Activity 4 - Adaptation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Activity 4 - Adaptation Activity 4 - Adaptation GONERIL Come, sir, I would you would make use of that good wisdom Whereof I know you are fraught, and put away These dispositions that of late transform you From what you rightly are. [King Lear, 1.iv] For economic, social and cultural reasons, Shakespeare rose to prominence in the course of the eighteenth century. The works performed, at Drury Lane and other theatres in the period were not, however, quite those that you can see in London or Stratford-upon-Avon in the twenty-first century. Rather, Shakespeare's plays were often adapted. Even if people read printed versions of the original texts at home, those they saw on the stage were often quite different. These adaptations did, however, contribute to Shakespeare's fame. Above all, they presented Shakespeare in a way that was not too unfamiliar to eighteenth-century audiences. This meant that these adaptations allowed parts of Shakespeare's works to be performed even when prevailing cultural opinions would not have suffered the full text to appear on the stage. We may criticise them for their rewriting now, and indeed some eighteenth-century critics and actors were already doing this, but we should not forget that such rewritings also kept Shakespeare on the stage, particularly in the early decades of the period. Several famous authors rewrote Shakespeare for the stage in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. John Dryden (1631-1700) contributed to a new version of The Tempest, called The Enchanted Island in 1667, which added a sister for Caliban, and a man, Hippolita, living on Prospero's island but who, as the direct opposite of Miranda, had never seen a woman. Garrick, as well as performing Shakespeare, also adapted his plays: he turned The Winter's Tale into Florizel and Perdita by removing much of the first few acts; similarly, The Taming of the Shrew became Catharine and Petruchio, reducing the play from five acts to three. Garrick even dared to edit Hamlet, and spoke about his audacity in a letter to the French translator of Shakespeare, Pierre-Antoine de la Place in January 1773: I must tell You that I have ventur'd to alter Hamlet, & have greatly Succeeded; I have destroy'd ye Grave diggers, (those favourites of the people) & almost all of ye 5th Act – it was a bold Deed, but ye Event has answer'd my most sanguine expectation: if you correspond with any of the Journalists, this circumstance will be worth telling, as it is a great Anecdote in our theatrical history – As well as removing the gravediggers, Garrick also drastically changed the end of the play. Ophelia still goes mad, but does not die; instead her exit provokes a violent argument between Hamlet and Laertes. In the course of their argument, Hamlet becomes enraged and stabs Claudius, which causes Gertrude to flee in terror; Hamlet then “runs upon Laertes' sword” and dies in Horatio's arms, living just long enough to hear that Gertrude has died of grief off-stage. What do you make of these changes? Why do you think Garrick removed the gravediggers, Osric, the fencing match, and the on-stage deaths of Gertrude and Laertes? Think about dramatic effect, about the fact that Garrick himself played Hamlet, and the concern, already discussed, that Shakespeare's plays be moral. Although Garrick's version of Hamlet was popular during the actor's life, it did not long survive his retirement from the stage. In contrast to this, the most famous adaptation of all Shakespeare's plays, Nahum Tate's King Lear, held the stage from its first performance in 1681 through the entire eighteenth century until the 1820s, when Shakespeare's original version was finally resurrected. Even then, Tate's King Lear continued to be performed, with a staging in New York as late as 1985. You can read Tate's version of King Lear here: http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/tatelear.html Tasks - What does Tate change? Why do you think he changes it? How would you characterise the ensemble of his modifications? - Compare a scene of Tate's adaptation with Shakespeare's original. Discuss specific changes Tate makes to Shakespeare's language. - How would you adapt a Shakespeare play? Take any work by Shakespeare and propose changes to its plot, giving your reasoning. Modifications can be made in terms of setting (Thomas Otway transported Romeo and Juliet to imperial Rome in 1680), language (William Davenant greatly simplified the language of Macbeth for an operatic version in 1674), structure (Garrick removed acts and scenes; Tate added them); character (Dryden, as we have seen added characters to The Tempest); and much else besides. .
