Week Nine - Week Twelve
Week Nine
29th September, 2005
'I see Tom Wills as an Australian Hamlet, a hopelessly divided young man who found himself caught between two cultures at a time when no-one acknowledged such a position could exist, and a person who had no language for his fatal dilemma other than his actions'. [29]
In today’s workshop, the focus was set for the rehearsal and the improvement of the Shakespearean parody. One major piece of assistance came from Jenny, who suggested that I present Mud similar to the style of the Offal in a previous Children’s Theatre production. This character was essentially a living sausage, however the actor with the role developed it remarkably well. Mud, in the parody, could simply be an irrelevant character, however he needs to be presented with as much conviction as all the other characters. This realisation has changed my whole approach to creating my roles.
I questioned my approach a number of weeks ago, namely was my character a good or bad actor? My response to this would suggest my character is a competent, strong actor who is just having a visibly ‘bad night’ because of their multiple roles. My aim is to present three strong characters, each individualised and identifiable through movement and speech, as ‘a mere change of name or costume and a bit of false beard creates a different person’ (Charney, 1971:37). I even attempted to give myself a fourth role by volunteering to be the actor hoisted up in the dream scene.
For each character I have developed distinguishable walks, mannerisms and vocal characteristics that I feel best suit my various roles. For Mud, my movement will be very low to the ground, literally, like a ball of mud. My ‘bouncing’ walk will be accompanied by a dribbling, slurping voice that sounds… muddy… I guess!?! Grot, the elderly loon, will walk bent over with a kind of duck’s waddle to signify age and hopefully highlight his lack of mental ability. I aim to present his voice crackly and high, once again as an attempt to indicate age and intelligence. For the triangle player, it is only his movement that I need to focus on. His movements will be quick but significant with his entry presented as a dignified musician and his exit presented as shameful (due to the triangle stuck to his hand). A smart, ‘tiptoeing’ entrance will be contrasted with a quick head hung low, ‘flat foot’ exit. It is important that all of my characters are individually defined, yet also obviously from the same actor, myself.
I feel that the activity of describing, theorising and brainstorming ideas is a vital and useful way of developing a character. As visible in this journal, and all my previous journals, sketches assist me in visualising and developing my characterisations. Such a whole class activity would be brilliant to introduce into a class environment, especially the brainstorming and dissecting of a Shakespearean character. I believe all aspects of performing a character must be investigated, and such a class discussion could achieve a number of useful and vital approaches.
Class discussions on the major characteristics of a role could help all students to reflect on their approaches to a character. For instance, if the class worked though the character of Antony in Antony and Cleopatra, a class discussion and brainstorm could highlight a variety of approaches to present the character. Ideas of distinguishable movements, vocalisations, gestures, costumes and basic delivery could inspire other students to improve the presentation of their characters. ‘Costumes are, in fact, a kind of personal property that helps to define character, or at least to make certain points about character in an immediate, external way’ (Charney, 1971:24). Even physical sketching could assist students in visualising their characters on paper. With this in mind, this week’s lesson plan is focused around such an approach.
Constructing a character, I hope, will encourage students to creatively think about how they construct their role. Through class discussions, I hope to encourage the written development of characterisation ideas, descriptive sketches and even popular culture celebrity/identity comparisons that students find most compatible with their characters. The important opportunity, from such an activity, could allow the students an arena for understanding the process for creating a layered character as well as suggesting ideas for their own approach. Developing and introducing such skills is important in any classroom situation.
Study Week
6th October, 2005
'Danni and Brian rehearse for the jungle version of "Shakespeare in the Park" for an appreciative audience'. [30]
As I was unable to attend this week’s rehearsals, I still felt it was important to outline my last steps in completing this unit. To begin with, I feel it is vital to constantly refer back to my unit objectives. My purpose is to obviously justify, in my mind, how strongly and competently I have met all aspects of the unit and how I aim to proceed in the final weeks. In addition, however, a major reason for this semester involves the development of my skills in teaching my biggest fear in drama… Shakespeare. I feel fairly confident in my research and reflection at this point, and I believe I am on track to compile a useful selection of lesson plans and strategies for attacking the other fear… the student!
