Shakespeare's Characters Research Articles

Reading and Performing The Tempest in a Prison: Hag-seed by Margaret Atwood

This article aims to analyse Margaret Atwood's Hagseed as a rewriting of the educational project orchestrated by Prospero, and as a mirror of the process by which Elizabethan actors created and modified their performance in response to their own and their audiences' needs. Set in a prison and planned as both a rehabilitation for criminals and a vengeance, The Tempest is reenacted and adapted in a collective interpretation to suit the inmates' inner turmoil. Unlike Felix, they cannot leave the prison, but they dream of freedom. Freedom they will find by adapting Shakespeare's characters to their world of imagination and experience. Felix will allow them to find their own way of interpreting the text, which is very different from the attitude Prospero takes throughout The Tempest. In the end, the prisoners involved in adapting Caliban will write a sequel to his story, making him (and themselves) the protagonist and author/s of their own story. Undoubtedly functioning as a metatextual reading of the novel itself in relation to its hypotext, the Pirandellian scene allows us to see how a reader can become an author, and how a subordinate and inarticulate group of people can become confident and self-aware enough to reappropriate their own history. Then the Palimpsest is rewritten, bearing the memory of an educational project, but proposing a new one, more appropriate to our times, with new objectives and new tools.

Reading and Performing The Tempest in a Prison: Hag-seed by Margaret Atwood

This article aims to analyse Margaret Atwood's Hagseed as a rewriting of the educational project orchestrated by Prospero, and as a mirror of the process by which Elizabethan actors created and modified their performance in response to their own and their audiences' needs. Set in a prison and planned as both a rehabilitation for criminals and a vengeance, The Tempest is reenacted and adapted in a collective interpretation to suit the inmates' inner turmoil. Unlike Felix, they cannot leave the prison, but they dream of freedom. Freedom they will find by adapting Shakespeare's characters to their world of imagination and experience. Felix will allow them to find their own way of interpreting the text, which is very different from the attitude Prospero takes throughout The Tempest. In the end, the prisoners involved in adapting Caliban will write a sequel to his story, making him (and themselves) the protagonist and author/s of their own story. Undoubtedly functioning as a metatextual reading of the novel itself in relation to its hypotext, the Pirandellian scene allows us to see how a reader can become an author, and how a subordinate and inarticulate group of people can become confident and self-aware enough to reappropriate their own history. Then the Palimpsest is rewritten, bearing the memory of an educational project, but proposing a new one, more appropriate to our times, with new objectives and new tools.

Tragedy in Shakespeare’s Plays

Tragedy is an eminent genre in the functions of William Shakespeare, fringing p plays like “Hamlet," "Macbeth," and "Romeo and Juliet." Shakespeare's tragedies are prominent for their inspecting human nature, characters’ convolution and the rendering of tragic happenings. This retaliation will provide research-backed information, including citations and quotes, on the topic of tragedy in Shakespeare's plays. Tragedy as a Reflection of Human Nature: According to critic A.C. Bradley, Shakespeare's tragedies dig extensively into the human psyche and unmask fundamental veracity about human nature. In his book "Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth," Bradley states, "Shakespearean tragedy, as a rule, displays man in his general environment and character... the tragic blunder, however, accords to the nature of the particular, not to his fate" (Bradley, 1904). This reflects how Shakespeare's tragedies investigate the vulnerabilities and flaws of individuals, advancing to their downfall. Complexity of Characters: Shakespeare's tragic characters are complex and often possess both flawed and admirable elements. In his essay "The Tragic Hero," critic F.L. Lucas throws light “Shakespearean tragic heroes are... multidimensional, not simple. They are neither wholly positive nor wholly heinous, but persons of eminent who are destroyed by a moral flaw or an error" (Lucas, 1959). This demonstrates how Shakespeare's characters are not condensed ideals but rather convoluted beings with internal conflicts, making their tragic course all the more fascinating. Portrayal of Tragic Circumstances: Shakespeare's tragedies require circumstances that leads the way to deep agonize and loss. In her assessment of Shakespearean tragedies, critic Marjorie Garber points out, "Shakespearean tragedy moral and a social world in which they are often trapped and caught and even pressed by larger political and social forces" (Garber, 2004). This emphasizes how Shakespeare's plays often include larger societal or political issues, adding to the tragic results faced by the characters. In conclusion, Shakespeare's tragedies are well known for their deepest exploration of human nature, complex characters, and the depiction of tragic circumstances. Through diligent character development and the interplay of destiny and free will, Shakespeare designed plays that continue to resonate with audiences across centuries. Reference: • Bradley, A. C. (1904). Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited. • Lucas, F. L. (1959). The Tragic Hero. In R. S. Crane (Ed.), Critics and Criticism: Ancient and Modern (pp. 271-287). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. • Garber, M. (2004). Shakespeare After All. New York: Anchor Books. • Knight, G. W. (1961). Shakespeare and the Idea of Tragedy. London: Chatto & Windus.