Recommended publications
  • Hamlet-Production-Guide.Pdf
    ASOLO REP EDUCATION & OUTREACH PRODUCTION GUIDE 2016 Tour PRODUCTION GUIDE By WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE ASOLO REP Adapted and Directed by JUSTIN LUCERO EDUCATION & OUTREACH TOURING SEPTEMBER 27 - NOVEMBER 22 ASOLO REP LEADERSHIP TABLE OF CONTENTS Producing Artistic Director WHAT TO EXPECT.......................................................................................1 MICHAEL DONALD EDWARDS WHO CAN YOU TRUST?..........................................................................2 Managing Director LINDA DIGABRIELE PEOPLE AND PLOT................................................................................3 FSU/Asolo Conservatory Director, ADAPTIONS OF SHAKESPEARE....................................................................5 Associate Director of Asolo Rep GREG LEAMING FROM THE DIRECTOR.................................................................................6 SHAPING THIS TEXT...................................................................................7 THE TRAGEDY OF HAMLET CREATIVE TEAM FACT IN THE FICTION..................................................................................9 Director WHAT MAKES A GHOST?.........................................................................10 JUSTIN LUCERO UPCOMING OPPORTUNITIES......................................................................11 Costume Design BECKI STAFFORD Properties Design MARLÈNE WHITNEY WHAT TO EXPECT Sound Design MATTHEW PARKER You will see one of Shakespeare’s most famous tragedies shortened into a 45-minute Fight Choreography version
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor's Titus Is Beautiful, Or Shakesploi Meets the Camp
    Colby Quarterly Volume 37 Issue 1 March Article 7 March 2001 Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor's Titus Is Beautiful, or Shakesploi Meets the Camp Richard Burt Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq Recommended Citation Colby Quarterly, Volume 37, no.1, March 2001, p.78-106 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Colby. It has been accepted for inclusion in Colby Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Colby. Burt: Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor's Titus Is Beautiful, Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor's Titus Is Beautiful, or Shakesploi Meets (the) Camp by RICHARD BURT II cinema eI'anna piu forte (Cinema is the strongest weapon) -Mussolini's motto Every day I'll read something that is right out of Titus Andronicus, so when people think this is "over the top," they're absolutely wrong. What could be more "over the top" than the Holocaust? -Julie Taymor "Belsen Was a Gas." -Johnny Rotten SHAKESPEARE NACH AUSCHWITZ? NE MORNING in the summer of 2000, I was channel surfing the trash talk O. shows to get my daily fix of mass media junk via the hype-o of my tele­ vision set. After "Transsexual Love Secrets" on Springer got a bit boring, I lighted on the Maury Povich Show.! The day's topic was "My seven-year-old child drinks, smokes, swears, and hits me!" Father figure Pavich's final solu­ tion, like Sally Jessie Raphael's with much older kids on similar episodes of her show, was to send the young offenders to boot camp.
    [Show full text]
  • HAMLET: PRESS RESPONSES Almeida & West End (2017) Shakespeare
    HAMLET: PRESS RESPONSES Almeida & West End (2017) Shakespeare www.roberticke.com FINANCIAL TIMES Ian Shuttleworth ★★★★★ I have been privileged to see several first-class Hamlets this century: Simon Russell Beale, Samuel West, David Tennant, Rory Kinnear, Maxine Peake, arguably Lars Eidinger. Andrew Scott is at least as outstanding as any of those, and right now I’m inclined to rank him in front. His Prince is almost always self-aware, but not self-understanding; on the contrary, his keynote is a kind of bemused wonder at goings-on both within and beyond his skin. The great soliloquies seem new-minted, every word a separate question. The playfulness at which Scott so excels (most notably as Moriarty in BBC-TV’s Sherlock) is here kept under a rigorously tight rein. I did not see this production when it opened at the Almeida a few months ago, but my impression is that neither Scott’s nor anyone else’s performance has been ramped up for a venue two and half times the size; the consequent occasional intelligibility problems are far outweighed by the sense of human scale. For this is the glory of Robert Icke’s production. It does not consist of a superlative Prince Hamlet, a clutch of fine supporting performances and a number of sharp directorial ideas stitched together into a plausible fabric; rather, it is whole and entire of itself. Angus Wright’s cool, disciplined Claudius, Juliet Stevenson’s besotted-then-horrified Gertrude, Jessica Brown Findlay’s Ophelia (at first at sea like Hamlet, finally psychologically shattered in a wheelchair), David Rintoul’s doubling of the Ghost and the Player King .
