Historical Context - Question 5

WEEK 5 - SHAKESPEARE TODAY

QUESTION: Analyse contemporary Shakespeare productions with reference to live performances you may have seen or clips or footage available online. You should comment on what you notice about them and how they differ from what you know about the original performance conditions of Shakespeare’s work? (Don’t be afraid to point out the obvious).

Consider how these productions are employing all the techniques, technology and resources of modern theatre.

You can use Digital Theatre http://www.digitaltheatre.com a password to access this site is available from the library

I watched a contemporary version of Othello directed by Trevor Nunn. This version was performed by The Royal Shakespeare Company in 1990 and had Ian McKellen play the role of Iago. I found this modern production very interesting because they had decided to set it in the Victorian times, instead of Elizabethan times, when Shakespeare set it. It was interesting because the Trevor Nunn had decided to use very minimal set and had not used any multi media to add a more visual element. I think that he made this decision because he wanted to make the play authentic to how it would have been watched in the Elizabethan times, however I think that he could have used modern technology to benefit the performance and make it more exciting. The play had been modernised, in the fact that there were female actresses playing the female parts and a black man playing Othello. At the time Shakespeare was writing it was unheard of to have either black or female actors, both were illegal. Nunn also made an interesting decision, by casting the character of Cassio's lover as a black woman, which is not specified in the play. I felt that by doing this, it bought the play into the modern day. 


Peter Brook's version of A Midsummer Night's Dream, is completely different to anything that would have been performed in Shakespeare's time. Their version is very experimental and uses physical theatre. Brook's aim was to create something completely different and perform Shakespeare in a radical new way.It is completely different to anything that would have been done 100 years ago, let alone in the Elizabethan times, however it is also not traditional to today's theatre. Their version hardly used any set and was performed in a white box. They use physical theatre to make the story come alive. This is completely different to traditional Shakespearean theatre because the acting would have been very melodramatic and gestural. The actors were generally picked on popularity and genuine talent was considered to be less important. It was key however that the audience liked the hero or main character, because the audience used I get involved, cheering their favourite actors and booing the bad characters.

Performance (10th of May) Evaluation

I feel that overall the two performances on the 10th of my went really well. We did a dress rehearsal during the day, which didn't go very well. I feel that as a whole cast we lacked energy and it was clear to the the people watching that we weren't reaching our full potential. The volume was too quiet, because we weren't used to working in such a big space and hadn't adjusted our voice. The transitions between scenes were too slow and no one was coming on or going off stage with enough energy or purpose. This meant that the play dragged and there wasn't a sense of flow to the story. 

However, after having such a unsuccessful dress rehearsal, I think the whole cast was motivated to up their game for the real show. Having negative feed back from the dress rehearsal, gave us more of a reason to prove that we could give a good performance. The 4:30 show went well and we were much quicker and energised in the transitions. I feel that we were loud and the audience reacted really well to all the jokes and comedy happening on stage. It was really helpful to hear the audience laugh, because we had never done it in front of a full audience and I found that I fed off their reactions, which made my own performance better. I made a few mistakes in the dance, which was frustrating and I think I came out of character briefly as I tried to fix the dance. If this had happened again, i would have turned the mistake into something my character had done, instead of coming out of character and seeing the mistake from my point of view. The bow at the end of the first show was really messy and no one was watching each other, so we all bowed at different times. The end of the play is really important because it is the last thing the audience remember, so it has to be strong. I think that it let the rest of the play down, because it didn't keep with the high standard of our performance. 

The 7:00 o'clock show was even better than the 4:30. We took what we had learned from the dress and first show, so most of the weaker parts had been fixed. I felt that this performance was my best performance and felt grounded in my character. The dance went well, apart from when Sam lifts me, but we covered it p and just carried on without making a a big issue over it. Before one of our scenes, with all the girls, Chloe realized her letter from Longaville wasn't on the props table. We didn't panic, but found anther piece of paper for her to use. It was quite distracting for all of us, because before you go on stage you need to be quite, focusing on your breath and getting into character. This was the only part of the show that I felt could have been changed. 