Determinism and Descent: A Naturalistic Exploration of Human Tragedy in Shakespeare's 'King Lear' and Its Lasting Impact on Literary Traditions

This research paper examines the influence of naturalism on literature, focusing on its emergence in the late 19th century and its lasting impact through an analysis of William Shakespeare's 'King Lear.' Naturalism, rooted in scientific determinism, aimed to realistically portray human existence shaped by external forces. The paper explores how 'King Lear' serves as a significant naturalistic work, delving into themes of flawed decisions, betrayal, the inexorable march of time, and the interplay between individual agency and cosmic forces. Shakespeare's characters in 'King Lear' reflect the naturalistic approach to character development, exhibiting psychological depth influenced by their environment and circumstances. The play offers a deterministic vision, aligning with naturalistic principles, and explores the consequences of human choices within a larger cosmic context. The influence of Shakespeare on subsequent naturalistic writers is evident in their nuanced characters and societal explorations. Analyzing 'King Lear' through interconnected naturalistic elements—character motivations, societal structures, and the inexorable march of fate—reveals how Lear's motivations, shaped by societal expectations, lead to a tragic cascade of events. Symbolism and imagery in the play amplify naturalistic themes, such as the storm representing the chaos of human existence. The cathartic experience of tragedy in 'King Lear' is rooted in the naturalistic portrayal of life's harsh realities, prompting reflection on the broader human experience. Diverse critical interpretations, from deterministic readings to discussions on individual agency, add complexity to the naturalistic exploration, inviting readers to engage with the text from various perspectives.

Psychoanalytical perspective of shakespeare's characters in love

This paper delves into the intricate realm of Shakespearean characters in love, employing a psychoanalytical lens to unravel the depths of their emotions, desires, and conflicts. Drawing on psychoanalytic theories, particularly those of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, this paper aims to dissect the subconscious motivations and psychological intricacies of characters such as Romeo and Juliet, Orsino and Viola, and other iconic figures. Through this analysis, the paper seeks to offer a nuanced understanding of how Shakespeare masterfully crafted characters whose emotional journeys resonate with universal human experiences. In addition to exploring the psychoanalytical aspects of Shakespearean characters' love, this paper also investigates the socio-cultural influences shaping their romantic dynamics. By examining the historical context in which these plays were written and performed, it aims to illuminate the ways in which societal norms and expectations intersect with individual psychology to influence characters' behaviors and choices. Furthermore, it analyzes how Shakespeare's portrayal of love reflects broader themes of power, gender, and identity, shedding light on the complex interplay between personal desire and societal constraints in Renaissance England. Through this multidimensional approach, it endeavors to provide a comprehensive examination of Shakespearean love that resonates with contemporary audiences while honoring the timeless brilliance of the Bard's storytelling.

Shakespeare's Universality: Exploring the Timelessness and Relevance of his Works across Cultures and Societies

This research paper investigates the universality and enduring relevance of Shakespeare'sworks across cultures and societies. Through an analysis of his masterful use of language and exploration of fundamental human experiences, such as love, loss, and power, this paper argues that Shakespeare's characters and stories continue to resonate with contemporary audiences. The paper highlights the broad range of themes tackled by Shakespeare, including politics, gender, and social norms, and their relevance to the human experience. Furthermore, the paper emphasizes how Shakespeare's works provide valuable insight into the cultural and societal norms of his time, and how his exploration of complex ideas and themes through language demonstrates the power of literature.This paper highlights the importance of exploring the timelessness and relevance of Shakespeare's works across cultures and societies to connect us to each other and the larger world. The paper concludes that the universality of Shakespeare's works reflects the capacity of art to transcend time and place and the enduring power of the human imagination.