    [Show full text]
  • Braggart Courtship from Miles Gloriosus to the Taming of the Shrew
    2707 Early Theatre 19.1 (2016), 81–112 http://dx.doi.org/10.12745/et.19.1.2707 Philip D. Collington ‘A Mad-Cap Ruffian and a Swearing Jack’: Braggart Courtship from Miles Gloriosus to The Taming of the Shrew There is a generic skeleton in Petruchio’s closet. By comparing his outlandish behav- iour in Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew (ca 1592–94) to that of Pyrgopo- linices in Plautus’s Miles Gloriosus (ca 200 BC), as well to that of English variants of the type found in Udall, Lyly, and Peele, I re-situate Petruchio as a braggart soldier. I also reconstruct a largely forgotten comic subgenre, braggart courtship, with distinctive poetic styles, subsidiary characters, narrative events, and thematic func- tions. Katherina’s marriage to a stranger who boasts of his abilities and bullies social inferiors raises key questions: What were the comic contexts and cultural valences of a match between a braggart and a shrew? Is there a generic skeleton in Petruchio’s closet? When he arrives in Padua in The Taming of the Shrew (ca 1592–94), he introduces himself to locals as old Antonio’s heir — and those who remember the father instantly embrace the son. ‘I know him well’, declares Baptista, ‘You are welcome for his sake’ (2.1.67–9).1 But when Petruchio begins beating his servant and boasting of his abilities, he may also have struck playgoers as a character type they knew well: the braggart soldier. By comparing Petruchio to the type’s most storied ancestor, Pyrgopo- linices in Plautus’s Miles Gloriosus [The Braggard Captain] (ca 200 BC), as
    [Show full text]
  • Hamlet on the Screen Prof
    Scholars International Journal of Linguistics and Literature Abbreviated Key Title: Sch Int J Linguist Lit ISSN 2616-8677 (Print) |ISSN 2617-3468 (Online) Scholars Middle East Publishers, Dubai, United Arab Emirates Journal homepage: https://saudijournals.com/sijll Review Article Hamlet on the Screen Prof. Essam Fattouh* English Department, Faculty of Arts, University of Alexandria (Egypt) DOI: 10.36348/sijll.2020.v03i04.001 | Received: 20.03.2020 | Accepted: 27.03.2020 | Published: 07.04.2020 *Corresponding author: Prof. Essam Fattouh Abstract The challenge of adapting William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet for the screen has preoccupied cinema from its earliest days. After a survey of the silent Hamlet productions, the paper critically examines Asta Nielsen‟s Hamlet: The Drama of Vengeance by noting how her main character is really a woman. My discussion of the modern productions of Shakespeare begins with a critical discussion of Lawrence Olivier‟s seminal production of 1948. The Russian Hamlet of 1964, directed by Grigori Kozintsev, is shown to combine a psychological interpretation of the hero without disregarding its socio-political context. The action-film genre deployed by Franco Zeffirelli in his 1990 adaptation of the play, through a moving performance by Mel Gibson, is analysed. Kenneth Branagh‟s ambitious and well-financed production of 1996 is shown to be somewhat marred by its excesses. Michael Almereyda‟s attempt to present Shakespeare‟s hero in a contemporary setting is shown to have powerful moments despite its flaws. The paper concludes that Shakespeare‟s masterpiece will continue to fascinate future generations of directors, actors and audiences. Keywords: Shakespeare – Hamlet – silent film – film adaptations – modern productions – Russian – Olivier – Branagh – contemporary setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Make Us Laugh at That: Hamlet's Gravediggers
    “Make Us Laugh at That: Hamlet’s Gravediggers” LAURY MAGNUS Though the “Clownes” in 5.1.appear only once in Hamlet, Shakespeare’s Gravediggers’ Scene has been called “the most extraordinary scene in this extraordinary play” (CN3189, Hibbard, 1987), a valuation that is surely a function of the proud professional undertaker, the First Clown, whose quick wit shines out in dialogue but who is intently focused and in his own world when at his proper task of digging. Does this clown speak more lines than have been “set down for him?”1 Of course, such a question is one that textual evidence in itself can’t decide. But what it does point to is that even when intent on his digging, the Gravedigger enjoys the limelight and “performing” for himself and for any passers-by. What is also clear is that the Gravedigger’s singing at his tasks intrigues Hamlet at a critical point of passage in the play. As an outsider first introduced in this scene of the play, the Gravedigger could be seen as a choric figure. In his initial dialogue with Second Clown, he unwittingly comments on the prior actions of the prince and the court of Denmark that have led them to seek the consecrated “ground” of his professional turf. For his part, the prince, now also an “outsider” who stumbles upon this site, becomes a kind of correlative choric figure as he comments to Horatio on the Gravedigger’s song and accompanying gestures and then draws out the Gravedigger concerning his trade. From this dual choric perspective grows what is to be a direct duel of wits between clown and prince that is prelude to the mortal duel of 5.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamlet Crossword Puzzle
