Deconstructing the Transhistorical in Contemporary Productions of the Merchant of Venice
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Deconstructing the Transhistorical in Contemporary Productions of The Merchant of Venice by Sergio Nunes Melo A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Centre for Study of Drama University of Toronto © Copyright by Sergio Nunes Melo 2010 Deconstructing the Transhistorical in Contemporary Productions of The Merchant of Venice Sergio Nunes Melo Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Centre for Study of Drama University of Toronto 2010 ABSTRACT This dissertation critiques four 2007 productions of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice observed in three Anglophone theatrical cultures. The dissertation is a narrative enquiry about how the pulls of the present and the past informed these stagings. It maintains that the deployment of ordering principles promoting balance between tradition and rupture favours compelling results. It examines the stagings’ socio-cultural contexts, publicity and promotion mechanisms, formal properties, and issues of representation. The Introduction locates the dissertation within the current scholarly discussion about Shakespearean playtexts and their stagings, arguing that it is possible to reconcile the binary established by two mutually exclusive epistemological claims regarding historicism’s function in scripted stagings. It provides explanations of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the work as well as how these foundations relate to the productions studied, determining the organization of the chapters. Chapter One examines the Theater for a New Audience’s staging, an example of Deconstruction. The chapter discusses how Darko Tresnjak attained the transhistorical by foregrounding the playtext’s open-endedness. It discusses how this staging productively ii explored the commonalities between sodomy and homosexuality, ethnic intolerance and anti-Semitism, as well as the emotional tracks of the characters. Chapter Two analyzes Shakespeare’s Globe’s production, suggesting that this hilarious reading of Merchant suppressed “seriousness” from a limitedly carnivalized show that studiedly avoided criticism regarding the play’s alleged anti-Semitic stance. The chapter expounds how the framing of the theatrical event was consistent with Rebecca Gatward’s materialization of the playtext as “reconstruction.” Chapter Three discusses Richard Rose’s staging with the Stratford Festival of Canada, elucidating the reasons for this production to be classified as “misconstruction.” Making use of the analytical distinction between ethnic intolerance and anti-Semitism, the chapter argues that this production’s shortcoming derived from the attempt to make socio-political statements that do not inhere in the traces of the text. Chapter Four analyzes an eccentric staging: the adaptation of Merchant through the eyes of a Holocaust survivor, with additional text by the director Julia Pascal. The chapter demonstrates how a fringe company with postmodernist epistemological claims was far removed from the skeptical imperative of Deconstruction in that it cynically destroyed inheritance instead of surveying its contradictions. The Conclusion is self-deconstructive and decomposes the narrative inquiry: it exposes how and to what extent the researcher’s reception of the stagings differed from his retrospective reflections on them, mapping out how the problems faced by the critique of each case study shaped a unitary theoretical approach. It argues that the most eloquent scenes and characterizations attained the transhistorical dimension by skeptically deconstructing the playtext, that is, by staging its open-endedness, its conflation of genres, and the emotional traces of the characters. iii In the memory of my father Antonio both a merchant and an alien in the country he chose for me to grow up a member of the human family iv Acknowledgements As an international student, my most heartfelt thanks are due first and foremost to the University of Toronto, for having offered me the invaluable privilege of both being the recipient of a Connaught Fellowship and the advisee of Professors John Astington, Jeremy Lopez, and Domenico Pietropaolo. This dissertation would not have come into being if my advisory committee had not demonstrated such unwavering enthusiasm for the project and extended so much practical help and candid encouragement. I am much obliged to the Graduate Centre of Study of Drama: To Prof. Stephen Johnson for his unrelenting pastoral care regarding theoretical, financial, bureaucratic, and existential matters; to Profs. Bruce Barton and Paula Sperdakos for the cross-cultural words of advice through the steps of this rite of passage; to Jean Glasgow, Deborah Loughlin, Luella Massey, Rob Moses, Marc