McKellan on McKellan

There’s an interesting interview of Ian McKellan in London’s Telegraph newspaper, with particular reference to his role of King Lear. Click on this link: McKellan as Lear.

Note: There’s a link at the beginning of the article that connects to the Royal Shakespeare Co’s website with an excerpt of McKellan as Lear (Act 1.5) and other items related to the production. Well worth a visit.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries.

Romeo and Juliet Act 3.4

At first glance 3.4 might appear somewhat odd, if only because it switches the action away from Romeo and Juliet who have been central to the two preceding scenes. Both are physically absent in 3.4, although Juliet is mentioned. However, this is precisely the dramatic/theatrical point. Switching the focus provides a “breathing space” for the audience so far as the momentum of the plot is concerned, and yet again variety of pace and tone is provided. Call it toying with the audience if you like, but it is an excellent way to construct a play.

The scene does much more than this, however, by reviving a thematic dynamic. The scene reminds us that Juliet has another suitor in the form of the conventional Paris who has sought Juliet’s parents’ approval. Indeed, here, Paris is also sympathetic when he recognizes Tybalt’s death casts a pall over current events: “These times of woe afford no times to woo.” This simple observation is followed by “Madam, good night. Commend me to your daughter.” Nothing could contrast more with the impetuous behaviour we have seen earlier from Romeo and Juliet. Brevity can be strikingly effective, and Paris’ demeanor is just what any parent would look for in a prospective son-in-law. Clearly Capulet approves because he is now anxious to have Juliet marry Paris–”I will make a desperate tender / Of my child’s love. I think she will be ruled / In all respects by me.” This is something of a shift from his earlier stance in 1.2.13 ff., though it still has a kindly tone in its expression. Of course, settling on a wedding day (and having Lady Capulet prepare Juliet for it) is merely a plot manipulation device. The audience knows that Juliet is married already, and so now its anticipation is increased because it wants to know how that potential “conflict” will be resolved. Shakespeare is also indulging his own sense of irony because he knows that the audience knows the outcome of the whole play–remember the story was well-known in Shakespeare’s day, and in any case, the Prologue laid out everything plainly. But when we watch a play, and suspend our disbelief, we forget all manner of things and are carried along by what we see before us being played out.

Macbeth Act 1.5

In many ways it is appropriate and telling that Lady Macbeth makes her first appearance alone since being alone on stage is a dominant act and draws the audience’s entire attention to her (as it does to any actor). There’s nothing else to distract us. Moreover, as the early scenes of the play in which Lady Macbeth appears demonstrate, she is a dominant, self-assured woman, very much a driving force in the relationship between herself and her husband. (It has always been one of the roles Shakespearean actresses want to perform.)

Shakespeare uses the obvious, not to say creaky device (at least Bernard Shaw much later always thought so) of a letter from Macbeth to Lady Macbeth to bring her up to speed with events concerning the Witches etc. His letter calls her “my dearest partner of greatness,” a useful clue to their relationship. More than useful is Lady Macbeth’s observation about her husband–”Yet do I fear thy nature. / It is too full o’ th’ milk of human kindness / To catch the nearest way. Thou wouldst be great, / Art not without ambition, but without / The illness [i.e. ruthlessness] should attend it.” If anyone knows Macbeth and his innate qualities, it is surely his wife: essentially, she thinks him too noble and good, wanting only to succeed in the right, moral way. However, no qualms afflict Lady Macbeth and she is determined to “pour my spirits in thine ear / And chastise with the valour of my tongue.” Just what those “spirits” comprise becomes evident when Lady Macbeth reacts to the news that Duncan’s arrival is imminent–her famous soliloquy beginning “The raven himself is hoarse” (36). (The raven has always been a bird of ill omen.) The keynote of her speech is struck by “unsex me here,” her disavowal of feminine/maternal qualities. Note too the speech contains several images connected to blackness and blood, and in the midst of her discourse Macbeth arrives; thus we associate him with what she has said. Further, Lady Macbeth springs into planning dire deeds, namely Duncan’s murder (though at this stage murder is only implied, not specified). Lady Macbeth urges her husband to “look like the time,” that is, to appear to be what he is not–”look like th’ innocent flower, / But be the serpent under’t,” and leave the managing of events to her. Macbeth’s response to this is remarkably terse and telling: “We will speak further.” Note he does not immediately reject any notions of murdering Duncan or raise all kinds of objections. He says merely they’ll talk more later on. Perhaps this embodies the idea that Lady Macbeth was exactly the catalyst Macbeth needed to spur him on.