    L I T ERARY CROSSWO RD PUZZ LE HamletHamlet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Across Down Across Down 1. Hamlet describes his father as a “Hyperion”: a 2. Hamlet and Laertes fight here during Ophelia’s 1. Hamletgod describes of __________. his father as a “Hyperion”: a god of 2. funeralHamlet and Laertes fight here during Ophelia’s funeral. __________.8. Hamlet may or may not be __________. 3.3. HamletHamlet calls calls Rosencrantz a __________ a __________ for doing for favors for 8. Hamlet10. Claudius may or maysays not “__________ be __________. in great ones must doingClaudius. favors for Claudius. not unwatch’d go.” 4. When the wind is from the south, Hamlet can tell 10. Claudius12. Hamlet says says“__________ of Claudius, in great “…meet ones must it is not I set unwatch’d it 4. theWhen difference the wind between is from the a hawksouth, andHamlet a can tell the go.” down, That one may smile, and smile, and be a __________. difference between a hawk and a __________. 12. Hamlet__________.” says of Claudius, “…meet it is I set it down, That one 5.5. HamletHamlet discovers discovers __________’s __________’s skull skull in the in churchyard.the may13. smile,The play and takessmile, andplace be duringa __________.” this period. 6. churchyard.Rosencrantz and __________ escort Hamlet to England. 13. The15. playClaudius takes place says during his deeds this period. are “__________.” 6.
    [Show full text]
  • The Comedy of Death in Hamlet: Everyone Dies in the End
    Cummings: The Comedy of Death in Hamlet: Everyone Dies in the End The Comedy of Death inHamlet: Everyone Dies in the End Ty Cummings Shimer College Faculty Sponsor: Barbara Stone In my reading ofHamlet, there are two key moments which take death out of its strict placement within the plot, and into a place of universal deliberation where it is treated as an idea, acomponent of the human condition. I'm speaking of Hamlet's "To be or not to be” soliloquy and his encounter with the gravediggers. In experiencingHamlet as a play deemed 'tragic,' these philosophic and existential musings of death seem to embolden the distressing morbidity ofHamlets concluding scene. However, it is possible to interpret these and other moments as disarming the 'tragedy' Hamletof and transforming death into an object of absurdity, comedy, and perhaps, to be extreme, ridicule. To begin, I'd like, for the time being, to liberateHamlet from its historical and literary context, as well as disregard its author's intentions. Though I may defend this somewhat postmodern move by citing my ignorance of the rich historical situationHamlets of audience and the author's body of work as well as argue such knowledge would be more or less speculative, I'd rather justify my approach as follows: the experienceHamlet of changes with the times. It is an object molded by its viewer/reader, and its meaning and effect do not, in this essay, exist independently of the psychology of a contemporary audience. With the permission of my reader, I'd like to pursue my interpretation of deathHamlet in within such a 1 Published by Digital Showcase @ University of Lynchburg, 2016 1 Agora, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Identity and Role-Playing in Shakespeare's Hamlet
    The Mask of Madness: Identity and Role-playing in Shakespeare’s Hamlet Treball de Fi de Grau Grau en Estudis Anglesos Supervisor: Dr Jordi Coral Escola Anna Fluvià Sabio June 2016 Acknowledgments Throughout the writing of this TFG, I have benefited from the advice of Dr Jordi Coral Escola. I am very grateful for his constant support, suggestions and corrections. I would also like to thank my family and friends for having been extremely supportive and encouraging during this process. Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 Madness as a Key Theme in Elizabethan Drama.......................................................... 3 The Spanish Tragedy and Hamlet ................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1: Madness .......................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Origins of his Madness ........................................................................................... 6 1.2 Assuming the Role of the Madman ...................................................................... 10 Chapter 2: Theatricality .................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Hamlet’s Role ....................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Metadramatic Elements in the Play .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Alas Poor Yorick. Hamlet and Kristeva's Maginary Father
    E. Denbo / PsyArt 21 (2017) 143–158 ‘Alas Poor Yorick!’: Hamlet and Kristeva’s Imaginary Father Elise Denbo Queensborough Community College City University of New York Most psychological approaches interpret Shakespeare’s Hamlet within a Lacanian/Oedipal revenge narrative. This paper, however, explores Shakespeare’s Hamlet through theories of Julia Kristeva, who develops a term called ‘the imaginary father,’ which she revisions from Freud’s ‘father of individual prehistory.’ The notion of an archaic/imaginary father as a hybrid locus (a mother-father amalgam) within the semiotic domain not only introduces new perspectives to consider the role of fatherhood but also the affective (and material) nature of transference/countertransference in Shakespeare’s plays. The dramatization of Hamlet’s “inner mystery” as opposed to his outer “show” has not been explored as an intrapsychic activity regarding an archaic father of imaginary ambivalence. Despite the scene’s brevity (5.1), considering Yorick as Hamlet’s father of individual prehistory reconfigures symbolic mastery to explore the unfolding development of Shakespearean character as a metaphorical process, a presymbolic activity rather than fixed representation, dramatizing the corporeal struggle for psychic and creative space. To cite as Denbo, E., 2017, ‘‘Alas Poor Yorick!’: Hamlet and Kristeva’s Imaginary Father’, PsyArt 21, pp. 143–158. Most playgoers are familiar with the unique encounter between Hamlet and Yorick, the long departed court jester unearthed from his grave, that Shakespeare positions in counterpoint to the early appearance of King Hamlet’s ghost, an event which combined with his mother’s sudden marriage to his uncle sets the play in motion.
