The Actor-Manager Career of Sir Frank Robert Benson in Perspective: an Evaluation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Actor-Manager Career of Sir Frank Robert Benson in Perspective: an Evaluation 71-27,577 TOTH, John William, 1936- THE ACTOR-MANAGER CAREER OF SIR FRANK ROBERT BENSON IN PERSPECTIVE: AN EVALUATION. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 Theater 1 University Microfilms, A XEROK Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEÉI MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE ACTOR-MANAGER CAREER OF SIR FRANK ROBERT BENSON IN PERSPECTIVE* AN EVALUATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by John Willieun Toth, B.A., M.A. ******** The Ohio State University 1971 Approved by Adviser Division of Theatre AC KNOWLEDGEMENTS For their help in acquiring materials for this study, I wish to thank the following individuals: Miss Eileen Robinson, The Shakespeare Centre, Stratford- Upon-Avon; Mr, George Nashe and Mr, Tony Latham, The Enthoven Collection, The Victoria and Albert Museum, London, My sincere thanks I extend to Dr, John H. McDowell who first introduced me to F,R, Benson; to Dr, Roy Bowen and Dr, Charles C, Ritter whose editorial help has been invaluable; and to Dr, John C, Morrow whose helpful suggestions, scholarship, guidance, and humor have provided continuous encouragement. Finally, I wish to thank my parents without whose moral support, patience and understanding this project could never have been accomplished. ii VITA September 29, 1936t.. Born - South Bend, Indiana 1954........ ....... Graduated from Central High School, South Bend, Indiana 1954-1957...t........ Attended Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana 1959................ B.A., The University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 1959-1960.,, ,....... Teacher, Central High School, South Bend, Indiana 1960-1962,,,,,, ,.... Teaching Assistant, English Department, The Catholic University of America, Washington, D,C, 1962........ ,,. M..A., The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C, 1962-1968..... ...... Teacher, Washington High School, South Bend, Indiana 1968-1971.... ,,,,,,, Teaching Associate, Division of Theatre, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Theatre Studies in History of the Theatre and Criticism, Professors John H, McDowell, John C, Morrow Studies in Dramatic Literature. Professor John C, Morrow Studies in Acting, Professor Roy Bowen Studies in Stage Direction, Professor Charles C, Ritter iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................. 11 VITA......................................... Ill LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS........................ vl Chapter I. THE THEATRE IN LONDON PRIOR TO I89O... 1 The Major and Minor Playhouses and the Drama The Audience The State of the Theatre The Rise of the Actor-Manager Tradition Shakespearean Revival The Purposes and Format of the Study A Biographical Sketch of Frank Benson II. BENSON'S LONDON APPEARANCES .... 4-5 The Theatre In London During the 1890's I A General Statement The Theatre's Return to Respecta­ bility Prominent Actor-Managers In London During the Nineties The Coming of Benson's Call to the Theatre Benson's Early Years In London The Season at the Globe Theatre (I889-I89O) The Lyceum Season (I900) The Comedy Theatre Season (I9OO- 1901) III. BENSON ON TOUR.. 14-2 On Tour With the Bentley Company Benson Enters Management The "Melnlngen System” Iv A Return to Oxford Benson and His Company Life on Tour The Problems of Touring The Bensonian Audience IV. THE STRATFORD FESTIVAL.,.............. 199 The Development of the Festival Idea Benson and the Stratford Festival The "Syndicate" and the American Tour Sir Frank Robert Benson The Road Away from Stratford V . BENSON AND THE BENSONIANS............. 256 Benson's Acting Background The Acting Teacher A Personal Glimpse of Frank Benson The Bensonian Spirit VI. 0 ONGLUSIONS........................... 294 APPENDIX • ■ • f ’ , f . • ■ I • • 1 • ' A...... 304 B ...... 314 BIBLIOGRAPHY................................ 316 LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 . Frontispiece: F.R. Benson, I9IO From portrait by Hugh Riviere vii 2 , Frank Benson as Romeo, c, I887,,,..... 27 3 « Frank Benson as Hamlet, I89O., . 1^5 4 . Frank Benson as King Lear, I903«»ti,«. 176 5, Frank Benson as King Henry the Fifth, 1912,.,., 200 VI Figure 1 Frontispiece I Frank Benson, I9IO From portrait by Hugh Riviere vii CHAPTER I THE THEATRE IN LONDON PRIOR TO I89O After the Shakespearean Tercentenary performance of Julius Caesar on May 2, I9I6 , a rather dusty, dishev­ eled actor dressed in the bloody costume of Julius Caesar, was knighted by King George V. In the Royal Room behind the Royal Box of London's Drury Lane Theatre, Prank Robert Benson received what was perhaps the most important honor of his career. How had this man come to this great honor? What events had shaped his destiny so that he would be knighted by the King in such an unorthodox manner? In order to answer these questions, it will be necessary to understand that part of the history of the late nineteenth-century English theatre that relates to the formation of the traditions, concepts, and ideals that influenced and became an integral part of this man's artistic philo­ sophy. In order to understand Benson, an actor-manager devoted to the production of Shakespeare's plays, it is necessary to understand, generally, the conditions 1. 