Father Figures in Romeo and Juliet - Lord Capulet

What follows is a second part of a larger piece that I am working on regarding the roles of the parents in The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet. Earlier I looked at the role of Prince Eskales as a possibly fatherless father figure. Here we will take a look at the strongest of the patriarchs depicted in the play, and see how his role effects the tragedy of the young star-crossed lovers.

--------

The Capulets are probably the best-illustrated family unit in the entirety of Shakespeare’s theatrical canon. We have scenes between the parents and child. We see intercessions by the household servants who are like family. There is a variety to this family that makes them human, if not entirely likable. How then does this environment contribute to the tragedy of the play?

Lord Capulet speaks the first line almost every time that he enters the scene. He comes on speaking which puts the attention on him. When the Prince speaks privately to the fathers after the opening brawl, he takes Capulet away with him first. Paris, the Prince’s kinsman is wooing Capulet’s daughter. Capulet holds a feast. Capulet’s family has a large crypt. In the context of the play the Capulet family is given importance over the Montagues. The first words in the play are given to the Capulets. Lord Capulet is the strong, authoritative father figure in this tragedy.

The character is not drawn as a bad father. He protects his family. When the audience discovers that the Countie Paris wishes to marry Juliet, we first see Lord Capulet putting him off, telling him to wait because she is too young. At his great feast, he speaks well of the party-crashing Romeo, the son of his great rival and is able to keep the peace when Tibalt demands satisfaction for this insult. It is only when Tibalt is murdered that Capulet begins to force the marriage on his only living child in order to ensure her safety and the family’s prosperity, making him appear a monster in the eyes of his daughter, and a villain in the hearts of the audience.

‘Mountague is bound as well as I, / In penalty alike, and 'tis not hard I thinke, / For men so old as wee, to keepe the peace,’ he states. There is an acknowledgment of his role as a leader, due to his age and authority. However, he quickly tempers this authority with a father’s care for his daughter: ‘But wooe her gentle Paris, get her heart, / My will to her consent, is but a part, / And shee agree, within her scope of choise, / Lyes my consent, and faire according voice.’ He does not treat Juliet as chattel, and shows true care and tenderness in these lines regarding the dispensation of his daughter.

The first time we are given any exchange between Lord and Lady Capulet is after Tibalt’s death when Lord Capulet does an about-face and agrees to quickly marry Juliet off to Paris. He sends his wife to their daughter to make the case. Herein we have a glimpse as to why this concerned father is made out as the baddie in this youthful love story. This is the first time we see Juliet and her father interacting, and he cannot understand why his daughter is not agreeable to his plans. Of course, she is unaware of how he has been protecting her up to this point.

How, will she none? doth she not give us thanks?

Is she not proud? doth she not count her blest,

Unworthy as she is, that we have wrought

So worthy a Gentleman, to be her Bridegroome

…………………………………………………………………is meant Love.

How now?

How now? Chopt Logicke? what is this?

[…]

Gods bread, it makes me mad:

Day, night, houre, ride, time, worke, play,

Alone in companie, still my care hath bin

To have her matcht, and having now provided

A Gentleman of Noble Parentage,

Of faire Demeanes, Youthfull, and Nobly Allied,

Stuft as they say with Honourable parts,

Proportion'd as ones thought would wish a man,

And then to have a wretched puling foole,

A whining mammet, in her Fortunes tender,

To answer, Ile not wed, I cannot Love:

I am too young, I pray you pardon me.

                       

Here is much abuse thrown at Juliet by her father. He calls her ‘green sickness,’ ‘carrion,’ ‘baggage,’ ‘tallow face,’ ‘disobedient wretch,’ ‘wretched puling foole’ and ‘whining mammet.’ He threatens her: ‘I will drag thee, on a Hurdle thither,’ ‘My fingers itch,’ ‘you shall not house with me,’ ‘Ile nere acknowledge thee.’ His authority is lost with these insults and threats, showing instead a father whose work for his child is unappreciated. In his eyes, Juliet has no idea what machinations he has been dealing with on her behalf. Perhaps it is the very fact that he has been working without her knowledge that has put this rift between them. In Capulet’s next scene, this rift seems to be closed.

How now my headstrong,

Where have you bin gadding?

…………………………………………………………………rul'd by you.