    [Show full text]
  • Dd Shrewstudyguide.Pdf
    HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF DRAMA AND DANCE THE TAMING OF THE SHREW William Shakespeare STUDY GUIDE Written and compiled by James J. Kolb, Professor of Drama HOFSTRA/DRAMA 1997 A Study Guide to Hofstra University’s Department of Drama and Dance Production of The Taming of the Shrew by William Shakespeare March 1997 Table of Contents The New Cambridge Shakespeare version of The Taming of the Shrew, edited by Ann Thompson, is the text used in the About Shakespeare 2 current production. It is published in paperback by Cambridge University Press, 40 West 20th Street, New York, Title Page of the First Folio Edition New York 10011-4211 of Shakespeare’s Plays 2 ISBN # 0 521 29388 X ($10.95) Shakespeare’s Coat of Arms 3 Shakespeare’s Plays 3 Shakespeare’s Theatre 4 HOFSTRA/DRAMA Department of Drama and Dance Summary of the Story 5 Hofstra University (516) 463-5444 The Sources of the Story 5 The Date of Composition and Special Problems With the Text of The Taming of the Shrew As Related to The Taming of a Shrew 6 A Few Critical Comments 7 The cover engraving is taken from James Edmund Harting’s About the Play on Stage 10 The Birds of Shakespeare (1871). It depicts hawks in training being carried to the field in “the cadge,” carried by “the Notable Lines 15 cadger.” See page 8 of the Study Guide for some additional comments about falconry. About the Play in Other Forms 16 The idea and format of this study guide is by Peter Sander.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Television Shakespeare from the BBC, 1937-39 Wyver, J
    WestminsterResearch http://www.westminster.ac.uk/westminsterresearch An Intimate and Intermedial Form: Early Television Shakespeare from the BBC, 1937-39 Wyver, J. This is a preliminary version of a book chapter published in Shakespeare Survey 69: Shakespeare and Rome, Cambridge University Press, pp. 347-360, ISBN 9781107159068 Details of the book are available on the publisher’s website: https://www.cambridge.org/core/what-we-publish/collections/shakespea... The WestminsterResearch online digital archive at the University of Westminster aims to make the research output of the University available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the authors and/or copyright owners. Whilst further distribution of specific materials from within this archive is forbidden, you may freely distribute the URL of WestminsterResearch: ((http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/). In case of abuse or copyright appearing without permission e-mail [email protected] 1 An intimate and intermedial form: early television Shakespeare from the BBC, 1937-39 In the twenty-seven months between February 1937 and April 1939 the fledgling BBC television service from Alexandra Palace broadcast more than twenty Shakespeare adaptations.1 The majority of these productions were short programmes featuring ‘scenes from…’ the plays, although there were also substantial adaptations of Othello (1937), Julius Caesar (1938), Twelfth Night and The Tempest (both 1939) as well as a presentation of David Garrick’s 1754 version of The Taming of the Shrew, Katharine and Petruchio (1939). There were other Shakespeare-related programmes as well, and the playwright himself appeared in three distinct historical dramas. In large part because no recordings exist of these transmissions (or of any British television Shakespeare before 1955), these ‘lost’ adaptations have received little scholarly attention.
    [Show full text]