‘THE NEW (OLD) PLAY’: Q1 HAMLET AND THE TEXTS AROUND PERFORMANCE, 1980-2015 Scott Shepherd Royal Holloway, University of London PhD Thesis TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ................................................................4 ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................7 A NOTE ON TEXTS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................9 CHAPTER ONE WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HAMLET ................................11 Approaching the Archive .............................................................................................16 The First Quarto from 1825 to 1980: A Pre-History ....................................................23 The Origins of Q1: A Survey of Scholarship .................................................................35 Summary of the Argument and Outline of the Thesis ....................................................44 CHAPTER TWO: 1980-1989 THE MOST VALUABLE OF ALL SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES ....................................50 RSC 1980: Reviewing Authenticity ...............................................................................58 Orange Tree 1985: Absolute Fidelity? .........................................................................66 RSC 1989: Common Sense, I Suppose ..........................................................................72 National Theatre 1989: Neutered by the NT? ...............................................................78 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................83 CHAPTER THREE: 2000 THE END OF THE BAD QUARTOS ..................................................................................86 Red Shift 1999-2000: The Hamlet Experience .............................................................94 Two Hamlets at the Globe, 2000: Our Beginning and End .........................................101 National Theatre 2000: I would rather die .................................................................113 Conclusion .................................................................................................................118 2 CHAPTER FOUR: 2004-2008 BEFORE AND AFTER ARDEN ........................................................................................121 Old Vic 2004: The Young Hamlet ...............................................................................125 RSC 2004: Which Hamlet? ........................................................................................133 Editorial Interventions: The RSC and The Arden3 .....................................................140 Factory Theatre 2006-2012: The Return to a Victorian Text .....................................143 RSC 2008: Enterprising Editing ................................................................................147 Conclusion .................................................................................................................156 CHAPTER FIVE: 2010-2011 TEXT, PERFORMANCE AND THE INTERNET ...........................................................158 National and Globe, 2010: Globalised Conflict .........................................................165 White Bear 2011: Localised Conflict .........................................................................178 Young Vic 2011: Monkeying About with Shakespeare ...............................................184 Conclusion .................................................................................................................192 CHAPTER SIX: 2015 THE FUTURE FOR Q1? ....................................................................................................196 Conclusion .................................................................................................................208 WORKS CITED Editions of Shakespeare’s Plays ................................................................................216 Archival Material .......................................................................................................218 Newspaper Reviews by Production ............................................................................220 Other Sources ............................................................................................................225 APPENDIX A: INDEX OF CASE STUDIES ....................................................................240 APPENDIX B: INTERVIEWS ...........................................................................................241 3 DECLARATION OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY I declare that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Scott Shepherd 4 ABSTRACT This thesis argues that from 1980 to 2015 the First Quarto of Hamlet had an increasingly significant influence on the texts prepared for and associated with performance. Directors, I argue, approach Q1 the text in a variety of ways, from complete rejection, through the seemingly accidental inclusion of lines and words which echo Q1, all the way to the adoption of large sections of the text and performance of the text in its own right. As the period develops, there is a perceptible increase in the frequency and variety of the ways directors use the First Quarto in text for performance. Since its rediscovery in 1823, scholars have debated the origins of the text, arguing variously that it is a first draft, a memorial reconstruction, a ‘noted’ text, a garbled version, and a pirated copy. Few academics have investigated how Q1 influences the texts prepared for and associated with performance, however; such texts as promptbooks, programmes and reviews. Using a body of primary evidence gathered from extensive archival investigation, as well as interviews and secondary research, this thesis explores in detail the ways Q1 influenced such texts in London and Stratford between 1980 and 2015. During the 1980s, Q1’s impact was limited mainly to a small selection of theatrical tropes, and the use of lines was almost non-existent. As the twentieth century drew to a close, numerous academics questioned the critical foundations on which Q1’s rejection was based. This academic revisionism led to an increased public profile for Q1, culminating in 2006 with the Arden3’s publication of the three-text Hamlet edition which put Q1 on a par – or nearly so – with the other two texts. In parallel with the text’s increased profile, texts for performance started taking on more and more aspects derived from Q1, so that by 2015, Q1 played a far more significant role than it had in 1980. The First Quarto was by no means ‘reformed’ by the end 5 of the period, to use Kathleen Irace’s terminology, but it becomes clear that Q1 takes a more significant role informing and influencing the texts around performance of Hamlet. 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Over the past four years I have received so much care and support from so many people. My first thanks must go of course to my supervisor Dr Deana Rankin for the patience and wisdom with which she has guided me through this quest. Her brilliant insights and challenges have spurred me on to create a work far better than I could have hoped to achieve without her, and her advice on my thesis has been second to none. My advisor Dr Christie Carson has likewise provided thought-provoking and challenging feedback, for which I am grateful. Thanks also to my examiners Professor Emma Smith and Professor Elizabeth Schafer for the stimulating and insightful questions and feedback. Immense thanks must go to those theatre professionals who have been so generous with their time and knowledge. Directors Imogen Bond, John Caird, Jonathan Holloway, Lyndsey Turner and Sam Walters were all kind enough to give me interviews lasting over an hour, asking for nothing in return. Similarly, actor Beruce Khan of the Globe Theatre spent an hour in the beautiful surroundings of Bangalore, India sharing his thoughts on the world tour upon which he was then embarked. I can only apologise to him that the file holding this interview was corrupted. The information these interviews provided me with was invaluable for my research and if I seem to criticise any of the interviewees, I wish to make clear that my high regard for and gratitude to all of them far outweighs any disagreements. Thanks also to Phil Oh and Joy Park of the Alpha Study Centre, who have provided great support along the way, and without whom I would have struggled to fund my studies. There have also been countless librarians, archivists and theatre workers who have provided me with help over the course of my research, particularly in my search for lost or old records and texts; my thanks to all of them. 7 Lastly, special thanks to my (very big) close family, to whom this thesis is dedicated: my parents Jeff and Paula; my siblings (and sibling-in-law) Joel, Isobel, Jess, Carrie, Joshua and Amanda; and lastly my nephew Samuel and of course my nieces Eden and Joy, both of whom were born during the time it took me to research and write this thesis. Without the love and support of all my family, there is no way this work would have been completed. Extra thanks go to all those members of the family old enough to read for proofreading my work, especially to my mum, who, incredibly, read the whole thesis. Now that is true love. 8 A NOTE ON TEXTS AND ABBREVIATIONS All quotations from