Hamlet in T.S Eliot’s Interpretation

T.S. Eliot’s critical essays have great importance in the process of creating the writer’s literary works and, in general, in establishing the characteristics of modernist writing techniques. In addition, Eliot’s theoretical works written in different years show the change in his way of thinking and make it possible to perceive his approaches differently. On the one hand, we can consider that his criticism of specific writers and individual literary works is extremely unfair and subjective. However, we must notice that the negative evaluations and opinions he deserved pushed him to propose new approaches to the discussed issues with endless interpretations. As Eliot wrote in another new essay dedicated to Shakespeare in 1927, It is better to change your way of being wrong than be the same way wrong. The 1919 essay "Hamlet and His Problem" is an example of such inappropriate criticism. In fact, the new term ‘objective corelative’ makes it more attractive than the approach itself. It should be noticed that by accusing Shakespeare of expressing subjective emotions and declaring Hamlet a failure, he doesn’t stop discussing the play and interpreting it in his literary works. In a way, the essays of the following years and his practical usage of Hamlet explain the reasons for his attitudes. We should seek these reasons in the form of expressing ‘horrible’ accepted by the Modernist writers. Along with the explanation of the play and Shakespeare’s attempt, the terms established in Eliot’s literary works should be considered. His theory doesn’t remain an impractical theory; Eliot uses it in the writing process. When we are looking for the reasons for the criticism directed at "Hamlet", the following terms must be named: ‘Objective Correlative’, ‘Poetic Meditation’, and ‘Self-dramatization of a Hero’. After many attempts, in the essay "Shakespeare and the Stoicism of Seneca," Eliot identifies Hamlet’s different level of consciousness, personality and the existence of different philosophical viewpoints. By connecting Shakespeare's characters with Senecan drama, identifying Machiavelli and Montaigne’s opinions, and considering Elizabethan drama itself, Eliot frees Hamlet from the accusation of expressing Shakespeare’s pains and comes to ‘the Theory of Impersonality’. The paper discusses "Selected Essays" written by T.S. Eliot. The essays from different years highlight various interpretations of criticism directed at the play "Hamlet". To outline the practicality of Eliot’s literary theory, the paper analyses the usage of Hamlet as a character and the purpose of allusions in the writer’s literary works. The main analysis is devoted to "A Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock". Also, the episodes of "Burbank", and "The Waste Land" are discussed. Professor T. Kobakhidze has played a major role in Eliot’s literary works research process in Georgian reality. His monograph "T.S. Eliot and the Aesthetics of High Modernism" is used to identify the purpose of Eliot’s allusions taken from the play Hamlet according to modernist writing techniques. In addition, the paper summarizes the specific subjective reasons for Shakespeare’s criticism at an earlier stage of Eliot’s career.

Whitewashing white permanence: The (dis)/(re)membering of white corporeality in early modern England

AbstractIn early modern English drama, black flesh is remarkable. In the Shakespeare canon, the visibly black flesh of the eponymous Moor of Venice in Othello and the villainous Aaron in Titus Andronicus has been the subject of scholarly analysis for centuries. Yet, in a field that has placed so much emphasis on flesh marked by color, unmarked flesh is imbued with assumptions of whiteness that make unremarkable, a privilege that renders it unthought and uncritiqued, processes that contribute to the normativity of whiteness as inextricable from subjectivity. This rhetoric of whiteness as largely unremarkable continues to influence our modern conceptualizations of what Shakespeare looks like both in our minds and on the stage. Too often, modern productions of Shakespeare engage in casting practices that elide important early modern identity distinctions in service of contemporary white supremacy. For instance, national identity—the difference between being English, Irish, Scottish, French, etc—mattered both for character and actor on the Early Modern English stage. Yet, these distinctions fade into the fringes of memory when casting today's productions, allowing directors to include and exclude bodies based on modern conceptions of racial difference and mis‐remembering of whiteness as a coherent and stable early modern identity. But whiteness was neither so stable nor so stoic in Shakespeare's day or in the works of Shakespeare as our modern theatrical culture continually mis‐remembers and re‐performs. This essay engages with the ways in which the modern theatre mis‐remembers Shakespeare in relation to whiteness to reinforce white supremacy. This essay uses contemporary theories of Afro‐Pessimism and Black Critical Theory to destabilize the mythology of white permanence that undergirds Renaissance history. I argue that the notions of the stable white corporeal whole that scholars and artists assume of the majority of Shakespeare's characters requires an anachronistic reading of whiteness that is the product of chattel slavery and a paradigm that relies on the destruction of black flesh for the unified white body to gain corporeal coherence. The essay concludes with a critique of epistemology arguing that this forgetting of the historical dismemberment of white flesh makes us mis‐remember the role of whiteness in our present.