Goodman, and Dr. Paul Stoesser for their friendly disposition and sincere willingness to serve. I am indebted to many collaborators who contributed inestimable interlocution to the work in progress in a variety of ways: Prof. Mieke Bal, Prof. Ronald M. Baecker, Siegfried Betterman, Lil Blume, Prof. Adam Max Cohen, Prof. Paul Crowther, Prof. Jane Freeman, Prof. Douglas Green, Bob Isenberger, James McKinnon, Prof. Craig Patterson, Karen Rickers, Patrick Robinson, Prof. Skip Shand, Prof. Tania Shepherd, Jan Sommerfeld, Dr. Stephanie Treloar, Prof. Roy Turner, Christian von Seydlitz, Prof. Valery Wayne, and Dr. Kim Yates. I owe special thanks to the Stratford Festival of Canada: Richard Rose, for having provided me with the opportunity to observe the rehearsals, Ellen Charendoff and Christine Schindler, for having facilitated my access to the Archives; Ruth Stevens, for having always found an affordable space for me to sleep on the lessons learned in Stratford; the cast and crew for not having objected to my presence, particularly the warm welcomes of Sean Arbuckle, Mark Christmann, Phillip Clarkson, Bona Duncan, Bruce Dow, Raquel Duffy, Jacob James, Jean Michel Le Gal, Richard Monette (in memoriam), Severn Thompson, and Scott Wentworth. I am wholeheartedly grateful to my family and friends, who will add to their qualities the grace of their understanding concerning being anonymously mentioned here due to pragmatic reasons, for now and from now on. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………... ii Dedication………..……………………………………………………………………….iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………..v Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………vi INTRODUCTION Historicism x Modernism ………………………………………………………………...1 Deconstruction…………………………………………………………………………….7 The transhistorical dimension……………………………………………………….…...12 Genre……………………………………………………………………………………..14 Anti-Semitism and carnivalization………………………………………………………19 A succinct performance history of Merchant....................................................…………29 The representation of emotions……………………………………………………..……39 Chapter outline and methodological frame……………………………………………....40 Notes……………………………………………………………………………………..48 CHAPTER ONE: Deconstruction: the Theater for a New Audience’s The Merchant of Venice…………...52 Notes……………………………………………………………………………………..92 CHAPTER TWO: Reconstruction: Shakespeare’s Globe’s 2007 The Merchant of Venice……………...….97 Notes…………………………………………………………………………………....140 CHAPTER THREE: Misconstruction: the Stratford Festival of Canada’s 2007 The Merchant of Venice…...143 Notes………………………………………………………………………………...….184 CHAPTER FOUR: Destruction: the Pascal Theatre Company’s The Merchant of Venice…………………186 Notes……………………………………………………………………………………225 CONCLUSION……………………………………………...………………………….227 Notes……………………………………………………………………………………236 Works Cited…………………………………………………………………………….237 vi Introduction Reaction, reactionary, or reactive are but interpretations of the structure of inheritance. [ . T]he being of what we are is first of all inheritance, whether we like or know it or not.1 All art – even when it marks a point of rupture – always has some relation to tradition. Tradition involves the inheritance and modification of media, techniques, styles and motifs.2 Even past meanings, that is, those born in the dialogue of past centuries, can never be stable (finalized, ended once and for all) – they will always change (be renewed) in the process of subsequent, future development of the dialogue [ . ] Nothing is absolutely dead: every meaning will have its homecoming festival.3 Historicism versus Modernism This dissertation critiques four 2007 productions of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice: Darko Tresnjak’s with the Theater for a New Audience (New York); Rebecca Gatward’s at Shakespeare’s Globe (London, U.K.), Richard Rose’s with the Stratford Festival of Canada (Stratford, Ontario), and the radical adaptation by Julia Pascal with the Pascal Theatre Company (London, U.K). I have selected these productions for two reasons. First, they all used more or less stable versions of the original playtext in 1 2 English, second, they all ostensibly sought public visibility: all productions framed the theatrical experience similarly; they deployed the same mechanisms of promotion and publicity (advertisements in newspapers and magazines, posters, pamphlets, permanent websites); they made evident use of “symbolic capital,” which Pierre Bourdieu defines as “prestige, reputation, fame, etc. [ . ] known or recognised as self-evident;”4 and they clearly used Shakespeare’s and Merchant’s cultural capital to authorize themselves. In reviewing stagings of Merchant, I had to grapple with a heated debate implicit in the question What is the criterion for a compelling production of Merchant today? This question is particularly