 | Investigate suggested reasons for the division (or the myth) between Shakespeare and popular culture. (Using the lecture, tutorial and researched information, I will explore, investigate and theorise suggested reasons for the division between popular culture and Shakespeare ideology). Still my most underdeveloped area, as my ideas are based mainly on my personal experiences and observations as apposed to researched data. Even though the lecture, tutorial and workshop observations are significant aspects, I still feel I can find more information. |
|
| Develop approaches for introducing Shakespearean text and performance into secondary classrooms. (I will suggest, draft and construct possible lesson plans, approaches, ideas and pedagogies for deployment in a future classroom situation). Once again, well on track. Even though the performative side may still be lacking in quantities of lesson plans, I feel I cover such aspects in my suggested interactions with the classroom environment. I feel The Shakespearean Ladder to be a highly significant inclusion for a successful pedagogical approach, although all of my ideas still need more thought. |
|
| Develop these approaches into performing, presenting (and eventually) teaching Shakespeare. (I will offer both a written critique of my investigations and my own practical/performative interpretation). My observations have allowed me to investigate approaches to my own characterisations as well as theorise, verbalise and compose ideas on paper. My consistent ‘anal’ qualities have allowed me, once again, to leave no stone (or idea) untouched. |
In addition, I just received a great book in the mail this week. Although Coined by Shakespeare (McQuain & Malless, 1998) will be mainly used in my Culture and Everyday Life project, it provides another great example of a New Historicist perspective. It is a significant book that details the influence that Shakespeare has had on the English language and, in line with my project, everyday speech. How can Shakespeare’s language still be so ‘foreign’ yet it appears in everyday language? Perhaps this could be a good discussion topic in a classroom situation?
Week Ten
13th October, 2005
'Well there's a chance of anything statistically speaking. If you gave typewriters to a tree full of monkeys, they'd eventually produce the works of William Shakespeare'. [31]
In assessing, and researching, a possible reason for the ‘gap’ between popular culture and Shakespeare, the answer may lie with ‘man’. I found a reading suggesting ‘that ‘Shakespeare’s significant life’ transcends the world of ‘specific personal experience’, compelling us to think of him as ‘the abstract of what makes men men’ (Drakakis (ed), 1985:3). The presented ‘everyday man’ is abundant within his plays, but what of women? The implied heterosexual and homogeneous views of Elizabethan England, fundamentally, continued to suppress the views of women. Even the female parts would be ‘played by a boy whose transvestism… emblematically embodied the sexual contradictions manifest both in the play and Elizabethan culture’ (Hopkins, 2005:86). The women presented in most plays were ‘the contrast between reserve and seduction… consuming men as if they were alien beings’ (Drakakis (ed), 1985:103).
It is then implied that ‘masculinity does, femininity is’ (Drakakis (ed), 1985:17). It appears that Elizabethan ideology presents a view not solely dividing gender, but communicates a ‘clear theoretical sense of how power functions’ (Drakakis (ed), 1985:15). This is reiterated through the power of ‘men’ within Elizabethan society, with the notable exception of the Queen (a woman in a ‘man’s’ role). The imagery presented creates a series of oppositions for the audience to identify and relate towards. ‘Shakespeare’s public play-text embody a culture specific dialectic between personal and public images of gender and power; both are characteristically Elizabethan cultural forms’ (Hopkins, 2005:75). Paradoxically, it appears that Shakespeare could satisfy a heterogeneous audience; seemingly addressing all members of the audience. Perhaps that is why, today, he is the major individual still discussed from the Elizabethan era.
To discuss Shakespeare as an idol or ideology is one thing, however, it is often theorised that Shakespeare ‘pirated text’ (Rygiel, 1992:47). It appears that the Bard (not to use the word stole… but…) stole… structures, phrases and characters from many other references. This includes the plagiarism (and referencing) of historical transcripts, literature from his time and even the Bible (see O’Connor, 1978:35-6). Does this make him less of an idol? Well, no… because Shakespeare took these other works and made them his own, presenting them in his own unique writing style and approach to characters and story. Another reason for his longevity was possibly his ability to not choose a side, but seem to truly display both sides of an argument; as just mentioned, he addressed the heterogeneous audience.