2. that existed in the English theatre of the nineteenth centuryI the development of the actor-manager tradition, and the attitudes concerning Shakespearean revival as they evolved during that century. The Manor and Minor Playhouses and the Drama The nineteenth-century English theatre was a theatre in flux. The conditions and problems of the theatre of 1800 were completely different from the conditions and problems of I900, Watson characterizes the early years of the nineteenth century (1800-18^-3) as a period of growth, "Growth was the great fact of the age: the 1 growing pains might well be excused," There was a growth in the confusion created by the monopoly of the patent theatres, the rise of the so-called "minor" theatres, and the lack of clarity concerning the types of entertainment these two distinctly different kinds of theatres were to present. There was a growth in the population of the city of London and a subsequent rise in the economic stability of this expanded population as a result of the Industrial Revolution, This new and monied population, living in newly democratic times, sought varying kinds of entertainment, thereby changing the composition of theatrical audiences. New demands for entertainment also influenced the growth of the physical theatre and the development of the star system. creating financial problems for the actor-manager- producers. From the time of the Restoration in 1660, Drury Lane and Covent Garden, the patent or "major" playhouses, enjoyed the exclusive privilege of presenting what became known as "legitimate" drama. The monopoly caused by the patent legislation of 1660 and the reinforcing Liscensing Act of 1737 restricted all other theatres, excepting the Haymarket in summer months, from presenting "legitimate" drama. These theatres became known as the "minor" theatres. In 1800 the "legitimate" drama meant any form of spoken dialogue; whereas the "illigiti- mate" drama was entertainment in which nothing could be said without musical accompaniment," such various entertainments as melodramas, farces, burlettas, comic operas, burlesques, and extravaganzas,^ As a result of the Licensing Act of 1737» the two patent houses, as well as the Haymarket Theatre in the summer months, were guaranteed by lav/ that only they could produce the legitimate drama. All of the other theatres were restricted to the presentation of illegitimate drama. Enforcement of the law, however, depended on the interpretation given to it by the Lord Chamberlain. As more liberally inclined men came to hold the post of Lord Chamberlain, this interpretation became broader in scope. As a result. 4. the minor theatres were able to infringe upon the type of plays that originally were in the domain of the patents by the simple process of adding some musical accompani­ ment and changing the title. Such action allowed the minor theatres nominally to stay within the limits of the law. Over the years, the liberal interpretations of the Licensing Act of 1737 caused much confusion in attempting to identify the distinctions between the major and minor playhouses. If the minors stole the fare usually offered by the majors, the majors liberally borrowed the fare of the minor theatres, presenting spectacles, ballets, animal shows, burlesques, and acrobats as afterpieces and melodramas in the place of legitimate tragedy,^ The worst part of the pilfering done by the major theatres was that while the patentees could prosecute the minors for infringing on their rights, the minors had no legal recourse for the wrongdoings of the majors, Watson claims that "no fact helped the minors more than this injustice in win­ ning the sympathy of the populace and of the critics,^ When John Phillip Kemble, in 1811, introduced an eques­ trian show at Drury Lane, The Dramatic Censor cried that "this evening should bo considered as a black epoch forever!"^ This reaction proteste I the introduction of 5o an illegitimate form of entertainment into a patent house 0 The vagueness of the distinction between the types of entertainment presented at the major and minor theatres continued to grow during the first thirty years of the nineteenth centuryo By I832 Douglas Jerrold, appearing before the Select Committee appointed by Parliament in I832 to report on the state of drama, defined legitimate drama as occurring "when the interest of the piece is mental rather than physical,"^ A further indication of the confusion between the major and minor theatres v/as found in The Theatrical Observer of May 26, I83I: At the theatre royal, Drury Lane we have Timour the Tartar and the horses, at the theatre royal. Covent Garden, we have the Life and Death of Buonaparte, as a mere spectacle accompanied by every kind of catch-shilling gee-gaw, and some horses; while, on the other hand, we find at Sadler's Wells, Romeo and Juliet.