Thinking Does Not Make It So

Thinking Does Not Make It So

Shakespeare and the Play Scripts of Private Prayer by Ceri Sullivan

Reviewed by: Shakespeare and the Play Scripts of Private Prayer by Ceri Sullivan Grace Kimball Ceri Sullivan, Shakespeare and the Play Scripts of Private Prayer (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020), xvi + 247 pp., 7 ills. Ceri Sullivan's monograph analyzes English private prayers within the early modern period by emphasizing specific qualities of prayer-related publications and how those features influenced Shakespeare's history plays. This book specifically identifies the ways Shakespeare's work is enhanced through historically relevant religious publications. Sullivan highlights Shakespeare's tendency to use self-composed prayer and private devotion in his plays over public sermons and extracts from prewritten documents, although this is not to say that Shakespeare entirely ignored the Book of Common Prayer. Sullivan's monograph is an example of how scholars of early modernity may gain new insight by incorporating more detailed studies of Protestant devotion into their works, something that Sullivan notes has been underemphasized thus far. In general terms, Sullivan's monograph investigates "the narrative and dramatic skills shown in early modern private prayers" and the ways that the literature of the period displays how "prayer is valued as a powerful agent of change as well as an expression of emotion" (2). Sullivan navigates these archival documents by emphasizing patterns that encouraged early modern readers to have conversations with God, whose perceived identity was shaped through both textual and less formal methods in the period. The work moves away from the binary that "devotion was ideally a matter of self- torment or ecstasy" outlined in previous texts and highlights "less zealous, more down-to-earth responses" that represent a more everyday relationship with prayers and praying (14). To cover this material in further detail, Sullivan thoroughly cultivates an arc of reasoning that moves from the foundational elements of advice texts and performances of prayer and into more specific characteristics regarding the various debates centered around the technicalities of prayer, language, and relationships with God. In doing so, Sullivan provides the framework for what private prayer means [End Page 288] within the early modern era and actively moves against assumptions that private prayer needed to be solitary, an aspect illustrated by the author's later analysis of plays like 2 Henry VI. This argument, reemphasized through the Shakespearean case studies after the second chapter, points toward an individualized relationship with God manifested through intentionality and focus, even if others listened to the prayer. As Sullivan also highlights, what is unique about the development of personalized devotions in the early modern period are the elements of creativity, encouraged by the importance placed on accessibility so all people could have a consistent relationship with God. Sullivan further underlines the debates between premeditated and improvised prayer and contention about repetition, prayer length, and the speaker's identity. However, despite these points of controversy, the primary goal for advice texts was to teach individuals to speak to God skillfully with sincerity, ingenuity, and forethought. As Sullivan indicates throughout the rest of the text, Shakespeare's characters showcase varying degrees of ability—or a lack of skill entirely—to cultivate a productive, conversational relationship with God fostered by these approaches to private prayer. Sullivan's analysis of model prayers emphasizes considerations of performance quality, emotion, and alternative perspectives through compassion for others. The work examines how these ideas are translated into 2 and 3 Henry VI through a dramatist's historiographic components, as shown through the analysis of Henry VI's empathetic consultations with God compared to the insincere prayers of politicians. Therefore, Sullivan's monograph highlights how private prayer in historical plays can offer in-depth commentary inside the narrative itself. Sullivan also underlines the beliefs about the power of individualized devotion by perceiving God's role in both the origins and outcomes of events. Although many sought a response from God through methods of private prayer, particularly in dire moments, it becomes apparent that all individuals do not necessarily achieve God's favor. Sullivan's focus on Richard III and Henry V reinforces this perspective, where characters attempt to manipulate God through prayer as vengeful cursing and fortification of militaristic strength. The characters exhibit self-certainty that allows them to link requests through prayer...

