Posted on

Review (and more): Richard III by Independent Shakespeare Company

OK, I’m late to the party on this one.

Last night, my wife Lisa and I saw part of the final weekend (yes, Wednesday is now a part of the weekend in Griffith Park, Los Angeles) of Independent Shakespeare Company’s FREE production of Richard III. If I say it was worth the price that would sound snarky, but the truth of the matter is that in the run-up to their two-production summer season, I had donated a fairly large chunk of change, and then at the end of the show last night, dropped another $20 into their donation “bucket for ducats” for good measure.

David Melville as Richard III for Independent Shakespeare Company (photo courtesy StageAndCinema.com)

And yes, the show was that good.

With apologies to Elizabeth Barrett Browning, let me count the ways (in an abbreviated Top Five listing, as I’ve got some Macbeth-related fish to fry later in this post):

Continue reading “Review (and more): Richard III by Independent Shakespeare Company”

Posted on

Theater Review: Henry V by Kingsmen Shakespeare Company

A couple of nights back, I caught the performance of Henry V as part of the 20th anniversary season of the Kingsmen Shakespeare Festival on the campus of California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks, California.

Henry V by Kingsmen Shakespeare Company

Continue reading “Theater Review: Henry V by Kingsmen Shakespeare Company”

Posted on

Macbeth and equivocation

Remember a few days back when discussing the more witchy sources for Macbeth (this after discussing Holinshed’s contributions to the more human side of the story), and how I said there was one more text that might be considered an influence if not a source? And I said I’d discuss that later when I hit the Porter scene?

Well, today, I’m a-hittin’ it…

Continue reading “Macbeth and equivocation”

Posted on

Sources: history?

OK, folks, we all know how Shakespeare picks and chooses (a) from whom he steals, (b) how much he steals, and (c) how much he massages those stolen goods. And that’s in his fictional plays. In the histories, he’s been known to compress time, changes ages, and make wholesale changes to his sources. Macbeth, though a tragedy, is no different.

Now, having already taken a look at his borrowings from Holinshed for the human characters and Scot for the not-so-human,  let’s take a look at the “real” history, shall we?

Continue reading “Sources: history?”

Posted on

Curses! Soiled again…

OK, so before we get too far into Macbeth, er The Scottish Play, let’s address the 800-pound gorilla in the room (I know I’m mixing idioms, thank you very much): the infamous curse.

I’m not a superstitious guy. Sure, if my beloved Bruins win their first game of the season, you can bet your bottom dollar I’m wearing that same shirt for the next game. But broken mirrors? Just glass to clean up, baby. Walk under ladders? More stupid than unlucky. Cross black cats? Not a cat guy, so I don’t go out of my way to be near them to begin with. Friday the 13th? Kinda cool, since any month (save that lil’ bastard February in non-leap years) with that day will have at least a portion of five weekends.

Continue reading “Curses! Soiled again…”

Posted on

King Lear in Performance

OK, yesterday, I talked a little about the different published versions of King Lear, in particular the 1608 Quarto and 1623 Folio versions, as well as the early eighteenth century conflations by the likes of Alexander Pope and Lewis Theobald.

And if you thought those formed a tangled web, it’s nothing compared to different performed versions…

Continue reading “King Lear in Performance”

Posted on

Historical setting–muddy waters

Remember that the quarto publication of the play (1608) had the title True Chronicle History of the Life and Death of King Lear and his Three Daughters. Remember, too, that the anonymous play that seems to have had an influence (cough, source, cough) was also titled The True Chronicle History of King Leir, and his three daughters, Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella…and that the other major source, Holinshed’s Chronicles, was a history text.

History.

Continue reading “Historical setting–muddy waters”

Posted on

King Lear: sources, part one

The most widely cited sources for Shakespeare’s King Lear are Holinshed’s Chronicles and an anonymous play, King Leir.

Let’s take a look at Holinshed first…

Continue reading “King Lear: sources, part one”

Posted on

Folger: Shakespeare in Black and White

In a timely move (for us here at the Project, at least), the Folger Library’s podcast, Shakespeare Unlimited, has re-released its 19th episode (Shakespeare in Black and White: “Our Own Voices with Our Own Tongues”), a great 30-minute discussion of Shakespeare and the African-American experience.

Paul Robeson in Othello (courtesy Folger.edu)

Continue reading “Folger: Shakespeare in Black and White”

Posted on

Party in the ‘burbs!

Remember how I’ve been saying (er, writing) that Measure for Measure is perhaps a little too timeless, a little too timely for our world? (how could you, I’ve been banging that subject like a drum lately… and with the discussion of bawdy coming up–you ain’t heard nothin’ yet…) Well, Willy Shakes, that sly societal observer, wasn’t afraid to mix in a little contemporary commentary in his plays.

Continue reading “Party in the ‘burbs!”