SHAKESPEARE IN PRODUCTION - Assetsassets.cambridge.org/97805217/83750/frontmatter/...SHAKESPEARE IN PRODUCTION Shakespeare’s last play seems unusually elastic, capable of radically
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
SHAKESPEARE IN PRODUCTION
Shakespeare’s last play seems unusually elastic, capable of radically differ-ent interpretations, which reflect the social, political, scientific or moralconcerns of their period. This edition of The Tempest is the first dedicatedto its long and rich stage history. Drawing on a wide variety of sources, itexamines four centuries of mainstream, regional and fringe productions in Britain (including Dryden and Davenant’s Restoration adaptation),nineteenth- and twentieth-century American stagings, and recent Australian, Canadian, French, Italian and Japanese productions.
In a substantial, illustrated introduction Dr Dymkowski analyses thecultural significance of changes in the play’s theatrical representation: forexample, when and why Caliban began to be represented by a black actor,and Ariel became a man’s role rather than a woman’s. The commentaryannotates each line of the play with details about acting, setting, textualalteration and cuts, and contemporary reception.
With extensive quotation from contemporary commentators and detailfrom unpublished promptbooks, the edition offers both an accessibleaccount of the play’s changing meanings and a valuable resource for furtherresearch.
This series offers students and researchers the fullest possible stagingof individual Shakespearean texts. In each volume a substantial intro-duction presents a conceptual overview of the play, marking out themajor stages of its representation and reception. The commentary, presented alongside the New Cambridge edition of the text itself,offers detailed, line-by-line evidence for the overview presented in theintroduction, making the volume a flexible tool for further research.The editors have selected interesting and vivid evocations of settings,acting and stage presentation and range widely in time and space.
A Midsummer Night’s Dream, edited by Trevor R. GriffithsMuch Ado About Nothing, edited by John F. Cox
Antony and Cleopatra, edited by Richard MadelaineHamlet, edited by Robert Hapgood
Macbeth, edited by John WildersJulius Caesar, edited by James RigneyKing Henry V, edited by Emma Smith
Romeo and Juliet, edited by James N. LoehlinThe Taming of the Shrew, edited by Elizabeth SchaferThe Merchant of Venice, edited by Charles Edelman
As You Like It, edited by Cynthia MarshallTroilus and Cressida, edited by Frances Shirley
This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevantcollective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the
written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2000
Typeface in Monotype Ehrhardt ⁄. pt, System in QuarkXPressTM []
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication DataShakespeare, William, –.
The Tempest / edited by Christine Dymkowski.p. cm. – (Shakespeare in production)
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. (hb)
Michael Fitzgerald as Prospero, with multiple Ariels, in SilviuPurcarete’s production. By courtesy and kind permission ofNottingham Playhouse. Photo: Sean Hudson. page
Leah Hanman as Ariel in Frank Benson’s production. By permissionof the Shakespeare Centre Library, Stratford-upon-Avon.
Michael Redgrave as Prospero and Alan Badel as Ariel in MichaelBenthall’s production. By permission of the ShakespeareCentre Library, Stratford-upon-Avon. Photo: Angus McBean.
Ralph Richardson as Prospero and Margaret Leighton as Ariel inMichael Benthall’s revival. By permission of Hulton GettyPicture Collection. Photo: Central Press Photos, the ShakespeareCentre Library, Stratford-upon-Avon.
The masque in Declan Donnellan’s production. By permissionof photographer Robert Workman.
The masque in Jonathan Miller’s production. By permission ofphotographer Simon Annand.
Thomas Grieve’s set for Act , Scene of Charles Kean’s
production. By permission of V & A Picture Library.
Page of The Sketch, September , showing scenes andcharacters from Herbert Beerbohm Tree’s production. By kindpermission of The British Library (Shelfmark LD).
Act I, Scene of John Barton’s production, designed byChristopher Morley with Ann Curtis. By permission ofphotographer Zoë Dominic.
Act , Scene of Peter Brook’s production, designed by thedirector. By permission of the Shakespeare Centre Library,Stratford-upon-Avon. Photo: Angus McBean.
Act , Scene of Nicholas Hytner’s production, designed byDavid Fielding. By permission of the Shakespeare Centre Library,Stratford-upon-Avon (Joe Cocks Studio Collection). Photo: JoeCocks.
It is no longer necessary to stress that the text of a play is only its starting-point, and that only in production is its potential realized and capable ofbeing appreciated fully. Since the coming-of-age of Theatre Studies as anacademic discipline, we now understand that even Shakespeare is only one collaborator in the creation and infinite recreation of his play upon the stage. And just as we now agree that no play is complete until it is produced, so we have become interested in the way in which plays oftenproduced – and preeminently the plays of the national Bard, WilliamShakespeare – acquire a life history of their own, after they leave the handsof their first maker.
Since the eighteenth century Shakespeare has become a cultural con-struct: sometimes the guarantor of nationhood, heritage and the status quo,sometimes seized and transformed to be its critic and antidote. This latterrole has been particularly evident in countries where Shakespeare has to betranslated. The irony is that while his status as national icon grows in theEnglish-speaking world, his language is both lost and renewed, so that forgood or ill, Shakespeare can be made to seem more urgently ‘relevant’ thanin England or America, and may become the one dissenting voice that thecensors mistake as harmless.