Ovid, Shakespeare, Shevchenko: features of autocommunication practices

The paper presents analysis of cases of indirect literature influences of Ovid and Shakespeare upon Taras Shevchenko's poetry. The author questions the view which is common in modern Ukrainian literature studies that Shevchenko's interest in Ovid's works was caused by similarity of certain facts of their biographies, and in Shakespeare's one — because of their oeuvres' humanistic dimension. Based on analysis of some relevant aspects of Ovid's and Shakespeare's works, and poems, letters and diaries by Shevchenko, the author argues that Shevchenko's keen interest in both poets' works was specified by his concern with modes of autocommunication and its display. In Shevchenko's poems, autocommunication manifest is addressed to his own poems in many cases; in Ovid's works, it manifested itself in the same way, while for Shakespeare's dramas, it appeared in numerous soliloquys delivered by characters of his. Shevchenko's fierce need for autocommunication was rooted in his psychological portrait, therefore, he was interested in Ovid and Shakespeare not because of searching for some objects for reception or imitation but because of deep feeling of emotional affinity with Ovid's and Shakespeare's characters.

Review

Review

She-Wolf

Reviewed by: She-Wolf Charlene V. Smith She-WolfPresented by Amphibian Stage Productions at Amphibian Stage, Fort Worth, TX. 10 16- 11 10, 2019. Adapted by Stephan Wolfert and Dawn Stern. Directed by Stephan Wolfert. Set by Clare Floyd DeVries. Costumes by Kathleen Culebro. Lighting by Adam Chamberlin. Sound by David Lanza. Props by Amber Jones. With James Edward Becton (Suffolk/Duchess of Gloucester/Buckingham/Prince Edward/Westmoreland), Drew Ledbetter (Henry VI/Warwick), Dawn Stern (Margaret of Anjou), and Stephan Wolfert (Rene of Anjou/Humphrey Duke of Gloucester/Duke of York/Whitmore/Edward IV/Louis IX). Stephan Wolfert, founder of De-Cruit, has spent the last seven years healing the trauma of veterans through Shakespeare. As he developed this program, he also created a stunning one-man show, Cry Havoc(reviewed in SB37.3), which tells of his experience as a veteran, his introduction to Shakespeare, and how the two led him to create De-Cruit. By interspersing Shakespeare's text with his own lived story, Wolfert crafted an emotionally powerful piece that brings new understanding to Shakespeare's soldiers. Wolfert returned to playwriting recently, teaming up with actress Dawn Stern to adapt Shakespeare's Henry VIand Richard IIIinto a play focused on Margaret of Anjou, who was, as Wolfert pointed out in his director's notes, a military veteran. No other Margaret adaptation I'm aware of has specifically set out to explore Margaret's status as a veteran and, having seen Cry Havoc, I hoped that She-Wolfwould similarly use personal narrative to illuminate Shakespeare's characters. At this point in the play's development (a version of the script was workshopped prior to the Amphibian Stage production with a larger cast; Stern and Wolfert have since begun performing a two-actor version), however, the script does not put a personal spin on the story, favoring instead a mostly conservative adaptation. Following linearly the plot of Shakespeare's four plays, She-Wolfopened with Margaret's first appearance meeting Suffolk in 1 Henry VIand ended with Margaret's final appearance in Richard IIIwhere she slips her weary head from her yoke and "leave[s] the burden of it all on thee" (4.4.113). [End Page 295] She-Wolfwas performed with a cast of four; Dawn Stern played Margaret and three male actors portrayed all other roles. At times, the piece fell into the same traps other Margaret adaptations have found: take a story with too many characters, perform it with too few actors, and Margaret can get lost within her own play. This adaptation successfully avoided the risk of Richard III taking over the latter part of the play by boldly removing him and passing some of his lines and actions to Edward IV. But even so, Wolfert felt too centered at times, as he portrayed all three of Margaret's primary adversaries: Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, Richard Duke of York, and Edward IV. Reducing a story that occurs over four plays to two hours or so is always the primary challenge faced by Margaret adaptations. Often characters important to the emotional stakes necessarily get very little stage time or don't appear at all. For instance, in She-Wolf, Margaret captured York, mocked him about his sons, and revealed the murder of Rutland, before we'd even met Edward, George, Richard, or Rutland. The tone was frequently comic. Wolfert played Walter Whitmore with a pirate voice and King Louis IX with a clownish French accent. James Edward Becton slimed about as Suffolk and as Dame Eleanor gave more of a drag performance than a three-dimensional woman. When this tonal element succeeded, it gave the impression of a capable woman surrounded by silly men who, inexplicably, are all given more power than she is. When it didn't work, interactions became superficial; without further development of the relationships between Margaret and the men in her life, it was difficult to feel the depth of her loss. Suffolk and Margaret's relationship was not one of passion, but of mutual opportunity. Suffolk creepily pursued Margaret when they met and she pushed away his advances. Their first kiss was clearly...