Send for the Countie, goe tell him of this,

Ile have this knot knit up to morrow morning.

…………………………………………………………………bounds of modestie.

Why I am glad on't, this is well, stand up,

This is as't should be, let me see the County:

I marrie go I say, and fetch him hither.

Now afore God, this reveren'd holy Frier,

All our whole Cittie is much bound to him.

…………………………………………………………………there's time inough.

Go Nurse, go with her,

Weele to Church to morrow.

…………………………………………………………………now neere night.

Tush, I will stirre about,

And all things shall be well, I warrant thee wife:

Go thou to Juliet, helpe to decke up her,

Ile not to bed to night, let me alone:

Ile play the huswife for this once. What ho?

They are all forth, well I will walke my selfe

To Countie Paris, to prepare him up

Against to morrow, my heart is wondrous light,

Since this same way-ward Gyrle is so reclaim'd.

The cues here, ‘rul’d by you’ and ‘bounds of modestie,’ combined with Capulet’s responses show that Juliet has come to her senses and that as far as he is concerned, ‘This is as't should be.’ He is so happy that he offers to stay up worrying: ‘Ile not to bed to night, let me alone: / Ile play the huswife for this once.’ Having completed his duties has a father, he will now take on the role of the mother.

However, this joy is short-lived. After a few small exchanges, Capulet’s cue lines tell him all he needs to know:

…………………………………………………………………helpe, call helpe.

…………………………………………………………………shee's dead.

…………………………………………………………………O wofull time.

The death of his daughter throws him into despair, and he grieves, for his child.

Death that hath tane her hence to make me waile,

Ties up my tongue, and will not let me speake.

[…]

O Child, O Child; my soule, and not my Child,

Dead art thou, alacke my Child is dead,

And with my Child, my joyes are buried.

In his grief he does not look for solace with his wife. His lines are given to unspecified persons, or directed to his thwarted son-in-law, Paris. At this most painful time for him, the death of his daughter (of course, we in the audience have satisfaction that Juliet is not dead, and at the same time, the knowledge that she does not see this honest tenderness that her father expresses for her: another instance of the tragedy of miscommunication between father and daughter), he is alone in his suffering.

In the play’s final scene, Capulet makes several references to family. He refers to his own family by their relationship to himself, again calling Lady Capulet ‘wife’ and referring to ‘our Daughter’ and ‘my Daughter[ ]’ rather than using their names. Then surprisingly he refers to ‘Brother Montague.’ Now, with the death of both of their children, they can be brothers. They are of one generation and can understand each other.

By eventually forcing the issue of Juliet’s marriage to Paris, Lord Capulet pushes the tragedy along its path. Had he continued with the compassionate care of his daughter, letting her choose whom she liked, he still may not have allowed the marriage of Romeo and Juliet to continue, but we can only speculate on alternate endings. What is clear through the text is that there is very little meaningful communication between father and daughter in the Capulet household, a strengthening of which may have avoided quite a bit of bloodshed.

-----

As work continues on the prompt book and through text sessions with the cast of The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet for NRTC’s upcoming production as part of our Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project’s 2016 tour, more will be unearthed regarding the parents and parental figures in the play and how the generation gap effects the course of the play.

-Andy Kirtland, Managing Director of The New Renaissance Theatre Company (which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project)

Our Midsommer Nights with Romeo and Juliet

Much like last year’s post Much adoe and Me, this post is about why A Midsommer Nights Dreame and The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet (First Folio spellings) were chosen for our Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project tour this year.  To begin with, both of these plays are perfect demonstrations of almost everything the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique offers from blocking directions to simultaneous dialogue clues.  MSND, aside from being my favorite of Shakespeare’s comedies, has countless examples of how this technique shows the audience what the characters really think about each other even though they are saying the opposite.  Using just the rules of Unrehearsed brings the Demetrius & Helena ‘follow me no more’ scene to hilarious life when the actors follow the technique’s rules of crossing.  And the play within a play scene never fails to entertain when the actors stay true to the text and do exactly as Shakespeare has written!  I don’t want to give too much away, but I’ve seen so many productions of MSND where the director feels that he/she needs to ‘add’ superfluous actions and props to make this scene funny.  It doesn’t need it.  Just stay true the text and you’re golden!  Finally, as the director of MSND, I got to do one of my favorite doublings, which is to combine the lovers, mechanicals and fairies into just four tracks.  I put together this doubling the last time I directed MSND, which adds a bit more excitement and fun for our cast as well as the audience – who get to see our versatile actors switch characters with the snap of a finger.  With the usual doubling of Puck & Philostrate, Theseus & Oberon, Hippolyta & Titania, and Egeus & Quince (Bottom has no doubling), this rounds out my cast to 9 actors onstage and 1 prompting.

