At the beginning of Act III, scene ii, Claudius still partially holds onto the belief that Hamlet is mad due to an extreme case of love sickness for Ophelia. After Claudius witnesses Hamlet’s interaction with Ophelia (III,ii) he is convinced that Hamlet is a danger to others, mainly to Claudius, and that Hamlet must be eliminated. Before the play within a play, Claudius is still unaware that Hamlet knows about Claudius’s guilt. By watching the play, Claudius quickly learns that Hamlet is, in fact, fully aware who murdered his father. Claudius and Gertrude are forced to sit and watch the players reenact King Hamlet’s murder, much to their discomfort. At the end of the scene Claudius exits abruptly, proving to Hamlet and Horatio that Claudius is guilty of regicide.
1. (l. 83) This is the first line spoken by Claudius in this scene. He is entering the makeshift theatre with his wife and entourage. He is trying to be jovial and welcoming to Hamlet. As the king he wants to keep up appearances so he would laugh, smile and pat Hamlet on the back. Claudius’ behavior is like sweet perfume that is trying to cover up what is rotten in the state of Denmark.
2. (ll. 101-21) At this point, Hamlet is sitting in front of the King and next to Ophelia. Hamlet is making repeated inappropriate sex jokes to Ophelia and is continuing to play mad (or is he?) for Claudius. Claudius would appear to be very attentive to the interaction between Hamlet and Ophelia. He would whisper to Gertrude and look at her and then to Hamlet and back again. He would even lean forward to make meaningful eye contact with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
3. (ll. 137- 210) During the “Mouse-trap” play, Claudius would at first be laughing and clapping to show he can take a gentle mocking. But as the play-within-a-play continues and becomes an obvious reenactment of King Hamlet’s death, Claudius becomes increasingly uncomfortable. First he is restless, moving in his throne, fiddling with his rings, looking at the reactions of others in the audience, maybe even perspiring a little.
4. (ll. 211-22) In these lines, Hamlet asks Gertrude how she likes the play and describes its “origins” as Venetian. At this point, Claudius is beyond uncomfortable and is getting exceedingly angry. His lips would be pursed, eyes narrowed, face red. Claudius would hold the arms of his throne tightly to show restraint.
5. (ll. 239-49) Claudius has had enough, he stops the play and calls for the lights. He yells, still trying to restrain his anger but his voice wavers as he says, “Give me some light. Away!” (l. 246). He would stand up quickly, wave his hand at “Away!” and stomp off stage left. Claudius would not look back but the rest of the court would quickly follow him off stage.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Sunday, September 14, 2008
The Shakespearian Bookworm goes to Stratford
It is undeniable that Shakespeare draws on the poetic by clever use of meter, rhyme, alliteration, assonance, etc. As Styan points out in his book Perspectives on Shakespeare in Performance, until relatively recently (the past 100 years or so), Shakespeare was studied almost exclusively as a way for school children to learn English and Latin grammar (12). Shakespeare’s plays were eventually studied as strictly text. C.H. Herford describes the approach as “in their literary aspect” (13). In this way the plays relied heavily on footnotes which contain historical context and lengthy background information (13).
With this in mind, looking at Shakespeare’s plays as pure text seems to do the plays a disservice. They are not understood through a multidimensional lens that live performance allows. Additionally, Stylan suggests that theatre is a living, breathing organism that is constantly evolving. He says, “… as long as a play is still being played and witnessed, it is still being born again, still growing, and actors and spectators are helping to bring it to birth” (18). This seems to be especially true for Shakespeare, whose universality has allowed his work to be reborn on a Victorian stage as well as in a 21st century movie theatre.
In an academic setting, reading Shakespeare as text and viewing it as performance are both valuable to the student. In a close examination of the text, the amazing use of language will naturally add to the student’s appreciation of Shakespeare’s work especially in regard to his contributions to the English language. Similarly, viewing a performance will enhance a student’s appreciation of the stage craft and the theatrical nuance that Shakespeare intentionally built into his plays. It is important to understand the cultural milieu that Shakespeare wrote in as well as the contemporary relevance that Shakespeare continues to provide to new audiences.
With this in mind, looking at Shakespeare’s plays as pure text seems to do the plays a disservice. They are not understood through a multidimensional lens that live performance allows. Additionally, Stylan suggests that theatre is a living, breathing organism that is constantly evolving. He says, “… as long as a play is still being played and witnessed, it is still being born again, still growing, and actors and spectators are helping to bring it to birth” (18). This seems to be especially true for Shakespeare, whose universality has allowed his work to be reborn on a Victorian stage as well as in a 21st century movie theatre.
In an academic setting, reading Shakespeare as text and viewing it as performance are both valuable to the student. In a close examination of the text, the amazing use of language will naturally add to the student’s appreciation of Shakespeare’s work especially in regard to his contributions to the English language. Similarly, viewing a performance will enhance a student’s appreciation of the stage craft and the theatrical nuance that Shakespeare intentionally built into his plays. It is important to understand the cultural milieu that Shakespeare wrote in as well as the contemporary relevance that Shakespeare continues to provide to new audiences.
Sharon Old vs. David Antin in the World Series of Literary Genre
Are Antin and Olds practicing the same genre?