See The Shakespeare Diaries.

Romeo and Juliet 3.3

One of Shakespeare’s basic theatrical techniques is scene juxtaposition as is evident when 3.2 and 3.3 are compared. In 3.2 we had Juliet with her (elder) confidant, the Nurse; in 3.3, we have Romeo and his (elder) confidant, Friar Laurence. Thus the audience is invited to compare and contrast Romeo and Juliet (and to a lesser degree, the Nurse and the Friar) in these two scenes. Friar Laurence’s opening line of 3.3 also makes plain how we should view Romeo–”come forth, thou fearful man. / Affliction is enamoured of thy parts, /  And thou art wedded to calamity.” These are not words associated with a brave hero! Moreover, Romeo’s own words are laden with self-pitying self-indulgence as epitomized in the excessive “What less than doomsday is the Prince’s doom?” Indeed, excessive wallowing repetition of words characterizes much of Romeo’s speech as even a cursory glance at his speech at lines 17-23 reveals, the tone being signalled by “There is no world without Verona’s walls.” Moreover, Romeo is ignoring the Friar’s sound observation that Romeo should really be thankful for “the kind Prince, / Taking thy part, hath rushed aside the law, / And turned that black word ‘death’ to banishment. / This is dear mercy, and thou seest it not.”

What appears to be a measure of self-recognition by Romeo is turned into an almost farcical moment in his speech beginning line 64–”Thou canst not speak of that thou dost not feel.” That is the petulant cry of every adolescent who has ever felt the world does not understand him (or her). True, Romeo does admit to being “doting” and therefore not rational. But then comes the almost farcical moment when he falls on the ground, but not before announcing this action “And fall upon the ground, as I do now.” (As an aside, this is one of numerous examples of how Shakespeare provides stage directions for his actors; here, I would argue the “direction” serves a dual purpose.) Symbolically, this is also Romeo associating himself with a low level in the chain of being, the ground/earth, and thus lacks all the higher attributes belonging to rational humans. His foolish behaviour is compounded by his refusal to heed the Friar’s injunctions to get up, and by the Nurse’s witnessing his condition when she enters at the mid-point of the scene. Interestingly, the Nurse says that “O, he is even in my mistress’ case”–that is, Juliet is doing the same thing as Romeo. However, the audience sees Romeo on the ground, and only hears about Juliet (“Even so lies she, / Blubb’ring and weeping, weeping and blubb’ring”), and seeing carries far more impact when it comes to judging the two characters.

What really crystallizes Romeo’s character for us is his attempt to stab himself (108), given the current situation (banishment rather than a death penalty). Friar Laurence’s words capture what we should think of Romeo: “Hold thy desperate hand. / Art thou a man? Thy form cries out thou art; / Thy tears are womanish, thy wild acts denote / The unreasonable fury of a beast. /Unseemly woman in a seeming man! / And ill-beseeming beast in seeming both!” Not being oneself, “seeming” to be something else, reality versus illusion–always crucial notions in Shakespeare. And so the Friar delivers a long speech of “good counsel” to Romeo, and begins to devise a plan of action whereby Romeo will go to Mantua to serve out his banishment until perhaps more favourable conditions prevail at home. However, R & J will have one night of connubial bliss together.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaires.

