to
encourage anyone to fly so far and fast in the face of almost every
major tenet of the play's thesis as to promote such a concept? Without
R3's deformities of mind and body, the plot becomes a list of events -
pretty partial and historically inaccurate at that - if such a crazy
notion is developed.
I rather fear a whole stream of 'what ifs?' coming on this thread.
Shylock not a Jew?
Oberon not a Faery King?
Hermione REALLY dead?
Ariel doesn't sink the ship in the first three minutes and conspires
with Alonso et al to dethrone Prospero?
Puck gets it right first time?
Antony and Cleopatra live happily ever after like the folks who live on
the hill?
Brutus rushes JC to the hospital?
Lear doesn't die - or has someone already done that..................!!
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
|