Style, Computers, and Early Modern Drama: Beyond Authorship. Hugh Craig and Brett Greatley-Hirsch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Pp. vii+283.

<i>Style, Computers, and Early Modern Drama: Beyond Authorship</i>. Hugh Craig and Brett Greatley-Hirsch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Pp. vii+283.

Henry IV Part One, and: Henry IV Part Two, and: The Merry Wives of Windsor

Reviewed by: Henry IV Part One, and: Henry IV Part Two, and: The Merry Wives of Windsor Michael W. Shurgot Henry IV Part OnePresented by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in the Thomas Theatre, Ashland, Oregon. 02 22- 10 28, 2017. Directed by Lileana Blain-Cruz. Set by Adam Rigg. Costumes by Dede M. Ayite. Lighting by Yi Zhao. Composer and sound design by Palmer Hefferan. Fights by Christopher DuVal. With Jeffrey King ( King Henry IV), Daniel José Molina (Prince Hal), G. Valmont Thomas/ Tyrone Wilson (Falstaff), Tyrone Wilson/ Buzz Frazer (Northumberland, Sheriff), Michael Gabriel Goodfriend (Poins, Mortimer, Douglas), Robert Vincent Frank (Westmorland, Bardolph), Jeremy Gallardo ( Prince John, Francis), Lauren Modica (Peto, Glendower), Nemuna Ceesay (Lady Percy, Vernon), Michele Mais (Mistress Quickly), Alejandra Escalante (Hotspur), Kimberly Scott (Worcester), Moses Villarama (Sir Walter Blunt, Gadshill), Rachel Kostrna (Lady Mortimer). Henry IV Part TwoPresented by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in the Thomas Theatre, Ashland, Oregon. 07 4- 10 29, 2017. Directed by Carl Cofield. Set by Adam Rigg. Costumes by Dede M. Ayite. Lighting by Alan C. Edwards. Composer and sound design by Elisheba Ittoop. Fights by U. Jonathan Toppo. With Jeffrey King (King Henry IV, Fang, Bullcalf), Daniel José Molina (Prince Hal, King Henry V), G. Valmont Thomas/ Tyrone Wilson (Falstaff), Kimberly Scott (Archbishop York, Pistol, Mouldy), Tyrone Wilson/ Ted Lange (Northumberland, Snare, Warwick), Michael Gabriel Goodfriend (Poins, Hastings, Collevile, Travers), Robert Vincent Frank (Westmorland, Bardolph), Jeremy Gallardo (Prince John, Francis, Morton, Wart), Lauren Modica (Peto, Justice Silence, Mowbray), Alejandra Escalante (Rumor, Doll Tearsheet, Davy, Clarence), Richard Elmore (Justice Shallow, Lord Bardolph, Drawer), Nemuna Ceesay (Lady Percy, Gower, Gloucester, Shadow), Robin Goodrin Nordli (Lady Northumberland, Lord Chief Justice, Feeble, Harcourt), Michele Mais (Mistress Quickly, Porter), Yi Shostrom (Page to Falstaff). The Merry Wives of WindsorPresented by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in the Allen Elizabethan Theatre, Ashland, Oregon. 06 6- 10 13, 2017. Directed by Dawn Monique Williams. Set by Regina Garcia. Costumes by Ulises Alcala. Lighting by Jennifer Schriever. Composer and sound design by Paul James Prendergast. Sign Coach/ASL Translator Monique Holt. Fights by U. Jonathan Toppo. With KT Vogt (Falstaff), Vilma Silva (Mistress Page), Paul Juhn (Master Page), Jamie Ann Romero (Anne Page), Amy Newman (Mistress Ford), Rex Young (Master Ford), Catherine Castellanos (Mistress Quickly), Sara Bruner (Sir Hugh Evans), Jeremy Peter Johnson (Doctor Caius), Tony DeBruno (Justice Shallow), Cristofer Jean (Slender), Will Dao (Peter Simple), William DeMeritt (Fenton), U. Jonathan Toppo (Bardolph), Al Espinosa (Pistol), Christopher Salazar (Nym), Hyunmin Rhee (John Rugby), Howie Seago (Host of the Garter), Tatiana Lofton (William Page, Robin), and others. [End Page 358] In 2017 the Oregon Shakespeare Festival expanded its laudable commitment to innovative multicultural, multiracial, and gender-busting stagings of Shakespeare's plays. The season featured an African-American Falstaff, Latino Hal, and several female actors in male roles in the Henry IVplays, including the Lord Chief Justice, Feeble, Justice Silence, Worcester, Archbishop York, and most notably a female Hotspur; a female Falstaff and the deaf actor Howie Seago in Merry Wives; intriguing doubling that ignored traditional gender roles; and generous mixing of ethnicities among the oh-so-English Windsorites. The season was also replete with astonishing directors' concepts that, especially in the Henryplays, roiled traditionalists' expectations about the plays while forging new insights into Shakespeare's characters. [End Page 359] Although the directors for the two Henryplays were different, Adam Rigg designed the set for both plays. Two distinct features appeared in both. To the left of where I sat, high above the same elaborate red throne from last season's production of Richard II, hung a huge triptych such as one might see in a medieval cathedral. The middle panel was a painting of King Henry IV, crowned, robed, haloed, carrying a scepter, and gazing out over a troubled kingdom divided by court and tavern. The panel to Henry's left glowed in splendid light, but the one to his right was torn, suggesting visually perhaps his ragged country and tenuous hold on power. By Part Two, the halo around Henry's head was larger and bedecked with jewels, and the tear in the panel to the King's right was repaired and now...