Recommended publications
  • Programmes, Visiting Artists and Companies Ephemera PR8492/1950-1959 to View Items in the Ephemera Collection, Contact the State Library of Western Australia
    Programmes, visiting artists and companies Ephemera PR8492/1950-1959 To view items in the Ephemera collection, contact the State Library of Western Australia Date Venue Title Author Director Producer Agent Principals D 1950 January Marquee Puss in Boots Bruce Carroll Bruce Carroll Eric Maxon 0 Theatre Edgar Rogers Noreen Rogers ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ April 10 His Majesty's "Annie Get Leo Packer Carl Randall J.C.Williamson Victor Carell 1 Theatre Your Gun" Theatres Ltd Wendy Selover Irving Berlin Wilfred Stevens ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ May 25 His Majesty's The Mikado Leo Packer Anna Bethell J.C.Williamson Jon Dean 1 Theatre Gilbert & Theatres Ltd Richard Walker Sullivan Leslie Rands Ivan Menzies Bernard Manning Muriel Howard Marjorie Eyre Nancy Rasmussen Evelyn Gardiner Richard Bengar ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ June 3 His Majesty's Pirates of Leo Packer Anna Bethell J.C.Williamson John Dean 2 Theatre Penzance & Theatres Ltd Helen Roberts Trial by Jury Evelyn Gardiner PR8492/1950-1959 Page 1 of 40 Copyright SLWA ©2011 Programmes, visiting artists and companies Ephemera PR8492/1950-1959 To view items in the Ephemera collection, contact the State Library of Western Australia Date Venue Title Author Director Producer Agent Principals D Gilbert & Sullivan Leslie Rands Richard
    [Show full text]
  • The First Critical Assessments of a Streetcar Named Desire: the Streetcar Tryouts and the Reviewers
    FALL 1991 45 The First Critical Assessments of A Streetcar Named Desire: The Streetcar Tryouts and the Reviewers Philip C. Kolin The first review of A Streetcar Named Desire in a New York City paper was not of the Broadway premiere of Williams's play on December 3, 1947, but of the world premiere in New Haven on October 30, 1947. Writing in Variety for November 5, 1947, Bone found Streetcar "a mixture of seduction, sordid revelations and incidental perversion which will be revolting to certain playgoers but devoured with avidity by others. Latter category will predomin­ ate." Continuing his predictions, he asserted that Streetcar was "important theatre" and that it would be one "trolley that should ring up plenty of fares on Broadway" ("Plays Out of Town"). Like Bone, almost everyone else interested in the history of Streetcar has looked forward to the play's reception on Broadway. Yet one of the most important chapters in Streetcar's stage history has been neglected, that is, the play's tryouts before that momentous Broadway debut. Oddly enough, bibliographies of Williams fail to include many of the Streetcar tryout reviews and surveys of the critical reception of the play commence with the pronouncements found in the New York Theatre Critics' Reviews for the week of December 3, 1947. Such neglect is unfortunate. Streetcar was performed more than a full month and in three different cities before it ever arrived on Broadway. Not only was the play new, so was its producer. Making her debut as a producer with Streetcar, Irene Selznick was one of the powerhouses behind the play.