Romeo and Juliet Act 3.2

3.2 provides yet another variant scene, for the sake of variety, namely a long soliloquy from Juliet, followed by a duologue between her and the Nurse. Initially Juliet is awaiting the Nurse bringing the “cords,” that is the “ladder, by the which your love / Must climb a bird’s nest soon when it is dark” (2.5.73-74). Hence Juliet is impatient for night, and her soliloquy is loaded with images that in various ways are associated with light and darkness, beginning with the opening classical allusions (Phoebus, Phaeton, etc). However, if anything prevails in her soliloquy, it is images associated with blackness, thus infusing her words with a subliminal, ominous tone. This is not to say other touches are lacking, such as the lines “Give me my Romeo; and, when he shall die, / Take him and cut him out in little stars” (21-22). On one level this is fanciful overly romantic imagining on Juliet’s part; on another level, it is bawdy innuendo since “shall die” can also mean to experience orgasm (and, after all, this will be their first night together).

When the Nurse arrives we are provided with something of a mixture of comedy and tragedy (in the broadest sense). All through the play the Nurse has been somewhat comic; thus here her repetition of words with their resultant confusion and the subsequent delaying of the real news that Juliet wants to hear is tantamount to black comedy. This may also be signalled in the excessive series of oxymorons Juliet utters after hearing that Romeo has slain Tybalt (lines 73-79, e.g. “dove-feathered raven,” “honourable villain”). However, when the Nurse quickly agrees and declares there’s “no honesty in men,” Juliet just as quickly changes her tune and says “shall I speak ill of him that is my husband?” etc  While all this adds a dimension to Juliet’s character (and she has been fairly sensible in the play, or at least more sensible than Romeo), the excessiveness serves to associate her with Romeo’s character and behaviour, and to remind us that both are young, impulsive people (children might well be a better word). Juliet even thinks of suicide as a solution to Romeo being banished–”I’ll to my wedding bed; / And death, not Romeo, take my maidenhead”–which is clearly excessive and unrational, since other possibilities could present themselves: Romeo has been banished, not executed. However, the Nurse volunteers to find Romeo and bring the two young lovers together–Juliet’s suicide at this juncture would have brought at least one plot line to a premature end (and the audience knows that that is not how the original story finished!).

Check out The Shakespeare Diairies.

Romeo and Juliet Act 3.1.136-195

This sub-scene  and its structure provide one or two worthwhile insights into the play, particularly because the scene comes at the mid-point of Romeo and Juliet. After Romeo has fled (line 135), Shakespeare has “citizens” enter–not another named character, and not a messenger, and not a single citizen–but citizens (although only one is given lines to speak). Presumbly the purpose of this device is to show that disorder, in the form of two murders (those of Mercutio and Tybalt) affects every segment of society, and that society is embodied in the citizens who enter. This supposition is reinforced by the Citizen’s line “I charge thee in the Prince’s name obey.”

No sooner has the Citizen said that than Prince Escalus makes his second appearance; indeed, all three of his appearances occur after disorder, and he then imposes order. (Note too that his entrance is accompanied by other elements of the feuding families, and thus the whole proceeding takes on something of the form of an emblematic social tableau .) One might wonder why Benvolio is given a long explanatory speech (150-73), particularly as the audience has already just seen the events that he recounts. Most obviously, Escalus needs to have the facts (and Benvolio is more or less objective), and so this lends some realism to the plot. Additionally, coming as it does after two duels and much stage action, this long speech now slows down the pace of the action and so provides much needed variety. Moreover, as with Escalus’ first appearance, a long speech provides a sense of peaceful calm and order. That done, and rejecting the prejudiced remarks of both Lady Capulet and Lord Montague, Escalus pronounces what must be regarded as a fair judgement–Romeo’s banishment; he could have been much more severe, and imposed a death penalty. Of course, the judgement is also a necessary plot device that will lead to the ultimate resolution of the tragedy.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries

Julius Caesar Act 1.2.215-319

This section of 1.2 divides into three sub-scenes that again reflect Shakespeare’s careful dramaturgy; the first sub-scene has 3 people in it, the second two, and the third just one person. Not a “big deal” some might say; in fact, this arrangement is a reflection of how a conspiracy often begins, and this very early stage of the conspiracy is signalled by Casca’s opening line “You pulled me by the cloak. Would you speak with me?” Cloaks are a “clothing symbol/image” of conspiracy–when have conspirators not worn them, although of course they were also a natural part of clothing (always hiding to a degree what is underneath). Speaking is also, again obviously, a part of conspiracy, but also of everyday life. (Like much in Shakespeare, it is how a thing or things are viewed that its/their purpose become clear–unlike this explanation so far!!). It should be emphasized that the “conspiracy” is in but its infancy at this stage.

Casca brings news of “what hath chanced to-day,” namely Caesar being offered the crown three times, significantly by Mark Antony, his protege. Again it is worth noting Shakespeare’s dramatic technique here. Instead of attempting to stage a large “crowd scene” with its attendant difficulties, the whole scene is reported by Casca. And by allowing Casca to so report it, Casca is able to put his own gloss on the events, rather than leaving an audience to judge for itself the events it witnesses. Thus the audience hearing Casca’s account is both subliminally influenced by Casca’s account but also learns a little more of Casca’s position and character. One small example will suffice. In describing the cheers, Casca says how the “rabblement hooted, and clapped their chopt hands.” His word choice is clearly derogatory towards the crowd; the event could have been described either neutrally or favorably (towards the crowd and/or Caesar). Thus, in little, is Casca’s own position established, as is his opinion of Caesar in detailing how (and by implication why) he fell down in a swoon and subsequently “offered them his throat to cut”–a form of crowd manipulation that affected at least “three or four wenches” who “cried ‘Alas, poor soul!’”

Brutus and Cassius alone (292-303) permits them to comment on Casca (whose ultimate importance will become clear later on), and Cassius’s final soliloquy (305-19) allows him to focus of the “noble” Brutus, and how he must be seduced. And how is Brutus to be seduced? Not by rational argument, but by false “writings” (purportedly from several people) thrown in through his window at night.

See The Shakespeare Diaries.

Ewan McGregor as Iago

The current production of Othello at the Donmar Theatre, with Ewan McGregor playing Iago, is described as the hottest ticket in town (regular tickets for the run that ends in February 2008 are already sold out), with black market tickets fetching $2,000. The apparent attraction is Ewan McGregor in his first Shakespearean performance. However, if the reviews in the four “quality” newspapers are anything to go by, the real attraction of the production is an excellent performance of Othello by black actor Chiwetel Ejiofor. As for McGregor, the Daily Telegraph opined: “He often seems to have trouble detecting the pulse of the verse and crucially lacks the vitality the role demands. . . . you would at least expect McGregor to bring a thrill of charisma and a dangerous presence to the stage. Not a bit of it. He is static and dull, his only trick the occasional adoption of an implausible grin.” The Guardian is somewhat more charitable: “Ewan McGregor gives a decent, robust, if insufficiently complex, account. . . . McGregor’s great asset, paradoxically, is charm. . . . [Instead of] the impotent obsessive imagined by many actors, we get simply an enigmatic destroyer.” However, McGregor fans need not despair, if The Times is anything to go by: “There are times when his diction is fine and they are often the right ones . . . He’s vigorous, hard, mean and he does hate, really hate. Hate enough to give us Shakespeare’s play as it poignantly, painfully should be.” And The Independent is full of praise: “With Chiwetel Ejiofor as Othello and Ewan McGregor as his nemesis, Iago, the production finds two actors who can go against the grain of current notions of how these roles should be played and who can furnish us with new insights into the hero’s downfall.”

For anyone still interested (and it sounds as though Ejiofor’s performance is very much worth watching), there is a very limited number of tickets sold only on the day of performance.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries.