The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0832  Thursday, 13 December 2007

[1] 	From:	William Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date:	Tuesday, 11 Dec 2007 16:45:05 -0500
	Subj:	Re: SHK 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff

[2] 	From:	Tom Reedy <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date:	Wednesday, 12 Dec 2007 02:10:46 -0600
	Subj:	Re Re: SHK 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff

[3] 	From:	Donald Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date:	Wednesday, 12 Dec 2007 08:58:40 -0600
	Subj:	RE: SHK 18.0827 Shakespeare as Falstaff


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:		William Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:		Tuesday, 11 Dec 2007 16:45:05 -0500
Subject: 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff
Comment:	Re: SHK 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff

John Briggs recently asked: "I would say that whoever played Falstaff 
played Sir Toby - would anyone argue?" I won't argue but I have recently 
seen an acting-student production at the College Conservatory of Music 
at the University of Cincinnati, in which Andrew Bernhardt played a 
tall, lean, athletic Toby, paradoxically in the Noel Coward vein. The 
only complaint that I heard about his acting was that he upstaged all 
the other actors.

Bill

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:		Tom Reedy <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:		Wednesday, 12 Dec 2007 02:10:46 -0600
Subject: SHK 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff
Comment:	Re Re: SHK 18.0817 Shakespeare as Falstaff

Steve Sohmer <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >wrote:

 >I wouldn't be surprised if he played
 >Chorus and delivered the "this is not the man" epilogue in 2H4. I like
 >to think he discharged the same duties in R&J and H5. It would have
 >seemed to audiences "just right" if writer-Shakespeare (who wrote the
 >play) engaged actor-Shakespeare to narrate it.

Surely he would have doubled as Mercutio?

"He was (indeed) honest, and of an open and free nature; had an 
excellent fancy, brave notions, and gentle expressions; wherein he 
flowed with that facility that sometimes it was necessary he should be 
stopped: Sufflimandus erat, as Augustus said of Haterius. His wit was in 
his own power; would the rule of it had been so too."

Tom Reedy

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:		Donald Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:		Wednesday, 12 Dec 2007 08:58:40 -0600
Subject: 18.0827 Shakespeare as Falstaff
Comment:	RE: SHK 18.0827 Shakespeare as Falstaff

A very interesting post from Steve Sohmer, but when he writes, "I'm 
going to suggest that Shakespeare played both Polonius (Ophelia's dad) 
and Old Hamlet (Hamlet's  dad)," he seems to have forgotten the fact 
that the cooling corpse of Polonius is lying on stage while King Hamlet 
appears to his son (though not to his widow).

Ah, what fun it was, playing Polonius, to lie there interminably, 
staring at the ceiling while Hamlet raged at his mother. And then, in a 
rather odd staging, I had to speak the king's lines in a hollow and 
ominous voice, while Hamlet responded to empty air. I wasn't sure that 
it worked quite right, but it did not cause snickers, much less guffaws 
-- probably because the actor playing Hamlet was quite good.

Cheers,
don

_______________________________________________________________
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.