Overall I was really happy with my performance. I made sure that i projected and had a strong physicality. If we had had longer to work on the play, I think it would have been good to make the ending stronger and spend more time on building our characters. I think that over we gave a very strong performance, which kept to a traditional Shakespearean style. 

Feed back from rehearsals

Feed back after the run from pages 38 to 48.

• Luther said that we all needed bigger physicality's, not to make it melodramatic, but more obvious.
• The transitions when the boys take the girls away to speak privately need to e smoother. You need to move with purpose and know why you are moving. Especially rosaline and the prince, the prince is a smooth guy!
• It's really obvious when people don't know the meaning of their lines. Once you understand, it affects the way you say your lines. If the actor knows, the story starts coming out, otherwise is really boring for the audience.
• The actors who are on stage, but don't say anything for ages, need to continue acting. You can't just sit there, you have to react and stay alive and present in stage.
• It is really really important that during the speeches, you really explain the story, certain words are highlighted. Make sure that you tell the story by picking out important words.
• The girls laughing is really good and convincing.
• It takes you out the world of the play when you look at an actor who is staring blankly into space.
• Make sure you always have a reason to sit/stand/move.

Historical Context - Question 4

WEEK 4 - THEATRES, ACTORS AND ACTING IN SHAKESPEARE’S TIME

QUESTION: What were the theatres or ‘playhouses’ of Shakespeare’s time like and how were plays staged in them? 

QUESTION: Who were the actors of Shakespeare’s plays and how did the experience of being an actor differ from the experience today?

There were two different types of playhouse in Shakespeare's time, the outdoor playhouses, also known as ‘amphitheatres’ or ‘public’ playhouses, and indoor playhouses, also known as ‘halls’ or ‘private’ playhouses. Most outdoor playhouses, including the globe, consisted of a central, uncovered yard surrounding the stage, then three tiers of seating around the sides.These outdoor theatres were brilliant in the right weather, but are not practical when it is raining or very cold. The indoor playhouses were able to run all year round and became especially popular during the winter time. outdoor theatres were much more affordable and attracted  people from all classes. The indoor theatres were more expensive because they accommodated fewer people. Basic seats would start at sixpence and if you were a wealthy, fashionable gentleman you could pay for a seat on the side of the stage for two shillings (24 pence) .

Whether a play was performed in an outdoor, indoor or touring theatre, all the actors were male and they would play all the female roles. The women were generally played by younger men or boys, but if a comic female character was required, such as Juliet's nurse, an older, more popular actor would take the role. If you were an actor, you were required to have multiple talents, not just acting. The men had to be able to fence on stage with skill, sing songs, play instruments and dance. Because there were no special effects or incredible sets, like there are today, the actors had to use violence, music and humour to keep people’s attention. The costumes were usually not historically accurate, but instead the actors would wear lavish modern outfits, that were a spectacle to look at. They were often second hand outfits that had once been worn by rich, noble men. A large amount of the budget would be spent on costumes for the actors. There was very little or no set, the only things on stage were props required for the story, such as a throne, sword or bed. Entrances and exits were in full view of the audience, unlike today's theatres where the backstage area is well hidden, keeping all focus on stage. 

Oxford University in the 1940's

In preparation for the play, I did some research into what oxford University was like in the 1940's. I found this video which was made int he 40's, which is almost an advert for students looking to go to oxford at the time. It shows what the  city and campus looked like at the time and shows the fashion at the time. 

Diary Entry by Katherine

Monday 6th May 1942 

Dear Diary,
Today we arrived at Oxford University. It is a beautiful city and the university is very grand. There are  lot of men here, but not a lot of woman scholars, so we stand out! The princesses had told us that we could expect the princess to be wonderful hosts, who would invite us into their living quarters, to stay in during our visit. However when we arrived, Boyet informed us that they intent to make us camp outside the university because of some ridiculous oath they've made, which means they can't be involved with women for the next three years whilst they study!! We were all outraged to hear that they intent to be such poor hosts. I was particularly annoyed because I am keen to get to know Dumaine better. I really like him and was hoping this trip would finally bring us together. I was tying to hide my feelings from the others, because I was embarrassed. But it would appear that Maria and Rosaline are also in love, so I don't feel as guilty as I did!! I was also happy to hear that Dumaine had talked to Boyet and was asking after me, which makes me think that he does not plan on sticking to his stupid oath and might actually try to court me whilst we are here. I hope he does! 
Anyway, I better get some sleep now because I need to be rested for the hunt tomorrow. 
Write soon. 


