It all started with a Blog entry I posted here last week called Shakespeare in Other Words. Suddenly, Howard Sherman @HESherman and Peter Marks @petermarksdrama took that post to a new direction and began a heated session on Twitter about the use of modern translations in Shakespeare productions. Before I knew it, Sherman organized a Tweet Convocation:“Soul of Shakespeare: Plot vs Language” #pmdhes for today at 2:30 with w/guest tweep Michael Kahn from DC’s Shakespeare Theater.
The confab lasted well over an hour and lots of folks joined in. Here are just a random few of the Tweets:
“Soul of Shakespeare” twitter convo arises from unplanned debate over whether it’s still Shakespeare when language is altered.
Above all, let’s have fun. After all, how many opportunities r there for live national multi-participant discussions of Shakespeare?
Doing our finger stretches, getting ready for today’s Twitter conversation at 2:30.
@mikelomo was writing abt Shax in classrooms, not on stage, but it’s led to fascinating convo.
I am not bothered by some language changes. Murder, instead of murther, for example.
You don’t call Shakes ‘Ovid & Holinshead altered’ so why would you call very-much altered Shakes ‘Shakes’
But, if you change Mamet’s words is it still Mamet? No one argues he’s a poet not a playwright.
The depth of character in Shakes comes from what they SAY about what they feel & do
Aren’t we talking ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ of Shakespeare? Yes, language was distinct, but so was his vision, scope, style collusion etc
Have all the conceptual productions and severe cutting of text made it too ok to change language?
Greatest approach to teaching #Shakespeare at any age and especially in high school – GET THEM ON THEIR FEET AS THEY READ!!
But I don’t think ppl go to Shakespeare to see the same production that they had seen at another time. At least I hope not.
In schools, are students given free rein to imagine different settings, concepts? Would that help them “relate” better?
That’s what we do in schools. They produce their own scenes in any style they want, using the words.
“Where would you put this scene?” “What situation does this sound like to you?” imagination/relatability is key
Yes, good teachers allow that sort of higher-level thinking.
When productions modernize a play, etc., but keep the language – does the audience relate more?
My parents has Lambs’ TALES FROM SHAKESPEARE,. Suggested I always read before going to see when I was young.
When I was 5, my Russian immigrant mother read me the real Shakes. I fell in love w/it like you did with the Lambs.
I resisted the Lambs’ summaries completely. Stodgy, dull and I wanted to discover the stories for myself.
In my Shakespeare class in college I felt like we were discouraged from taking risks. Stick with the safe, they said.
I had BBC Shakespeare: Animated Tales after finding R&J at 8yo. Devotee ever since. All orig. lang.
In high school…only a handful of the plays are in most curriculums? Does that limit appeal?
I just don’t think Shakespeare is FOR everyone. And I think there are (a few) langauge barriers that cannot be overcome.
Any and all textual changes are GAME ON. As long as there’s transparency.
Make a good production & Shakespeare automatically is accessible. Concept should illuminate, not be used to “dumb down.”
many prods say they put lang center. alas, few really do
I knew director who watched all rehearsals from balcony w/ eyes closed to “listen to language. but it’s not a radio play
I love some plays, dislike others, avoid yet others entirely. But I don’t need to rewrite them.
I think it’s outrageous when Shakespeare is watered down. It’s outrageous when any author is paraphrased.
Why not go back to all male actors if we want to be extra faithful? (said w/ a wink)
Soliloquies are subtext made verbal.
I really have no problem with non-English additions. It’s the watered-down English I deplore.
Yay for us geeks!
Good god, was that an hour? Thanks @HESherman @petermarksdrama @ShakespeareinDC for the lovely confab!
You can go to Twitter and search #pmdhes to see the rest. But the discussion raised lots of questions. Feel free to answer some of them in the comments section below.