“This is you”: Encountering Shakespeare with Tim Crouch

This essay considers Tim Crouch's Shakespeare, a suite of monologue plays based on Tempest (I, Caliban, 2003), A Midsummer Night's Dream (I, Peaseblossom, 2004), Macbeth (I, Banquo, 2005), Twelfth Night (I, Malvolio, 2010) and Julius Caesar (I, Cinna (the poet), 2012). While originally designed for a young audience, Crouch's adaptations have been performed in a variety of theatrical contexts that have added new and probably unforeseen dimensions to their negotiations with Shakespeare. In my analysis I turn to the notion of mobility as a key analytical tool to elucidate the method, aims, as well as the broader cultural meaning of Tim Crouch's reworkings. In his hands, Shakespeare is mobilized as a powerful resource to activate spectators and emphasize their co-authorship in the process of theatre. Through a combination of textual strategies and performance methods, the monologues construct the identities of Shakespeare's characters as multiple and mutable and, in parallel, cast their addressees in fluid, often contradictory roles. My main line of argument is that the plays' propensity of motion is rooted in their emphasis on Shakespeare as a highly mobile cultural signifier which seems confirmed by the monologues' journeys outside the UK. The further adaptational practices triggered by these encounters with foreign audiences are testament to the flexibility of Crouch's dramaturgy of process and its aptitude to accommodate new discursive identities and adjust to each new context of reception.

“Mark the music”: Shakespearean female characters in contemporary rock music

Through an investigation grounded on the theoretical and methodological guidelines provided by women's studies and reader response theories, this contribution aims to consider the ways in which Shakespeare's female characters are used and reshaped in the lyrics of rock songs written in English by male singer-songwriters, between the 1960s and the 1990s. Given the amplitude of the topic and the ungraspable nature of such fields as popular culture and pop-Shakespeare, the author does not (and cannot) aim to be exhaustive, but rather addresses the issue by selecting four characters, Juliet, Ophelia, Cordelia, and Lady Macbeth, whose musical alter egos will be analysed by the close reading of a selection of songs written and sung by rock singer-songwriters chosen for their representativeness and their popularity. The analysis will try and answer the following questions: which aspects of the dramatic characters are highlighted or, on the contrary, omitted in the songs? What is the function of this musical use of Shakespeare's work? Through their musical identity, do these female characters reinforce or undermine the socio-cultural and psychological oppression of women characteristic of a patriarchal culture? What can the role of these musical offshoots play in the study of Shakespeare's reception?

A Narrative Case Study ofHamletand the Cultural Construction of Western Individualism, Diagnosis, and Madness

There is no story in Western literature that epitomizes the dominant Western discourse of individualism as clearly, and its effects as boldly, as Shakespeare's Hamlet. “This above all: to thine own self be true” (I.iii.78) is the cornerstone of Western individualism and the discourse of the individual over the relational. Though Hamlet was written over 500 years ago, the theme of individualism parallels strongly with the present Western construction of madness in mental health. In this article, a narrative case study of Hamlet is presented as a creative vehicle to explain narrative therapy and to challenge the individualized notion of madness by decentering it, unpacking it, and making it visible (Derrida, 1997; White, 1991). It is proposed in Hamlet that self-subjugation related to individualizing discourse, coupled with corresponding discourses concerning duty, honor, and gender, influence Shakespeare's characters’ abilities to communicate and to polyvocally negotiate the meaning of events in their live...