As for Romeo & Juliet, that was a bit of a happy accident.  We wanted to do two plays this year and needed one that would be a dramatic contrast to MSND – while still sharing some of the same romantically tragic elements of how love (or the lack of it) affects people.  Plus, this would be an opportunity for people to see a well-known story presented in a new way, which will be illuminating in ways that more traditional productions, movies or merely reading the script are not.  Romeo & Juliet was written around the same time as MSND, and Andy Kirtland (the director) initially thought it could be performed using just 10 actors, as well (9 performing and 1 prompting).  However, after many nights of hair-pulling research, he discovered that this play does indeed need 11 people.  This is where our Apprentice idea came from, and we are thrilled to be bringing in someone to take over a track of roles for R & J as well as assist our awesome stage manager in MSND.  R & J also has that wonderful simultaneous dialogue in certain parts, if you use the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique.  These dramatic moments of confusion and characters talking over each other are thrilling and are rarely (if ever) seen in performances!  On a personal note, R & J was the first Shakespeare play I ever read and acted in.  Even though I had a very small part as a dancer in that university production, years later it would be one of my first Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique shows with The New England Shakespeare Festival – in which I played Mercutio.

As with all of our Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project shows, each of our actors have taken on 2 or 3 tracks, which we switch around for each performance.  So, audience members who attend on multiple days will never see the exact same show twice!  Watching an Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique production brings Shakespeare’s plays to life in ways that people don’t usually get to see.  Our theatre company cares about the story and staying true to the text, which comes through in the high quality performances and audience reaction.  I am thrilled to be bringing our 3^rd year’s tour to Allegheny Parks again and look forward to bringing our fun and energetic shows there for many years to come.

-Elizabeth Ruelas, Artistic Director of The New Renaissance Theatre Company (which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project)

 

The Prince's Daddy Issues in The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet

At this time of year as we find ourselves preparing for our upcoming Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project’s tour of A Midsommer Night’s Dreame and The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet, I find myself up to the elbows in cue scripts as I prepare and format the texts. When working on the texts in parts this way, themes and words make themselves known in different ways. This time, working on Romeo and Juliet, I have been struck by the roles of the parents. The following is part of a longer essay, still being composed, that will explore the parental relationships in The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet as seen through the text of the First Folio and the cue scripts for the characters involved.

After pointing out some differences in the title pages of the quartos preceding the publication of the First Folio, I point to one specific variation. One of the Prince’s lines, commonly printed as ‘To know our farther pleasure in this case,’ appears in the First Folio as ‘To know our Fathers pleasure in this case’ (emphasis mine). The following are my musings on the implications of this word choice when exploring the roles of parent’s in The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet. 

---

In his first appearance, The Prince has only one speech in which he brings a brawl to an end:

Rebellious Subjects, Enemies to peace,

Prophaners of this Neighbor-stained Steele,

Will they not heare? What hoe, you Men, you Beasts,

That quench the fire of your pernitious Rage,

With purple Fountaines issuing from your Veines:

On paine of Torture, from those bloody hands

Throw your mistemper'd Weapons to the ground,

And heare the Sentence of your mooved Prince.

Three civill Broyles, bred of an Ayery word,

By thee old Capulet and Mountague,

Have thrice disturb'd the quiet of our streets,

And made Verona's ancient Citizens

Cast by their Grave beseeming Ornaments,

To wield old Partizans, in hands as old,

Cankred with peace, to part your Cankred hate,

If ever you disturbe our streets againe,

Your lives shall pay the forfeit of the peace.

For this time all the rest depart away:

You Capulet shall goe along with me,

And Mountague come you this afternoone,

To know our Fathers pleasure in this case:

To old Free-towne, our common judgement place:

Once more on paine of death, all men depart.