‘Shakespeare in Production’ gives the reader, the student and the scholara comprehensive dossier of materials – eye-witness accounts, contempo-rary criticism, promptbook marginalia, stage business, cuts, additions andrewritings – from which to construct an understanding of the many mean-ings that the plays have carried down the ages and across the world. Thesematerials are organized alongside the New Cambridge Shakespeare text ofthe play, line by line and scene by scene, while a substantial introductionin each volume offers a guide to their interpretation. One may trace anargument about, for example, the many ways of playing Queen Gertrude,or the political transmutations of the text of Henry V; or take a scene, anact or a whole play, and work out how it has succeeded or failed in presen-tation over four hundred years.
For despite our insistence that the plays are endlessly made and remadeby history, Shakespeare is not a blank, scribbled upon by the age. Theatrehistory charts changes, but also registers something in spite of thosechanges. Some productions work and others do not. Two interpretations
may be entirely different, and yet both will bring the play to life. Why?Without setting out to give absolute answers, the history of a play in thetheatre can often show where the energy and shape of it lie, what has madeit tick, through many permutations. In this way theatre history can findcommon ground with literary criticism. Both will find suggestive directionsin the introductions to these volumes, while the commentaries provide rawmaterial for readers to recreate the living experience of theatre, and becometheir own eye-witnesses.
J. S. BrattonJulie Hankey
This series was originated by Jeremy Treglown and published by JunctionBooks, and later by Bristol Classical Press, as ‘Plays in Performance’. Fourtitles were published; all are now out of print.
I would like to thank Royal Holloway, University of London, for one term’ssabbatical leave in , , and ; the British Academy for a per-sonal research grant that allowed a fortnight’s research in Stratford; theSociety for Theatre Research for a grant that helped with the acquisitionof illustrations; and the copyright holders for permission to reproducethem. I have had enormous help from David Ward of my college library,as well as all the staff at the Shakespeare Centre Library in Stratford (espe-cially Karin Brown and Sylvia Morris) and the Theatre Museum inLondon (especially Andrew Kirk). I am very grateful to Andrew Gurr for his advice, generous sharing of knowledge and practical help, whichincluded using some of his own research time at the Folger ShakespeareLibrary to answer my queries; Julie Hankey for patiently working her waythrough many trees to help me see the wood; Jacky Bratton for combiningthe good offices of an editor with the kindnesses of a friend; Sarah Stantonfor her patience and understanding; David Lindley for his helpful com-ments and forbearance; Elisabetta Noto for translating the reviews of DeBerardinis’s production and explaining their references to Italian culture;Joyce Carter for making available her work on Paige’s production; IreneAlexander for facilitating my research at the Royal National Theatre; SarahMorris of the University of Bristol Theatre Collection for locating pho-tographs of Miller’s production; Lynette Goddard and HannahRudman for help, respectively, with the bibliography and word-processing;and Audrey Cotterell for her painstaking copy-editing. The many otherswho gave me access to material on particular productions are credited infootnotes to the relevant sections of the Introduction. My greatest debt isto my parents and to Pauline Gooderson, who has lived with this projectas long as I have and who, besides translating French and German reviews,has done so much to help me complete it.
The play-text printed here uses the readings established by David Lindleyfor the New Cambridge Shakespeare; however, the stage directions asprinted in the Folio have been restored, and, in line with the policy of thisseries, not all additional editorial directions have been adopted. Similarly,the lineation of NCS has, for ease of reference, occasionally been modified.
Shakespeare’s play is discussed in the present historical tense, and pro-ductions of it in the past tense. Ariel, who has been played by both femaleand male actors throughout the play’s production history, is referred to as‘she’ when played by a woman and ‘he’ when played by a man, in order tokeep the actor in the reader’s mind; this usage, however, suggests a consis-tent attitude that did not necessarily exist in the productions themselves.(For example, Ariel, played by Viola Tree in H. B. Tree’s production,is called ‘he’ in the printed version of the text and ‘she’ in the hand-writtenpromptbook notes.) The Commentary calls characters by their Shake-spearean names even when they have been slightly modified by lateradapters (e.g., Alonso’s and Antonio’s names are sometimes spelled‘Alonzo’ and ‘Anthonio’); the one exception is Dryden and Davenant’sTrincalo, whose difference from Shakespeare’s character warrants reten-tion of his new name.
For the reader’s convenience, productions are identified by name ofadapter/actor-manager/director; for example, ‘Tree’s Prospero’ means theactor in Tree’s production, rather than Tree himself. In some cases (forexample, ‘Kean’s Prospero’), the part was in fact played by the actor-manager in his own production. The actors of parts not discussed in theIntroduction are identified, where possible and pertinent, when the Com-mentary first introduces characters in a particular production. In addition,Appendix lists the principal players of productions that feature promi-nently in the Commentary; in alphabetical order of the person responsiblefor the production, it allows cross-referencing with the chronological listof productions, which gives fuller production data.
