Podcast: Play in new window | Download
This week’s podcast concludes our two-month discussion of Cymbeline. We’re going to start off with a directorial concept for the play, and end with a overview-y conclusion.
Continue reading “Podcast 156: Cymbeline — a concept, cast (not really), and conclusion”
So here’s the numerical breakdown…
Continue reading “Cymbeline: by the numbers”
Here are some thoughts, questions, and ideas that I didn’t really get around to addressing in our time here with Cymbeline:
Continue reading “Some thoughts and unanswered questions on Cymbeline”
The play may be called Cymbeline, but he’s not the protagonist. I suppose you might make an argument for Posthumus, but I think most would say the play revolves around our gal Innogen.
People love her.
Continue reading “Innogen. Again”
Using Professor Rodes’ midpoint theory, let’s take a look at Cymbeline.
There are 3288 lines in in the play, which means the midpoint is at line 1644, or at Act Three, Scene Four, line 185. According to Dr. Rodes’ theory, you could find at this midpoint–or within twenty lines either way–a speech that perfectly sums up a major theme of the play (the 20-line leeway was to help remove the differences in prose line lengths between individual editions).
Continue reading “Midpoint: dramatic, not thematic?”
So, sometimes there are scenes that make you wonder just how you stage something. You know, like Jupiter in Cymbeline. That’s a big one, an obvious one.
How about something more subtle?
Continue reading “How?”
With every play, toward the end of the discussion cycle, I like to address a subject that rocks my world, but probably bores the socks off you. Well, since it’s my blog, I get to do what I want. And I want to talk about stage directions hidden in plain sight within the dialog. While these later plays do tend to have more stage directions than before (like the bizarre war correspondency that opens Act Five, Scene Two; or the truly truly bizarre directions around the dream of Posthumus Leonatus), there are still some hidden nuggets. And what are Cymbeline’s nuggets? (that sounded like it belonged to our discussion of bawdy)
Well, let’s see…
Continue reading “Cymbeline: directing the stage”
A long time ago (OK, it was only three weeks)…I wrote about Cymbeline and the question of casting. As in, “How do you cut the casting requirements from the 40 in the play, to something more manageable?” It was more rhetorical than anything, going off on tangents that took us to experimental 6-actor casts for both Shakespeare’s Globe and Fiasco Theater.
Here’s a different, but related question.
Continue reading “Cymbeline production questions, part two”
Over the last week or so, I’ve been discussing some of the major speeches from Cymbeline. I started off with Act Two’s Iachimo-in-the-Box speech. Last weekend, I touched upon Posthumus’ full-scene, single-speech rant against women. Today, let’s move from the men to the main woman of the piece: Innogen.
Continue reading “Cymbeline speech study: the wake-up call”