I do not think Sharon Olds and David Antin are in the same genre, but I do think a case could be made either way. The ambiguity lies with Antin. His style is experimental in that he uses no punctuation, which creates a poetic feeling (dare I say Gertrude Stein or e.e. cummings). But, in reality, Antin’s pieces are narrative stories that are more like spoken word in the vein of Spalding Grey or David Sedaris. This style of spoken word is firmly planted in a different genre than poetry. It has the characteristics of an essay or a comedy routine rather than a poem.
The relationship between Sharon Olds and David Antin is that they each have a style that has a theatrical, performance like feel. Olds is working in a more conventional poetic genre, which traditionally is meant to be read out loud. That is not to say her poetry is clichéd or over done within the poetic genre. On the contrary, a poem like “I Go Back to May 1937” is fresh, powerful, and extremely confessional. On the other hand, Antin’s work is personal but on a day to day level. It is autobiographical and self-aware. You gain insight as to how he lives in the world, philosophically and concretely. You know that he
lives in California, is a writer and is married to Eleanor, but you don’t get the depth of his psyche or at least not directly as you do with Olds.
I do not think Sharon Olds and David Antin are in the same genre, but I do think a case could be made either way. The ambiguity lies with Antin. His style is experimental in that he uses no punctuation, which creates a poetic feeling (dare I say Gertrude Stein or e.e. cummings). But, in reality, Antin’s pieces are narrative stories that are more like spoken word in the vein of Spalding Grey or David Sedaris. This style of spoken word is firmly planted in a different genre than poetry. It has the characteristics of an essay or a comedy routine rather than a poem.
The relationship between Sharon Olds and David Antin is that they each have a style that has a theatrical, performance like feel. Olds is working in a more conventional poetic genre, which traditionally is meant to be read out loud. That is not to say her poetry is clichéd or over done within the poetic genre. On the contrary, a poem like “I Go Back to May 1937” is fresh, powerful, and extremely confessional. On the other hand, Antin’s work is personal but on a day to day level. It is autobiographical and self-aware. You gain insight as to how he lives in the world, philosophically and concretely. You know that he
lives in California, is a writer and is married to Eleanor, but you don’t get the depth of his psyche or at least not directly as you do with Olds.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Urban Street Theatre
I am driving home from campus, thinking about our first English 499 class. What is a good example of performance in everyday life? In the midst of my thoughts I see, out of the corner of my eye, a man in a white t-shirt and baggy pants stepping into the street. I think, “He’s not stopping, he is going to walk out into the street in the middle of traffic.” As I shriek to a stop to make way for this aggressive jaywalker, I realize this is a perfect example of performance in everyday life. I hear other drivers honk and yell at the young man, but he repels the jeers by straightening his back with self confidence. I watch him as he calmly and coolly struts in front of the furrowed brows of annoyed drivers, and I almost expect him to take a bow on the other side. Whether he knows it or his drive-through audience knows it, this is a theatrical experience.
The ritualistic performances we play out in our everyday life are tied, in many cases, to the social power structure around us. We collectively buy into the power structure of our society and play our role within it (sometimes eagerly and sometimes begrudgingly). The repetitive nature of ritual as it relates to social hierarchy is meant, in some ways, to desensitize a population into complacency. But ironically, a consequence of ritualized desensitization is that it gives the individual a substantial amount of freedom. At every level, we are free to improvise the role assigned to us and perform within the predetermined power structure and cultural script, just as an actor does not merely learn the lines of a play but has the leeway and flexibility to interpret the character he or she inhabits.
In the United States, the overlying social structure is reinforced through daily performance in a variety of settings. Examples include stopping for police, calling physicians “Dr.,” not swearing in front of mom and even giving a bully your lunch money. Another such setting may be a city street. In this case, the actors are usually young men or women. The scene that they act out is simple enough: a slow, defiant jaywalk that forces traffic to a halt. It is a short performance lasting only seconds, but nevertheless it is a compelling power play against the social hierarchy. It is a power play directed at those who are higher up in the social pecking order. It is a way for the have-nots to assert their limited power as human beings. By jaywalking, they create an unspoken script that says, “I may have nothing, but I am still a living person who cannot be ignored or run over. By my slow purposeful stride, I am asserting all the social power I have, and you must yield!”
The ritualistic performances we play out in our everyday life are tied, in many cases, to the social power structure around us. We collectively buy into the power structure of our society and play our role within it (sometimes eagerly and sometimes begrudgingly). The repetitive nature of ritual as it relates to social hierarchy is meant, in some ways, to desensitize a population into complacency. But ironically, a consequence of ritualized desensitization is that it gives the individual a substantial amount of freedom. At every level, we are free to improvise the role assigned to us and perform within the predetermined power structure and cultural script, just as an actor does not merely learn the lines of a play but has the leeway and flexibility to interpret the character he or she inhabits.
In the United States, the overlying social structure is reinforced through daily performance in a variety of settings. Examples include stopping for police, calling physicians “Dr.,” not swearing in front of mom and even giving a bully your lunch money. Another such setting may be a city street. In this case, the actors are usually young men or women. The scene that they act out is simple enough: a slow, defiant jaywalk that forces traffic to a halt. It is a short performance lasting only seconds, but nevertheless it is a compelling power play against the social hierarchy. It is a power play directed at those who are higher up in the social pecking order. It is a way for the have-nots to assert their limited power as human beings. By jaywalking, they create an unspoken script that says, “I may have nothing, but I am still a living person who cannot be ignored or run over. By my slow purposeful stride, I am asserting all the social power I have, and you must yield!”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