    [Show full text]
  • 31 Days of Oscar® 2010 Schedule
    31 DAYS OF OSCAR® 2010 SCHEDULE Monday, February 1 6:00 AM Only When I Laugh (’81) (Kevin Bacon, James Coco) 8:15 AM Man of La Mancha (’72) (James Coco, Harry Andrews) 10:30 AM 55 Days at Peking (’63) (Harry Andrews, Flora Robson) 1:30 PM Saratoga Trunk (’45) (Flora Robson, Jerry Austin) 4:00 PM The Adventures of Don Juan (’48) (Jerry Austin, Viveca Lindfors) 6:00 PM The Way We Were (’73) (Viveca Lindfors, Barbra Streisand) 8:00 PM Funny Girl (’68) (Barbra Streisand, Omar Sharif) 11:00 PM Lawrence of Arabia (’62) (Omar Sharif, Peter O’Toole) 3:00 AM Becket (’64) (Peter O’Toole, Martita Hunt) 5:30 AM Great Expectations (’46) (Martita Hunt, John Mills) Tuesday, February 2 7:30 AM Tunes of Glory (’60) (John Mills, John Fraser) 9:30 AM The Dam Busters (’55) (John Fraser, Laurence Naismith) 11:30 AM Mogambo (’53) (Laurence Naismith, Clark Gable) 1:30 PM Test Pilot (’38) (Clark Gable, Mary Howard) 3:30 PM Billy the Kid (’41) (Mary Howard, Henry O’Neill) 5:15 PM Mr. Dodd Takes the Air (’37) (Henry O’Neill, Frank McHugh) 6:45 PM One Way Passage (’32) (Frank McHugh, William Powell) 8:00 PM The Thin Man (’34) (William Powell, Myrna Loy) 10:00 PM The Best Years of Our Lives (’46) (Myrna Loy, Fredric March) 1:00 AM Inherit the Wind (’60) (Fredric March, Noah Beery, Jr.) 3:15 AM Sergeant York (’41) (Noah Beery, Jr., Walter Brennan) 5:30 AM These Three (’36) (Walter Brennan, Marcia Mae Jones) Wednesday, February 3 7:15 AM The Champ (’31) (Marcia Mae Jones, Walter Beery) 8:45 AM Viva Villa! (’34) (Walter Beery, Donald Cook) 10:45 AM The Pubic Enemy
    [Show full text]
  • Theater Souvenir Programs Guide [1881-1979]
    Theater Souvenir Programs Guide [1881-1979] RBC PN2037 .T54 1881 Choose which boxes you want to see, go to SearchWorks record, and page boxes electronically. BOX 1 1: An Illustrated Record by "The Sphere" of the Gilbert & Sullivan Operas 1939 (1939). Note: Operas: The Mikado; The Goldoliers; Iolanthe; Trial by Jury; The Pirates of Penzance; The Yeomen of the Guard; Patience; Princess Ida; Ruddigore; H.M.S. Pinafore; The Grand Duke; Utopia, Limited; The Sorcerer. 2: Glyndebourne Festival Opera (1960). Note: 26th Anniversary of the Glyndebourne Festival, operas: I Puritani; Falstaff; Der Rosenkavalier; Don Giovanni; La Cenerentola; Die Zauberflöte. 3: Parts I Have Played: Mr. Martin Harvey (1881-1909). Note: 30 Photographs and A Biographical Sketch. 4: Souvenir of The Christian King (Or Alfred of "Engle-Land"), by Wilson Barrett. Note: Photographs by W. & D. Downey. 5: Adelphi Theatre : Adelphi Theatre Souvenir of the 200th Performance of "Tina" (1916). 6: Comedy Theatre : Souvenir of "Sunday" (1904), by Thomas Raceward. 7: Daly's Theatre : The Lady of the Rose: Souvenir of Anniversary Perforamnce Feb. 21, 1923 (1923), by Frederick Lonsdale. Note: Musical theater. 8: Drury Lane Theatre : The Pageant of Drury Lane Theatre (1918), by Louis N. Parker. Note: In celebration of the 21 years of management by Arthur Collins. 9: Duke of York's Theatre : Souvenir of the 200th Performance of "The Admirable Crichton" (1902), by J.M. Barrie. Note: Oil paintings by Chas. A. Buchel, produced under the management of Charles Frohman. 10: Gaiety Theatre : The Orchid (1904), by James T. Tanner. Note: Managing Director, Mr. George Edwardes, musical comedy.