It takes the Prince 8 lines of text before the fighting ceases, and he can get a word in edgeways. His cue to enter is ‘seek a Foe.’ This gives the actor entering the idea that he is already entering a situation looking for an adversary, not to take control. He speaks of ‘Three civill Broyles, bred of an Ayery word.’ If his power is so respected, such slights would not break out into violence, but rather the fear of repercussions would keep the citizens in line. He must tell everyone to leave twice: ‘For this time all the rest depart away:’ then again 5 lines later, ‘Once more on paine of death, all men depart.’ This could be seen as 2 stage directions, the first to the citizens who have come to join the fight, and the second to the remaining heads of the family. It is within these five lines that the Prince speaks of his ‘Father’s pleasure.’ Possibly, he wanted the common citizens to disperse, and not hear that he must take this case to a higher authority, his Father. It is possible that everyone is aware of his weakness as a ruler, and therefore, ignores the order. At the end of these lines, still all men do not depart. Montague, Lady Montague and Benvolio remain on stage. Yes, this device keeps the plot and action moving along (and rightly so), but we could have another introducing Romeo after everyone had left the stage. By keeping some players on stage, the weakness of the Prince’s position is pushed farther.

Several references are made to age in his first speech: ‘old Capulet and Montague,’ ‘auncient Citizens,’ the double entendre of ‘Grave beseeming Ornaments’ and ‘hands as old.’ These men, or this situation at least, seem to have some seniority to the Prince. The reference to his Father also refers to an older authority. This opens up the possibility that the Prince is young himself, and offers an explanation for his weakness. The ending’s inevitability is presaged by the fact that a world in which the generations do not listen to one another is overseen by a youthful figure who does not command the authority necessary to keep order and peace.

The next time we see the Prince, we see the result of his weak leadership. He enters following the two fights that end with the deaths of Mercutio and Tibalt. His cue script for this scene is as follows:

 

…………………………………………………………………dost thou stay?

ENTER PRINCE, OLD MONTAGUE, CAPULET, THEIR WIVES

[51]

Where are the vile beginners of this Fray?

…………………………………………………………………O Cozin, Cozin.

Benvolio, who began this Fray?

…………………………………………………………………must not live.

Romeo slew him, he slew Mercutio,

Who now the price of his deare blood doth owe.

…………………………………………………………………life of Tybalt.

And for that offence,

Immediately we doe exile him hence:

I have an interest in your hearts proceeding:

My bloud for your rude brawles doth lie a bleeding.

But Ile Amerce you with so strong a fine,

That you shall all repent the losse of mine.

It will be deafe to pleading and excuses,

Nor teares, nor prayers shall purchase our abuses.

Therefore use none, let Romeo hence in hast,

Else when he is found, that houre is his last.

Beare hence his body, and attend our will:

Mercy not Murders, pardoning those that kill.

EXEUNT

Upon his arrival, he has to repeat himself. This is never a good beginning to a person supposedly in a position of power. The full text of these first exchanges looks like this: 

Prince                     Where are the vile beginners of this Fray?

Benvolio                O Noble Prince, I can discover all

The unluckie Mannage of this fatall brall:

There lies the man slaine by young Romeo,

That slew thy kinsman brave Mercutio.

Capulet Wife        Tybalt, my Cozin? O my Brothers Child,

O Prince, O Cozin, Husband, O the blood is spild

Of my deare kinsman. Prince as thou art true,

For bloud of ours, shed bloud of Mountague.

O Cozin, Cozin.

Prince                     Benvolio, who began this Fray?

There is evidence here that the lines spoken by Benvolio and Lady Capulet are simultaneous and he is given a false cue to start speaking by Lady Capulet. He is being shouted at and interrupted. From the audience’s point of view, this makes thematic sense: Lady Capulet has just found her kinsman was murdered, and Benvolio is trying to protect his best friend. From a character point of view, this reinforces the Prince’s weakness.

When interceding in the large melee in the first scene, the Prince threatens ‘If ever you disturbe our streets againe, / Your lives shall pay the forfeit of the peace.’ Yet here, after the feud results in the death of his own kinsman, his sentence is exile for Romeo, and a stiff financial penalty for the Montagues and Capulets. He goes back on his word, where a penalty of death is called for he again shows what he believes to be mercy. This tactic does not work out well for him.

