New Poll - G'day, Will !
Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 11:43 amcrgwllms15 posts in thread
New Poll - G'day, Will !
Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 11:43 amNew poll topic:
Which play would you say was the best introduction to Shakespeare, to a non-theatre audience?
The Poll-tergeist
[%sig%]
Which play would you say was the best introduction to Shakespeare, to a non-theatre audience?
The Poll-tergeist
[%sig%]
Re: New Poll - G'day, Will !
Mon, 4 Apr 2005, 06:04 pmStephen Lee wrote:
> THE HISTORIES
>
> Avoid these like the plague. They need a fair amount of
> background knowledge and have huge casts of people who appear
> to do little but run on and die. Also beware the numerous
> aliases floating around. Just when you've got it sussed that
> the angry young man is called both Harry AND Percy (Henry IV
> pt 1) you will be thrown by references to "young
> Northumberland". And its still him.
** We had a little chat about these at a party recently, Steve, and I certainly agree with what you've said regarding MOST of the plays in this category, but I think exceptions in terms of newcomer audience interest are Richard III (wonderful villainy which can carry the newcomer along quite well) and Henry V... (which I think is MUCH less complex, perhaps, than the others in this category, esp with the broad brushstrokes of jingoism, etc) -- and certainly, it's a favourite of school kids, esp since Branagh. -- interestingly, too, I think both plays among Shakespeares most popular as well... as I understand it, Richard III was his first big Box Office Smash, and made his reputation!
Actually, I can't help feeling HV would be an *ideal* choice for GRADS/UDS Summer Shakers, given the 'demographic' of both the cast AND the majority of the audience... any takers? :o)
> "Love's Labour's Lost" is a nightmare. The language is waaay
> complex and you should save it till you are more at home with
> the Elizabethan stage. It is David Meadows favourite comedy.
> 'Nuff said!
** Actually, Grant Malcolm did a wonderful production of this many, many moons ago at the Dolphin for GRADS which I still remember in fragments... first time I saw Angelique Malcolm, and I thought she was great in it! It was also about the first thing I ever saw at GRADS, and Grant set the bar, very, very high! 'nuff said!
> ROMAN PLAYS
>
> "Julius Caesar" is clean and clear in its language. Very
> accessible. A lot of characters though, especially in the
> second half battle scenes. A good choice. "Coriolanus" and
> "Antony and Cleo" are both problems. The former has the
> least likeable hero in the whole canon and can be dull in
> places. The latter has a "cast of thousands" and jumps
> about a great deal...good poetry though.
** Well, you know my opinion on Julius Caesar! YES, PLEASE! About time it was done again... and please, NOT IN &$%@*# PROMENADE (as in the god-awful WAAPA production of a few years ago)!! It would certainly give *me* enough of a hit of the politics I so enjoy in Shakespeare to get me through the next drought... and NO, I have not yet bought tickets to Bell's upcoming event -- I was disillusioned by their Henry IV a few years ago, I hold this production in grave danger of being a repeat!
> "Othello" is an excellent play, but not a play of enormous
> action (till the end).
** Well, you seemed to have a lot of schoolkids along to your excellent production last year... how did THEY go with it? I think that's as good a barometer as anything.
> "Measure for Measure". Interesting play. Some of the
> character motivations feel a little strange on first sight.
> 400 years is a long time ago to get your head around. It
> does not help if you get the impression that the Duke (say)
> would have been a bit unbelievanle even then.
** YUK! I'm sorry, for me this play is the playgoers equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard... or bad cheese! And, sadly, I couldn't really tell you why -- the few productions I've seen have not only left me cold, they've left me heaving!
> "Troilus and Cressida" An unpleasant piece. If you want to
> see a man coughing up his own blood into a handkerchief and
> wishing you would all get syphilis too, then be my guest.
** Having been in an excellent production of this with a fabbo cast and brilliant production design (Playlovers, John Milson, 1994), I guess I'm biased, but I think T&C has a good balance of action, romance, baseness, "history" etc. that (with severe trimming!!) could be attractive to a relatively new audience... and it has the added advantage of containing characters most people have heard of (except, curiously, the title characters... call it "Hector and Achillies", and you'd have lines down the street!... well maybe... if you put Russell Crowe and Brad Pitt in the roles...)
> ROMANCES
>
> "Winter's Tale", "Tempest", "Pericles" and "Cymbeline" are
> all excellent in their individual ways. Warm and mellow,
> with an optimistic outlook. I feel that by now Shakespeare's
> language has become very complex and compressed. It is much
> harder for the beginner to follow. Excellent choices for the
> more experienced Bardolator though.
** Now Winters Tale is a bit curious to me... I dragged a friend and his wife along to see it recently, and they thorougly enjoyed it. What was interesting was he had NEVER been to the theatre at all, and his wife only a few times. But it was clear enough for them to be right with it inside the first five minutes. I had to say, I was apprehensive about them coming along, because, like you I felt it would be about as clear as mud for about the first 30 minutes, and then they (might) be right. Obviously this has much to do with YOUR performance, Steve! :o)
And, sure, not a statistically significant sample (2 people!!), and there for free as my guests... but it got me thinking that, perhaps, we sometimes underestimate: a) the ability of casts and text to get things across, 2) the audiences?