    [Show full text]
  • March 2-31 at the Waterfront Theatre on Granville Island Based on the Elephant & Piggie Books by Mo Willems
    Tom Pickett (Gerald) and Kelli Ogmundson (Piggie). Photo by Tim Matheson Tim by Photo Ogmundson (Piggie). and Kelli (Gerald) Pickett Tom March 2-31 at the Waterfront Theatre on Granville Island Based on the Elephant & Piggie books by Mo Willems Published by Hyperion Books for Children Script and Lyrics by Mo Willems Music by Deborah Wicks La Puma carouseltheatre.ca|604 685 6217 carouseltheatre.ca Our Mission, Vision and Values Carousel Theatre for Young People (CTYP) creates playful, exceptional and accessible theatrical experiences that inspire, involve and educate. We envision a community that empowers people to be more imaginative, expressive and engaged. At our core, our values are playfulness, excellence, accessibility, integrity and financial accountability. Our Story Carousel Theatre for Young People (CTYP) has been creating theatre for young people since 1976. Located on Granville Island in the heart of Vancouver, CTYP is Vancouver’s professional mainstage TYA Company. We are a gathering place for artists, young people and families to embark on a journey where imagination, a dash of magic, and an abundance of play are the recipe for a theatrical adventure that has lasting impact. Our vision: to empower young people through the magic of theatre. Under the vision of Artistic Director Carole Higgins, CTYP stages vibrant stories that engage young people from the beginning of their development and continues to share stories that challenge young people through their formative years, empowering young people to become agents of positive change. Carole’s vision Stages of Play encompasses a full season that celebrates stories that explore rites of passage through our Family Stage at the Waterfront Theatre, explores Shakespeare’s canon through a contemporary lens every summer with our Teen Shakespeare Stage, and explores original Canadian creations for our BEE Stage.
    [Show full text]
  • School Profile 2017
    SCHOOL PROFILE 2017 Founded in 1981, Holy Trinity School (HTS) is Our partnerships with other organizations and a co-educational, JK-Grade 12, independent educational institutions provide a flexible day school that provides a safe, structured, and and personalized program that meets the supportive environment for students to develop needs of our students. Our Apple 1:1 Program character and values such as respect, integrity, creates a dynamic learning environment that leadership, and confidence. engages our community and fosters a creative, global, and connected classroom experience. We are leaders in learning. Our mission is rooted Technology has also enabled us to provide in academic excellence and our commitment to multiple pathways to fulfill the diverse needs our students continues to inspire us to pursue of our students. innovative teaching practices and programs to support the development of all our learners. Head of School Director of Admissions HTS.ON.CA Our program develops individual’s passions, Helen Pereira-Raso Richard Vissers skills, and knowledge that will enable them [email protected] [email protected] to thrive. This is complemented by extensive sports, music, drama, art and co-curricular Deputy Head Director of Student Success programs that provide a rich and well-rounded Peter Hill and University Placement school experience for students of every age. [email protected] Tracy Howard Mident #: 881481 At HTS, every student matters! [email protected] CEEB Code: 826583 POST SECONDARY DESTINATIONS FOR HTS GRADUATES *DESTINATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Memories of Pitsford a 100 Years Ago
    49 MEMORIES OF PITSFORD A HUNDRED YEARS AGO T. G. TUCKER Introduction by the late Joan Wake* All my life I had heard of the clever Pitsford boy, Tom Tucker-whose name was a legend in the Wake family. I knew he had emigrated to Australia a.s a young man and I had therefore never expected to see him in the flesh-when all of a sudden in the middle of my third war-he turned up! This was in 1941. He got into touch with my aunt, Miss Lucy Wake, who had known him as a boy, and through her I invited him to come and stay with me for a few days in my little house at Cosgrove. He was then a good-looking, white haired old gentleman, of marked refinement, and of course highly cultivated, and over eighty years of age. He was very communicative, and I much enjoyed his visit. Tom's father was coachman, first to my great-great-aunt Louisa, Lady Sitwell, at Hunter- combe near Maidenhead in Berkshire, and then to her sister, my great-grandmother, Charlotte, Lady Wake, at Pitsford. Tom described to me the two days' journey in the furniture van from one place to the other-stopping the night at Newport Pagnell, and the struggle of the horses up Boughton hill, slippery with ice, as they neared the end of their journey. That must have been in 1868 or 1869. He was then about eight years of age. My great-grandmother took a great interest in him after discovering that he was the cleverest boy in the village, and he told me that he owed everything to her.