Shakespeare and the Performance of Girlhood by Deanne Williams

Deanne Williams. Shakespeare and Performance of Girlhood. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 296 pp. $105. In her new book Deanne Williams helps to amend traditional belief that medieval and early modern English families placed little value on girls. Indeed, while girls were certainly victimized within early modern patriarchal social structures, many enjoyed affectionate relationships with their kin. Girls were also productive, necessary members of domestic economies and, at times, at least minimally educated. More specifically, Williams corrects what seems to be an unbelievable omission: a total lack of lengthy academic studies on in William Shakespeare's plays. Although billed as a book on Shakespeare, half of Williams's work here draws connections to other early modern professional playwrights and, importantly, girls who wrote pieces for performance, placing Shakespeare's work within a broader early modern conversation. Although she insists on unique place of girls in early modern theatre culture, Williams provocatively suggests expanding the figure of and subject of girlhood in order to make both relevant beyond limits of gender as well as age, accessible to boys and men, all while preserving a sense of as a special identity for women, an identity that need not be considered temporary and that need not be forsaken as part of a healthy development into adulthood (14). Even as Williams marks out a space for as special and worthy of consideration, she productively suggests that flexible connotations of term allow for a range of readings in dramatic work. Importantly, Williams draws attention to sixteenth century as a period in which girl began to refer solely to a female child. During medieval period, girl could be used to describe a child of either sex. The term could imply expected qualities of sweetness and innocence in an early modern female child, but it also carried connotations of eroticization and sex work, a point confirmed by contemporary dictionaries and their inclusion of terms such as harlot and trull as synonyms for girl (5). Shakespeare's plays appeared at a moment gendered identity attached to girls was in flux, especially given early modern practice of having boy actors play girls' and women's roles. Working with plasticity in term girl encourages a more complicated understanding of Shakespeare's characters, however. Take Joan of Arc's position in Henry VI, Part 1, for example: Joan la Pucelle (pucelle another term that simultaneously carries connotations of innocence and experience) is given moniker girl at two points in play. One of references to character as a girl can be found as York and Warwick debate merits of Joan's pregnancy claim, a conversation that supports Williams's sense of term as both virginal and sexualized for early modern mind (24). A consideration of this sexual duality and gendered uncertainty inherent in word girl allows for a broader, more engaging reading of often androgynous Joan's relationship to men and to larger structures of authority. Shakespeare includes term approximately sixty-eight times across his various works, usually in moments when a character's relationship to authority is complicated or troubled, according to Williams, who sees playwright's use of girl shift within larger changes in his social milieu (3, 4). In her initial discussion of Shakespearean texts, Williams attaches keywords to specific characters, keywords also selected from each respective play. Silvia is perverse in The Two Gentlemen of Verona, while The Taming of Shrews Kate is froward, and Romeo and Juliet's heroine is wayward (43). All three terms are associated with religious disruption and upheaval, a point that Williams opens up in somewhat limited ways. …

Reading Akhmatova: on the Pathway to Finding Self

Based on P. Ricoeur's theory of reading, the article provides a literary solution to the problem of self-identification, leading to the issue of a poet's narrative It is proved by the analysis of Reading Hamlet, Anna Akhmatova's early poem. Analysis of Akhmatova's refiguration and study of this poetic configuration have showed the poet's desire to achieve selfhood by identifying the life-world with Shakespeare's texts. The article presents the comparison of cultural meanings, characteristic to Shakespeare's characters (Ophelia and Hamlet) from the point of view of Russian and European readers, Anna Akhmatova's predecessors and contemporaries. Special attention is paid to possible identification of Akhmatova with Elizabeth Siddal, one of the characters of the European cultural field, and to her fictional image of herself as Shakespeare's Ophelia. Interpolating certain meanings of the read and interpreted cultural texts on the predicates of her own life situation of 1903- 1912, Akhmatova, first of all, clarifies her relationships with Nikolai Gumilev and solves the problem of preserving her own identity.