Regards,
Jason S
> THE HISTORIES
>
> Avoid these like the plague. They need a fair amount of
> background knowledge and have huge casts of people who appear
> to do little but run on and die. Also beware the numerous
> aliases floating around. Just when you've got it sussed that
> the angry young man is called both Harry AND Percy (Henry IV
> pt 1) you will be thrown by references to "young
> Northumberland". And its still him.
** We had a little chat about these at a party recently, Steve, and I certainly agree with what you've said regarding MOST of the plays in this category, but I think exceptions in terms of newcomer audience interest are Richard III (wonderful villainy which can carry the newcomer along quite well) and Henry V... (which I think is MUCH less complex, perhaps, than the others in this category, esp with the broad brushstrokes of jingoism, etc) -- and certainly, it's a favourite of school kids, esp since Branagh. -- interestingly, too, I think both plays among Shakespeares most popular as well... as I understand it, Richard III was his first big Box Office Smash, and made his reputation!
Actually, I can't help feeling HV would be an *ideal* choice for GRADS/UDS Summer Shakers, given the 'demographic' of both the cast AND the majority of the audience... any takers? :o)
> "Love's Labour's Lost" is a nightmare. The language is waaay
> complex and you should save it till you are more at home with
> the Elizabethan stage. It is David Meadows favourite comedy.
> 'Nuff said!
** Actually, Grant Malcolm did a wonderful production of this many, many moons ago at the Dolphin for GRADS which I still remember in fragments... first time I saw Angelique Malcolm, and I thought she was great in it! It was also about the first thing I ever saw at GRADS, and Grant set the bar, very, very high! 'nuff said!
> ROMAN PLAYS
>
> "Julius Caesar" is clean and clear in its language. Very
> accessible. A lot of characters though, especially in the
> second half battle scenes. A good choice. "Coriolanus" and
> "Antony and Cleo" are both problems. The former has the
> least likeable hero in the whole canon and can be dull in
> places. The latter has a "cast of thousands" and jumps
> about a great deal...good poetry though.
** Well, you know my opinion on Julius Caesar! YES, PLEASE! About time it was done again... and please, NOT IN &$%@*# PROMENADE (as in the god-awful WAAPA production of a few years ago)!! It would certainly give *me* enough of a hit of the politics I so enjoy in Shakespeare to get me through the next drought... and NO, I have not yet bought tickets to Bell's upcoming event -- I was disillusioned by their Henry IV a few years ago, I hold this production in grave danger of being a repeat!
> "Othello" is an excellent play, but not a play of enormous
> action (till the end).
** Well, you seemed to have a lot of schoolkids along to your excellent production last year... how did THEY go with it? I think that's as good a barometer as anything.
> "Measure for Measure". Interesting play. Some of the
> character motivations feel a little strange on first sight.
> 400 years is a long time ago to get your head around. It
> does not help if you get the impression that the Duke (say)
> would have been a bit unbelievanle even then.
** YUK! I'm sorry, for me this play is the playgoers equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard... or bad cheese! And, sadly, I couldn't really tell you why -- the few productions I've seen have not only left me cold, they've left me heaving!
> "Troilus and Cressida" An unpleasant piece. If you want to
> see a man coughing up his own blood into a handkerchief and
> wishing you would all get syphilis too, then be my guest.
** Having been in an excellent production of this with a fabbo cast and brilliant production design (Playlovers, John Milson, 1994), I guess I'm biased, but I think T&C has a good balance of action, romance, baseness, "history" etc. that (with severe trimming!!) could be attractive to a relatively new audience... and it has the added advantage of containing characters most people have heard of (except, curiously, the title characters... call it "Hector and Achillies", and you'd have lines down the street!... well maybe... if you put Russell Crowe and Brad Pitt in the roles...)
> ROMANCES
>
> "Winter's Tale", "Tempest", "Pericles" and "Cymbeline" are
> all excellent in their individual ways. Warm and mellow,
> with an optimistic outlook. I feel that by now Shakespeare's
> language has become very complex and compressed. It is much
> harder for the beginner to follow. Excellent choices for the
> more experienced Bardolator though.
** Now Winters Tale is a bit curious to me... I dragged a friend and his wife along to see it recently, and they thorougly enjoyed it. What was interesting was he had NEVER been to the theatre at all, and his wife only a few times. But it was clear enough for them to be right with it inside the first five minutes. I had to say, I was apprehensive about them coming along, because, like you I felt it would be about as clear as mud for about the first 30 minutes, and then they (might) be right. Obviously this has much to do with YOUR performance, Steve! :o)
And, sure, not a statistically significant sample (2 people!!), and there for free as my guests... but it got me thinking that, perhaps, we sometimes underestimate: a) the ability of casts and text to get things across, 2) the audiences?
Regards,
Jason S
- ···
- ···