    [Show full text]
  • Iv: the Allan Wilkie Shakespearean Company, 1920-1926
    IV: THE ALLAN WILKIE SHAKESPEAREAN COMPANY, 1920-1926 "Our True Intent is all for Your Delight." In September 1920, Allan Wilkie announced his plans to establish Australia's first permanent Shakespearean company, drawing a parallel to Frank Benson's Company in England. The inaugural production by the new Allan Wilkie Shakespearean Company was to be a "new arrangement" of Macbeth, and Wilkie gave it as his fixed intention to produce all thirty-seven of Shakespeare's plays, some of which had never previously been staged in Australia." Advance publicity emphasized the potentially historic nature of the occasion: When in future years this company will be counted one of the institutions of which Australia is proud, those who attend on the opening night will tell with satisfaction how they were present during the enthusiastic hours which saw the inception of the company [Argus, 9 September 1920]. Many cynics were quick to point out the unlikelihood of Wilkie's venture surviving for long, or even getting off the ground, in view of the history of Shakespeare production in Australia. His was by no means the first proposal to establish a permanent company, but lack of demand had ended all previous efforts. In order to arouse audience curiosity, Wilkie advertised, as mentioned above, a "new arrangement" of Macbeth. His presentation was to have two novel aspects, which were to form the basis of his production methods in the years to come. They were interdependent: first, a new method of scenic arrangement, and second, a new organisation of the play, made possible by simplified scenery.
    [Show full text]
  • 52 - Sir Frank Benson
    52 - SIR FRANK BENSON By Ann Pennington The proudest moment in the life of Frank Benson occurred when he was knighted by King George V during the tercentenary performance of Julius Caesar at Drury Lane in 1916, the first actor to be so honoured within the walls of a theatre. Previously he had been awarded the Freedom of the Borough of Stratford-upon-Avon for his services to Shakespearean theatre. Francis Robert Benson, known by his family as Frank and almost invariably by his fellow Thespians as F.R.B. was the fourth child and third son of William Benson, descended from Quaker stock, and Elizabeth Soulsby Benson (nee Smith), reputed to be one of the most beautiful women of her day. Their grave and memorial is in the New Alresford churchyard. Born in Tunbridge Wells on 4th November 1858, Frank Benson was quite a little boy when the family moved to Langtons, now Langton House, at the corner of East Street and Sun Lane in Alresford. Both house and grounds are much smaller now than when the Bensons, their six children and a battalion of servants lived there. The property included the farm with its paddocks, pastures, stables and grounds with long sloping lawns, flower walks and an enclosed kitchen garden. This was the home Frank Benson remembered in later life with almost passionate affection. Throughout his schooldays his main interests were physical fitness and the love of word and rhythm. In his two final years at Winchester he was Head of House (Wickham's) and had won the straight mile, appropriately on the Alresford road.