Thursday 9th May 1942

Dear Diary,
Today I received a love letter and a pair of gloves from Dumaine. I was most disappointed with the gloves because they're such an unromantic gift! I was very jealous of Maria who received a chain of very expensive pearls from Longaville! When I told the princesses, Rosaline and Maria they all laughed at the gloves. I also told them how ridiculously long my love letter is, it rambles on and on, never really getting to the point. Of course, I am pleased Dumaine has decided to break his oath and is now pursuing me, however I do find his attempts rather amusing.
I was very delighted at the princesses idea to swap gifts and attend the ball pretending to be each other. I swapped gift with Maria, so that Longavile danced with me and Maria danced with Dumaine. I thought it was very fun and we all laughed about it after. 
We are about to go and see the men now and hopefully we can have some fun, teasing them with what we did!
Write soon. 


Friday 10th May 1942

Dear Diary,
How sad I am, the King has died. The poor princesses had the message delivered to them, just as we were beginning to get on with the princess and their men. We had resolved our differences and they admitted that they had come to the masked ball disguised as Russians. We had all sat down to enjoy the play that the 9 worthies had prepared, when it was interuppted by the sad news. Naturally, the princesses felt that they must return to France at once to deal with his death, however the princess tried to convince them to stay, declaring their love. After much talk, it was decided that the princesses will mourn their father for a year and after that year they will return to the princess. Dumaine then came up to me and asked what I plan to do. I told him that I would stay with the princesses and when they return, I shall return with them. I am happy with this arrangement because if Dumaine waits a year for me, it will prove the strength of his love. 
I must go now, as we are travelling back to France today. I look forward to coming back next year. 

Historical Context- Question 3

WEEK 3 - SHAKESPEARE’S LONDON AND ELIZABETHAN AUDIENCES

QUESTION: What was London like in Elizabethan times and who were the people attending the theatre?

In the Elizabethan times, London was one of the biggest and richest cities in England. The majority of the city was situated on the north side of the river Thames. 

Many wealthy people lived in London, mostly business owners and their workers. As trade grew in London, so did the city. People began to move from Europe and the country side, so every available piece of land was built on. The city expanded hugely and the suburbs grew more and more into the surrounding countryside. It is estimated

that in the space of 50 years the population in London grew from 50,000 people to 200,000 people. The increased population meant that crime was a big issue. The dark, busy streets attracted thieves. The close proximity of living conditions in the city also meant that plague spread quickly and easily. In 1593 about 10,000 people were killed by the plague. In 1607, John Donne called it “London, plague London, full of danger and vice”.

Most of the theatres in London could house big audiences, some could take up to 3000 people, including the Globe. Most big theatres would put on a play every afternoon, suggesting that the demand was high. Between 10,000 and 20,000 people would go to the theatre every week! The theatre didn't just attract the wealthy, people of all different classes would go to the theatre. Servants and apprentices would go and watch plays in their spare time or days off. They could afford it, because the cheapest tickets, at the cost of a penny, would buy you a place standing in the yard around the stage. Then for two pennies, you could get a bench seat in the lower level, surrounding the yard. Theatres would charge three pennies if you wanted a cushion for your seat. One penny was only the cost of a loaf of bread, which compared to today's prices is incredibly cheap. The wealthy would also attend the theatre, but would not be seen standing in the yard! They would spend more money on getting a comfortable seat, high up in the stalls or if they were really wealthy they could afford to go to an indoor theatre. 

The audience at the theatre were generally quite rowdy and would make their feelings known about whether they liked the play or not.  The audience were very vocal and would boo the villains, cheer the heroes and applaud the special effects. The large crowds at the theatre attracted thieves, so fights would often break out. If an audience didn't like a play, they might walk out, throw things or damage the theatre.