All information about a production, including quotations, is drawn fromits promptbook and/or printed text, unless otherwise noted; full details ofsources are given in the bibliography. However, because productions evolveand make various changes to the text, stage-business, actors, etc., it should
be remembered that no promptbook is definitive; indeed, there are some-times several versions of a promptbook, reflecting different stages of thesame production. Furthermore, the accuracy of promptbooks depends onthe thoroughness of their annotators: a feature common to several pro-ductions may not have been recorded in each case. Evidence from apromptbook may therefore make a production seem different from otherswhen this is not the case.
Where promptboks have been consulted, all cuts are noted. Half-linecuts are annotated as ‘a’ or ‘b’ when the two halves of the line are sharedby different speakers or are clearly distinguished by punctuation; the occa-sional division of a line into three separate speeches or phrases is annotatedas ‘a’, ‘b’ and ‘c’. When division of a line is unclear, the words cut arequoted.
Standard promptbook abbreviations are used and quoted throughout thecommentary: e.g., DR or DSR (downstage right); LC (left centre); UL orUSL (upstage left); LUE (left upper entrance/exit); RE (first rightentrance/exit); FOH (front of house); FO (facing out); OP (oppositeprompt); PS (prompt side). Notations about R and L are always from theon-stage, rather than the audience, perspective. Other abbreviations aregiven in the list that follows.
Insignificant alterations of the text, such as expansion or use of con-tractions, changes from singular to plural, and slight differences in word-order, have not been recorded. For reasons of space, quotations do not useellipsis dots to indicate omission of the beginning or the end of a sentence.Citation of reviews is complete in the Commentary (i.e., author, newspa-per, and date); incomplete citation indicates an inadequately identifiedarchival cutting (usually from the Theatre Museum for London andregional productions and from the Shakespeare Centre Library for Strat-ford and RSC productions). In the Commentary, books and articles arecited only by author and short title; full details may be found in the Bibliography.
MG Manchester GuardianMGa Montreal GazetteMLD Montréal Le DevoirMMA Minneapolis Metro AreaMP Morning PostMR Minneapolis Register (?)MS Morning StarMSN Minneapolis Skyway NewsMST Minneapolis Star TribuneMSun Mail on SundayMT Minneapolis TribuneNBB New Brighton BulletinNC News ChronicleNCS New Cambridge ShakespeareNEC Newcastle-upon-Tyne Evening ChronicleNEP Nottingham Evening PostNG Nottingham GuardianNS New StatesmanNSL Newark Star-LedgerNTA New Theatre AustraliaNw NewsweekNYLJ New York Law JournalNYN New York NewsdayNYO New York ObserverNYP New York PostNYT New York TimesNYVV New York Village VoiceO ObserverOM Oxford MailOT Oxford TimesOTN Our Theatre in the Nineties (G. B. Shaw)OurT Our TownP Punchpb(s) promptbook(s)PP Plays and PlayersPS Paese SeraPWI Plymouth Western IndependentR RinascitaRPB Rochester Post-BulletinRS La Repubblica SpettacoliRSC Royal Shakespeare Company
RST Royal Shakespeare Theatre, StratfordSA Sunday AgeSCG Somerset County GazetteSCL Shakespeare Centre Library, StratfordSco ScotsmanSCSN Sherburne County Star-Newssd(s) stage direction(s)SDR San Diego ReaderSE Sunday ExpressSH Stratford HeraldSk SketchSLP South London PressSMH Sydney Morning HeraldSMT Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, StratfordSN Soho NewsSp SpectatorSPD St Paul DispatchSPPP St Paul Pioneer PressSS Shakespeare SurveySt StageST Sunday TimesSTel Sunday TelegraphSTT Stage & Television TodaySunH Sun HeraldSundH Sunday HeraldSWCN Solihull & Warwick County NewsT The TimesTab TabletTat TatlerTCC Twin Cities CourierTCR Twin Cities ReaderTES Times Education SupplementTGM Toronto Globe & MailTJ Theatrical JournalTLS Times Literary SupplementTM Theatre Museum, LondonTN Theatre NewsletterTO Time OutTR Theatre RecordTr TribuneTru Truth
This list gives basic information about all productions discussed or men-tioned in the Introduction and Commentary; asterisks mark those for whichcuts have been noted. Venues are in London unless otherwise noted; abbre-viations and locations necessary for identification of a theatre are given parenthetically. Design refers to scenery/set and costume unless otherwisenoted: (s) scenery/set and (c) costume. In order to indicate whether pro-ductions played Shakespeare’s text or an adaptation of it, the following designations are used: (a) adapter; (a-m) actor-manager; (m) manager; (d)director. Although adapters have consciously altered Shakespeare’s text, itshould be remembered that each production is to some extent itself anadaptation: actor-managers and directors cut, re-arrange, and interpret theplay so that it reflects their own vision of what it means. Consequently,some of the productions of Shakespeare’s text noted below include majoromissions and interpolations of other material; see the Commentary forfurther details.