Powell Dissertation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MIND’S EYE: THEATRICAL EDITING OF SHAKESPEAREAN TEXT by JANET POWELL A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Theater Arts and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2011 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Janet Powell Title: Mind’s Eye: Theatrical Editing of Shakespearean Text This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Theater Arts by: John Schmor Chairperson Sara Freeman Member Jack Watson Member Ben Saunders Outside Member and Richard Linton Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies/Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded June 2011 ii © 2011 Janet Powell iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Janet Powell Doctor of Philosophy Department of Theater Arts June 2011 Title: Mind’s Eye: Theatrical Editing of Shakespearean Text Approved: _______________________________________________ John Schmor The director or dramaturg crafting a production script for the performance of a Shakespeare play will use one or more printed versions of the text as a primary source. Due to the eccentricity and diversity of the original printings of the plays in Folio and quarto, subsequent published versions must be edited, but there is little agreement among editors regarding textual practice, and concerns about legibility often outweigh theatrical considerations. Thus, no single edition (other than the Folio) has emerged as a primary resource preferred by practitioners for making theatrical decisions. This dissertation is a study of published Shakespeare text as source for production scripts examining, in particular, the history of Shakespeare editing for general publication and its relationship to the needs and preferences of theatre practitioners. Using facsimiles, prefaces, and published editions as source materials, this study addresses the privileging of literary versus theatrical concerns in editors’ polices and practices as found in widely published editions, and compare them to trends in emendation and adaptation by theatre practitioners as drawn from playscripts, interviews, directors’ notes, performance reports, and playing editions. Finally, this study explores the possibility that “theatrical editing”— iv editing that privileges practitioners and serves primarily as a basis from which to produce theatre—is definable, desirable, and can be made available to practitioners in a reasonably accessible and affordable way. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Janet Powell GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene Reed College, Portland, Oregon DEGREES AWARDED: Doctor of Philosophy, Theatre Arts, 2011, University of Oregon Master of Arts in Liberal Studies, 1986, Reed College Bachelor of Arts, Speech: Theatre, 1977, University of Oregon AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: Shakespeare Theatrical editing Performance technique Music Theatre PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Artistic Director, Lake Tahoe Shakespeare Festival 2007-2008 Founding Artistic Director, Tygres Heart Shakespeare Company, 1989-1997 GRANTS, AWARDS, AND HONORS: Arnold, Isabelle and Rupert Marks Scholarship, University of Oregon, 2005-6 and 2006-7 vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my deepest appreciation to John Schmor for his guidance throughout the preparation of this manuscript and the course of my studies at the University of Oregon, and to the members of my committee for their support and insight: Ben Saunders, Sara Freeman, and Jack Watson. I received invaluable assistance from these noted Shakespeare scholars, editors and critics who were most generous with their time: Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor, Eric Rasmussen, Charles Marowitz, Neil Freeman, and Dee Anne Phares. Amy Marsh at Samuel French truly extended herself to assist me in my research, as did Ron Severdia, the founder of PlayShakespeare.com. To James Mardock, Rob Gander, Lorelle Browning, and especially Edgar Reynolds, my colleagues and partners in academic/theatrical crime, I owe a great debt of gratitude, as I do to these dear friends who offered solace and incentive throughout years of toil: Melissa Hurt, Michelle Kopper-Seymour, Carole Oberholtzer, Lynda Norton, Meg Patterson, Chryss Allaback, Melissa Kaiser, and Jen Thomas. To my family: Dave, Morgan, Blythe, Mom, Keith, and Bryan—I could not have done it without your love. To Laura Graser—thanks for starting it all. To David Maier—thanks for never giving up. vii For Dave. Love…lives not alone immured in the brain: But, with the motion of all elements, Courses as swift as thought in every power, And gives to every power a double power, Above their functions and their offices. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................1 II. HISTORY OF SHAKESPEARE EDITING FOR PUBLICATION.......29 III. HISTORY OF SHAKESPEARE EDITING BY THEATRE PRACTITIONERS......................................................91 IV. CURRENT PRACTICE IN EDITING SHAKESPEARE FOR PUBLICATION AND THE STAGE.....................................147 V. THE CASE FOR THEATRICAL EDITING OF SHAKESPEARE...........................................................................187 APPENDICES ..........................................................................................210 A. ORLANDO FOLIO FACSIMILES...........................................210 B. COMPARISON OF FOLIO ORLANDO SPEECHES...............214 C. EDITORS’ FACSIMILES.........................................................221 D. PHRASE SEGMENT COMPARISON DETAIL .....................242 E. PROLOGUE TO THE TEMPEST; OR, THE ENCHANTED ISLAND .............................................................................259 F. DORINDA/MIRANDA SCENE FROM THE TEMPEST; OR, THE ENCHANTED ISLAND..............................................261 REFERENCES CITED .............................................................................263 ix LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Summary of rhythm analyses of F1 first sentence................................88 x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Among the resources a theatre artist can use to support his or her production of a Shakespeare play, the text is the first, and most central to the process. A director may pore and puzzle over it for hours, scrutinizing each word for insight. From the moment s/he is cast in the role, an actor will likely be dragging around an increasingly dog-eared, coffee-stained, raggedly falling-to-pieces script—reading it, memorizing the lines, trying on new interpretations, and consulting the script daily until the show closes. This bedraggled Shakespeare script is an orphan; it is likely that we will never fully trace its ancestry or piece together a detailed and provably accurate story of its origins. Both factors—the shady origins of the text and the impermanent nature of performed art—constitute fairly implacable “unknowables.” Despite historians’ analyses of existing evidence, scholars’ postulated theories, and the thousands of books published on the subject over hundreds of years, the fact of what Shakespeare actually wrote, as well as which words his company spoke onstage, in what sequence, at which performance, and how the lines were surely altered during rehearsal, performance, and/or first printing, can never be completely known. This mystery has not impinged upon the enduring popularity of his plays in the theatre, however. William Shakespeare is one of the most frequently produced playwrights in the world, some four hundred years after his death. Exactly how ubiquitous Shakespeare is today is difficult to quantify. To my knowledge, there is no 1 recently published directory that features a comprehensive listing of all US or international Shakespeare productions in a given season, or one that lists all contemporary Shakespeare theatres. However, sites that feature links to theatres devoted primarily to Shakespeare tend to list them into the hundreds in the United States alone.1 At the Theatre Communications Group Web site, a search for productions of A Midsummer Night’s Dream presented by TCG member theatres over the last five years yielded seventy different productions—more than any modern production I tested except A Christmas Carol.2 Of course, Shakespeare is produced not only by professional theatres like those that make up the TCG membership, but also by semiprofessional theatres, smaller Shakespeare festivals, community theatres, academic drama programs, and other groups in a wide variety of venues, totaling thousands of productions each year. This might raise the expectation that Shakespeare performance scripts would be equally ubiquitous, but this is not the case. Despite the prevalence of Shakespeare performances, there is no single edition or publisher generally preferred by theatre practitioners. This is likely due to the fact that there is no current published Shakespeare edition recognized by most in 1 The “Shakespeare USA” map at the Folger Shakespeare Library’s Web site on Shakespeare in American life lists 140 theatres in the USA devoted exclusively or primarily to producing Shakespeare (http://www.shakespeareinamericanlife.org/features/usa_bak.cfmThe “Shakespeare Festivals” page at the Curtain Rising Web site lists 185 US theatres and 41 international companies devoted primarily to Shakespeare (www.curtainrising.com/shakes/shakefest.html). The “Festivals and Theatre Companies”