The third and final time that we see the Prince, he is summoned late at night to the Capulet family tomb.

…………………………………………………………………the Frier too.

ENTER THE PRINCE

[99]

What misadventure is so earely up,

That calls our person from our mornings rest?

 

…………………………………………………………………toward our Monument.

What feare is this which startles in your eares?

…………………………………………………………………and new kil'd.

Search,

Seeke, and know how, this foule murder comes.

…………………………………………………………………to a Sepulcher.

Come Mountague, for thou art early up

To see thy Sonne and Heire, now early downe.

…………………………………………………………………against my age?

Looke: and thou shalt see.

…………………………………………………………………to a grave?

Seale up the mouth of outrage for a while,

Till we can cleare these ambiguities,

And know their spring, their head, their true descent,

And then I will be generall of your woes,

And lead you even to death? meane time forbeare,

And let mischance be slave to patience,

Bring forth the parties of suspition.

…………………………………………………………………my selfe excus'd.

Then say at once, what thou dost know in this?

…………………………………………………………………of severest Law.

We still have knowne thee for a Holy man.

Where's Romeo's man? What can he say to this? 

…………………………………………………………………left him there.

Give me the Letter, I will look on it.

Where is the Counties Page that rais’d the Watch?                     

This Letter doth make good the Friers words,

Their course of Love, the tydings of her death:

And heere he writes, that he did buy a poison

Of a poore Pothecarie, and therewithal

Came to this Vault to dye, and lye with Juliet.

Where be these Enemies? Capulet, Mountague,

See what a scourge is laide upon your hate,

That Heaven finds meanes to kill your joyes with Love;

And I, for winking at your discords too,

Have lost a brace of Kinsmen: All are punish'd.

…………………………………………………………………of our enmity.

A glooming peace this morning with it brings,

The Sunne for sorrow will not shew his head;

Go hence, to have more talke of these sad things,

Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished.

For never was a Storie of more Wo,

Then this of Juliet, and her Romeo.

He comes on the scene to find the bodies of Romeo (whom he had exiled), Paris (another of his own kinsmen) and Juliet, freshly dead. There is, however, an acknowledgment of the role his weakness has played in the unfolding of the tragedy: ‘And I, for winking at your discords too, / Have lost a brace of Kinsmen: All are punish'd.’ Any reason for this weakness is only hinted at throughout the text.

However, once he discovers that the grudge between these families has resulted in death, and in an affront to his own family and authority, there is no more mention of age in the Prince’s text, and no further intimation of an absent Father. It could be said that the Prince does grow up.

The whereabouts and identity of the Prince’s Father, if he ever existed in the confines of the story, is never discussed. There is mention of the plague breaking out during the action of the play, but it never directly touches Verona. Was he afflicted? We do not know, and possibly should not even care. However, if this fleeting reference to an absent father (ruler) is significant to the over-arching theme of parents and their children, what does the Prince’s Father’s absence mean for, and say about, The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet?

The absence means, that for whatever reason, the son is left in charge. The child is given authority. We are never told how old the Prince is. We know that Mercutio and Paris are his kinsmen. We know that he has spoken out harshly against the feud between the Montagues and Capulets. We know by his actions that he is not a consistent ruler. By his own admission, his rule has contributed to the tragedy of the play. This all possibly points to the fact that the Prince is not ready to be in charge. He cannot govern Verona (his symbolic children) because he is immature and not ready. Having an unprepared Prince in charge mirrors the actions of the more popular characters in the play, parents who cannot govern their children and the youths who are incapable of governing themselves.

 

---

The essay will go on to compare and contrast the Lords and Ladies Montague and Capulet, as well as exploring the surrogate parents, the Nurse and Friar Lawrence. Some other themes that have caught my interest while preparing this play have been communication, or lack thereof, and the importance of names. I look forward to putting more of my thoughts down and sharing them with all of you.

-Andy Kirtland, Managing Director of The New RenaissanceTheatre Company (which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project)

NRTC: Year 1...and Beyond!

Just over a year ago, on 19 November 2014, The New Renaissance Theatre Company was officially incorporated as a non-profit corporation. In that year, we have accomplished quite a bit: 

The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project’s tour grew from two performances to six, and we performed in five new locations, including taking the show on the road to Baltimore, MD where we were seen at the Inner Harbor, and at Artscape. At home in Pittsburgh, we began a relationship with Allegheny Parks, allowing us to reach audiences all over Allegheny County.  

Behind the scenes, we have come to realize how the (sometimes unforeseen) small, yet crucial day-to-day tasks of running a theatre company are adding up. Networking through social media and events, blogging, looking for and obtaining insurance and other legal necessities, finding venues and willing partners and donors, fundraising and creating programs to educate performers and students are all fortunately beginning to pay off. We are extremely lucky to have added three outstanding and committed board members, whose talents and enthusiasm are an amazing addition to the administration of the company. Because of their skills and initiatives, NRTC will be able to grow faster and in a sustainable way to ensure that we are around for years to come. 

Of course, none of what we do would be possible without the growing support of our generous donors and the tireless efforts of our actors, who, with each performance, undoubtedly, embark on the most difficult task they will ever be asked to perform in front of an audience.  

At this time, as we are striding the blast between this year and the next, we must also look to the future. In 2016, The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project will continue to grow. Ambitiously, we are adding a second show to our summer tour, performing A Midsommer Night’s Dreame and The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet in rep. We are expanding from six to 12 performances and planning on returning to Baltimore. There are the possibilities of other performances and workshops in and around Pittsburgh as well as out-of-state. We will launch an Indie-gogo campaign to raise money and awareness of NRTC and USP. Our budget is increasing for the third year in a row, and we will be in a great position to invest in the theatre’s future. 

All of this is great for us and this may sound like so much horn-honking and back patting – but, yes it is. Go us! We are not ashamed to say that we are proud about what our hard work and passion has accomplished in this short period of time, or that we are excited about our future. But as always, our focus is on the audience and how you experience theatre and how it can be a meaningful part of your life.  

So what do our accomplishments mean for you? 

As the New Renaissance Theatre Company grows, we will be able to offer more opportunities for local artists and students. The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project is unique not only in Pittsburgh or the USA, but also in the world. Very few theatre companies attempt the type of work we do, or approach the text with the research and attention to detail that our productions demand. Most importantly, in order to bring our historically informed practices to life, we depend on brave, talented actors whom we seek, and will continue to seek (and find), in Pittsburgh. NRTC celebrates local and locally grown talent, and actively seeks ways to keep them in Pittsburgh, which is a benefit to the theatre community at large. As our visibility grows at home and abroad, we will become a resource for the city and, indeed, the region. By increasing our physical footprint through more and farther-flung performances and workshops, and increasing our presence online, NRTC will have the ability to reach more people who may not normally have direct access to quality, professional theatre on a regular basis. We can act as a gateway to the incredible arts scene that thrives and grows in Pittsburgh. 

In the next few weeks many people will begin to make New Year Resolutions. It could be said that NRTC’s is to move onwards and upwards, but we are striving to do that all the time. We promise to continue the hard work on our end in the coming year and making The New Renaissance Theatre Company a theatre that not only we are proud of, but one that you, our friends, fans and followers can be proud of, too. 

Thank you, and Happy Holidays!  
-Andy Kirtland, Managing Director of The New Renaissance Theatre Company (which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project)

Letting Shakespeare Do the Work for You

One of my favorite things to say to actors new to the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique (Historically Informed Practice) is that “Shakespeare does all the work for you.”  Trust the text, the words and the punctuation.  Don’t try to add subtext or backstory that’s not there.  It’s not necessary.  Unfortunately, it takes a true leap of faith for many actors to let go of their standard way of performing and trust the technique.  Shakespeare wrote during a time where actors barely rehearsed the plays.  They performed a different play every day - 6 days a week, added a new play every two weeks and had over 80 plays a year in their repertoire.  So, he and the other playwrights of the time wrote important stage directions and character clues right into the text, which actors of the day already knew how to use.  400 years later, this technique is still working.

Our Managing Director Andy Kirtland shares this story of when he played Antipholus of Ephesus in The Comedy of Errors for The New England Shakespeare Festival (NESF) several years ago: “I made the choice to be sad on the line 'I never saw my father in my life.' I thought it was good. But the less than gentle note I received was that 1) that isn't anywhere in the text, and 2) nobody cares. Even worse, I came to realize that it injects a note that is distracting to the general tone of the scene. Everything worked much better when I just said the line and the story continued on. It drove home that these techniques are not about me, the actor. They are about the story and the audience. Like so much in life it is not about you, and when the focus is on others, everything is so much better.”

It is difficult to believe that a group of actors who barely know each other will learn their parts on their own, will only receive their lines and the last few words of their cues, will not receive any blocking notes from the director, will not know who will be saying their cue lines or when, and the first time the entire show will be performed will be in front of the audience.  Then, magically, that first show happens and everything falls into place!  I confess that I was incredibly scared before my very first Unrehearsed show.  I was Bianca in Taming of the Shrew for NESF years ago, and during that very first scene that I watched from the wings – I saw it happen: a group of incredibly talented actors who received the best technique training from NESF’s founder & producing artistic director Demitra Papadinis brought this comedy to life without any rehearsal…and it worked beautifully!  It just took trusting the technique and our fellow actors.

Sometimes during text sessions, certain actors will ask me questions about subtext or the magic ‘if’ or how their character feels about so-and-so.  These are modern technique questions that have nothing to do with Shakespeare.  In fact, they were invented centuries after Shakespeare wrote his plays.  And don’t even get me started on Freud and the Bard.  I try to bring the actors back to what their character actually says and use the word choices that the playwright gives them to their advantage.  Don’t worry about what your character had for breakfast or if they were bottle-fed.  Concentrate on what’s happening now in the play and don’t anticipate what’s going to happen in a few scenes, which are basic acting notes that we all still get today.  Learn the technique, trust it, use it to the best of your ability and don’t over think it.  After all, Shakespeare has already done all the work for you.

 

-Elizabeth Ruelas, Artistic Director of The New Renaissance Theatre Company (which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project)

 

The USP Book Review II

Another year of reading, research and performance has brought about another look at books that have influenced my thinking, or that I just find interesting. Finding books specifically that touch upon Historically Informed Practices can be difficult, but I am grateful to Kim Carrell who has pointed me in the direction of some new scholarship. Those books will get a look soon. For now, here are some other books that may be of interest to our fans, friends and followers. Enjoy, and as always, your thoughts are welcome as well.

Rehearsal from Shakespeare to Sheridan, Tiffany Stern, Oxford, 2000

            Tiffany Stern earns her reputation as a leading light in theatre history with this book. It contains some of the most interesting scholarship and insight into the rehearsal practices of early modern English theatre. Her arguments seem stronger for the time after the interregnum, but of course there is more evidence and anecdotes for that period. Unlike Shakespeare in Parts, there is little practical information about how the environment that produced the plays could be reproduced, or simulated – and indeed (especially in the sections on the 18^th century theatres) there seems to be a stronger argument for a rehearsal period and process more like the one theatres enjoy today.

            What struck me as most interesting is the extrapolation that can be made between the ways scripts were brought to stage in the Restoration and after and the way those of Shakespeare and his contemporaries may have been produced in the Elizabethan and Jacobean theatres. During the Restoration, there were obviously more hands involved in changing the script, most notably the theatre Managers and Prompters – even the literati of higher society were solicited for their advice by playwrights and the theatre producers. Changes were made after the first performance, and many times actors made their own improvements. However, through all this, the playwright’s name stayed intact on the script, despite the amount of input by others. Some prologues and epilogues brag about the additions or deletions as well as the names and titles of those who made them. Many of the texts that we have today are not the texts as they were performed on stage, but as the playwright intended. Others are the performance texts.

The way that Stern lays out the history, along with the fact that many producers claimed (correctly or not) at least some tradition from the earlier stage, it is possible to make the argument that the plays that we have from Shakespeare underwent the same kind or similar journey from pen to stage. It is possible that there is no “Ur-Hamlet” with a ghost shouting “Hamlet, Revenge” like a fish wife as the apocryphal tale has it. It may have come during the performance of the same texts that we read today, only it did not survive in print.

            This is an interesting read, but it is not the easiest book to go through unless you have a great interest in the depth of theatre history. This is not a book to gloss over, but would be an indispensable resource for any research paper. It is a great addition to any library, and the bibliography holds a vast of wealth for further reading.

Easy Guide to Shakespeare, Fall River Press, 2014

            This book is the exact opposite of Rehearsal from Shakespeare to Sheridan. This is a light book, an easy read, with a little breadth and even less depth, but this is a fun read. It is great for people to get an introduction or a quick refresher for certain plays or to the playwright and some of the stories and theories about him and his work. There are chapters entitled “Famous Shakespeare Haters,” and it prefaces its chapter about possible other writers with the advice that “[i]f you see anyone in real life making these arguments, do not try to argue with them. Back away, slowly.”

How to Teach your Children Shakespeare, by Ken Ludwig, Crown Publishers, 2013

            In this book, playwright Ken Ludwig goes over how he introduced his children to Shakespeare, and how he got them to memorize some well-known monologues. Glossing over the memorization lessons, he has some nice insight into the plays he introduces. This is the first, and so far only, convincing argument I have come across that sheds any light on any possible merits of Twelfth Night. I have never found this a particularly interesting play outside of the Malvolio storyline, neither deep and searching or very funny.  Ludwig’s book is an interesting read, and if you have children whom you would like to get interested in the language of the Bard, How to Teach your Children Shakespeare is a great place to start.

The Quality of Mercy, by Peter Brook, Nick Hern Books Ltd., 2013

            This short read is a collection of musings by one of the most influential theatre directors of the twentieth century, and one that I greatly admire. That being said, this falls short of everything I have read by Brook up until this point. It is a love letter to Shakespeare, Bardology -not at its worst (that will come a little farther down in this blog) but that does nothing to further understanding or appreciation of Shakespeare’s plays. We know that Peter Brook loves Shakespeare, and that he is very good at directing those plays. His other books ‘The Empty Space,’ ‘The Shifting Point’ and ‘The Open Door’ are much more moving, inspirational and important. It hurts to say, but you can give this one a miss. Its only real value is if you are a lover of Brook, or a lover of Shakespeare with the need of knowing how much other people love Shakespeare.

Shakespeare the Invention of the Human, by Harold Bloom, Riverhead Books, 1998

            The Bible of Bardology. The title of this tome says it all. This is a love fest, mostly between Bloom and his favorite characters: Hamlet and Falstaff. The premise of the book is that Hamlet and Falstaff are the pinnacle of creation, the greatest characters ever penned and the first time in the history of English literature (or to read Bloom, indeed, the history of the universe) that real, complex, soulful people –human beings- are represented in art. This argument can be made for Hamlet, but Falstaff?

            The only explanation is that Falstaff is a popular character, and the only way to explain his popularity to make out that some huge universal Truth lies somewhere in the character that defines us all as the human race. That is not the case, but Bloom tries his hardest to make it so. Falstaff is a great character, but he is far from perfect. His popularity at the time was due to timely lampooning, Shakespeare’s language, and the actor’s portrayal. Any insight that Falstaff makes can be found elsewhere in the cannon. Bloom seems to feel himself as a Falstaffian character and therefore makes much of him.

            Some useful insights peppered throughout this (literally) heavy book are scarred by the fact that there are unnecessary references throughout to Hamlet and Falstaff. Even his compliments to other characters are undercut and back-handed like a jealous high school cheerleader. (One of my favorite drinking games is to read about a play that has nothing to do with Hamlet or Falstaff and drink every time one of them is mentioned superfluously. There are few chapters that I can make it through in one go.)

            Unfortunately, the tone of this book and its unashamedly worshipful view of Shakespeare are popular conceits that need to be overcome. Because of his place in American literary society, Bloom’s book is read, and appreciated, and accepted as popular theory because it lionizes Shakespeare. When researching plays, I do read it to know what resistance I will face and how best to address it. While others may not have the unexplainable crush on Falstaff that Bloom does, the pillar upon which the author sets the plays, the characters and the words is one that many look up to. The book is one of opinions, and it is from a literary point of view. There is very little, if any, practical information for theatre practitioners, in the book –its value is literary, but everyone serious about Shakespeare’s plays must read this book if for no other reason than to understand why it is important to approach Shakespeare as a real person and his plays as things to be out of the hands of academics and put into the hands of players.

            Bloom makes a case for Shakespeare showing us what it is to be human, but is unable to do that for Shakespeare himself. More’s the pity.

- Andy Kirtland, Managing Director of The New Renaissance Theatre Company, which produces The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project