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespeare on Film, Video & Stage
    William Shakespeare on Film, Video and Stage Titles in bold red font with an asterisk (*) represent the crème de la crème – first choice titles in each category. These are the titles you’ll probably want to explore first. Titles in bold black font are the second- tier – outstanding films that are the next level of artistry and craftsmanship. Once you have experienced the top tier, these are where you should go next. They may not represent the highest achievement in each genre, but they are definitely a cut above the rest. Finally, the titles which are in a regular black font constitute the rest of the films within the genre. I would be the first to admit that some of these may actually be worthy of being “ranked” more highly, but it is a ridiculously subjective matter. Bibliography Shakespeare on Silent Film Robert Hamilton Ball, Theatre Arts Books, 1968. (Reissued by Routledge, 2016.) Shakespeare and the Film Roger Manvell, Praeger, 1971. Shakespeare on Film Jack J. Jorgens, Indiana University Press, 1977. Shakespeare on Television: An Anthology of Essays and Reviews J.C. Bulman, H.R. Coursen, eds., UPNE, 1988. The BBC Shakespeare Plays: Making the Televised Canon Susan Willis, The University of North Carolina Press, 1991. Shakespeare on Screen: An International Filmography and Videography Kenneth S. Rothwell, Neil Schuman Pub., 1991. Still in Movement: Shakespeare on Screen Lorne M. Buchman, Oxford University Press, 1991. Shakespeare Observed: Studies in Performance on Stage and Screen Samuel Crowl, Ohio University Press, 1992. Shakespeare and the Moving Image: The Plays on Film and Television Anthony Davies & Stanley Wells, eds., Cambridge University Press, 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-14168-1 — The Merchant of Venice William Shakespeare , Edited by M.M. Mahood , Introduction by Tom Lockwood Frontmatter More Information THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE generaleditor Brian Gibbons, University of Münster associate generaleditor A. R. Braunmuller, University of California, Los Angeles From the publication of the first volumes in 1984 the General Editor of the New Cambridge Shakespeare was Philip Brockbank and the Associate General Editors were Brian Gibbons and Robin Hood. From 1990 to 1994 the General Editor was Brian Gibbons and the Associate General Editors were A. R. Braunmuller and Robin Hood. THE MERCHANT OF VENICE For this updated edition of one of Shakespeare’s most problematic plays, Tom Lockwood has added a new introductory section on the latest scholarly trends, performance and adaptation practices which have occurred over the last two decades. Investigating the latest critical frames through which the play has been interpreted, the updated introduction also focuses on recent international performances on stage and screen (including Al Pacino’s performances on film and in Daniel Sullivan’s production in New York, the Habima National Theatre’s production for the Globe to Globe Festival, Jonathan Munby’s touring production for the Globe performed in London, New York and Venice, and Rupert Goold’s production for the Royal Shakespeare Company). Finally, new forms of adaptation are considered: a perfor- mance transposed to the different generic mode of a New York auction room, and the remaking of the play in Howard Jacobson’s 2016 novel, Shylock Is My Name. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-14168-1 — The Merchant of Venice William Shakespeare , Edited by M.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Talking Theatre Extract
    Richard Eyre TALKING THEATRE Interviews with Theatre People Contents Introduction xiii Interviews John Gielgud 1 Peter Brook 16 Margaret ‘Percy’ Harris 29 Peter Hall 35 Ian McKellen 52 Judi Dench 57 Trevor Nunn 62 Vanessa Redgrave 67 NICK HERN BOOKS Fiona Shaw 71 London Liam Neeson 80 www.nickhernbooks.co.uk Stephen Rea 87 ix RICHARD EYRE CONTENTS Stephen Sondheim 94 Steven Berkoff 286 Arthur Laurents 102 Willem Dafoe 291 Arthur Miller 114 Deborah Warner 297 August Wilson 128 Simon McBurney 302 Jason Robards 134 Robert Lepage 306 Kim Hunter 139 Appendix Tony Kushner 144 John Johnston 313 Luise Rainer 154 Alan Bennett 161 Index 321 Harold Pinter 168 Tom Stoppard 178 David Hare 183 Jocelyn Herbert 192 William Gaskill 200 Arnold Wesker 211 Peter Gill 218 Christopher Hampton 225 Peter Shaffer 232 Frith Banbury 239 Alan Ayckbourn 248 John Bury 253 Victor Spinetti 259 John McGrath 266 Cameron Mackintosh 276 Patrick Marber 280 x xi JOHN GIELGUD Would you say the real father—or mother—of the National Theatre and the Royal Shakespeare Company is Lilian Baylis? Well, I think she didn’t know her arse from her elbow. She was an extraordinary old woman, really. And I never knew anybody who knew her really well. The books are quite good about her, but except for her eccentricities there’s nothing about her professional appreciation of Shakespeare. She had this faith which led her to the people she needed. Did she choose the actors? I don’t think so. She chose the directors. John Gielgud Yes, she had a very difficult time with them.
    [Show full text]