For this week’s lesson plan, I have been intrigued by Shakespeare’s ability to view both sides, how would that go as a debate… or even a ‘verbal’ boxing match? This activity (Character Debate) looks at two aspects of performance, namely the presentation of a character and their dialogue. In a debate (or even a verbal ‘boxing’ match), students would be expected to argue for or against either an important issue of a play or an issue of the time. Such an activity could also ask the student to defend an important issue of today’s world, like how would your character feel if…? In this case, a student could take on the role of Malvolio and argue that all the cinemas and theatres should be closed down because they focus on ‘smut’. I believe this lesson plan is quite relevant, as it would allow the student to perform in character, but also research and defend important current issues within their society as well as the play’s.
At this point in time, I thought it might be important to look at some of the possible New Historicist moments I have been collecting from the TV Week over the semester. Since the previously mentioned, ‘What’s in a name?’, I have been keeping an eye out for any possible examples popping-up. Phrases like ‘Much ado about muffin’,[32] ‘Up in arms’[33] and ‘Green-eyed’[34] envy are all examples of phrases penned by the Bard. I even thought that the directly worded quote ‘Unrequited love’ was also Shakespeare’s from Romeo and Juliet, however it appears not. After years of hearing Romeo and Juliet’s relationship described as ‘unrequited love’, I honestly assumed that it appeared in the play (maybe under some type of hyphen). Whatever the case, these examples have been shown to demonstrate Shakespeare’s ability to remain current after all of these years. ‘Today the words of Shakespeare, coinages or not, have become fair game for advertisers and headline writers who thrive on Shakespearean puns’ (McQuain & Malless, 1998:x).
Week Eleven
20 October, 2005
'His [Daniel Craig] training left him with an aversion to Shakespeare and costume drama: "I don't want to be dressing up in costumes and pansying around. When I left drama school the only jobs were for boys in floppy fringes who went to Eton. I could fit in because I do a slightly posh accent. But I realised actually I can't really be posh'. [35]
My sinister and sneaky secret was revealed today, allowing me to finally divulge that yes… my wife and I are expecting a little baby in about April/May of next year. This little secret has been hard to keep for over two months, however it is now out. I know this has nothing at all to with Shakespeare, university or anything else for that matter… I just wanted to write it down so my child can read this when he/she is older. I could make some tenuous connection to the Shakespeare unit… or just say movement and direction are vital to a performance.
A character’s movement can connote how they feel, even when a word is not spoken. Ilona has spent a lot of time, for instance, placing each character in an appropriate stance that connotes either their supremacy, strength, fear and even admiration for their opposing characters. Where the dialogue of Shakespeare may sometimes (or all the time) seem quite confusing and ambiguous, the firm movements can clearly connote a character’s feelings and thoughts. Perhaps, in the classroom, a similar approach could be of use?
As already established, visual aids such as DVD’s and videos are a great introduction for students to understand Shakespeare. Even then, the dialogue can be confronting and/or confusing for the students to take in. Perhaps a simple solution is to view a scene without sound and ‘dissect’ it. ‘The text imposes restraints, and it is still possible to criticize an interpretation for failing to take account of what the words and the action plainly tell us’ (Charney, 1971:viii). Through just the movement and displayed emotions, students should be able to establish a simple understanding of what is happening. Through a second viewing of the scene with sound, students could add to their established concepts and characters. This, I believe would offer a class a more efficient way of analysing a text, as the verbal dialogue of characters can sometimes get in the way. ‘I can’t understand what their saying’ can be the first sign of losing their attention.
With this in mind, this week’s lesson plan focuses on acting without words; in other words (get it… that’s a pun) … See the emotion! This activity asks students to choose a piece of dialogue from a Shakespearean play; and rather than reading it, they perform it without sound. The focus is upon their expression of feelings and emotions, and therefore students will not be flabbergasted by the complexities of lines required for learning the scene. I think this is a great activity as it allows the student to investigate and demonstrate the knowledge of the stage space, and especially useful for developing their non-verbal communication.
Besides the introductory quotation that appeared in this Monday’s Australian, I discovered another New Historicist moment for this week’s entry. In today’s Western Australian, an article titled ‘Shakespeare could be seditious’, reported on the possible effect of the proposed anti-terror laws. Just like the puritans closing down Elizabethan theatres, Police could have the power to close non-abiding productions; thus altering the playwright’s ‘freedom of expression’.[36] Such an article would be great to discuss and compare similar issues that happened in and around Shakespeare’s time.
Week Twelve
27 October, 2005
'Sky and Dylan are Ramsey Street's Romeo and Juliet ' and they've had their share of dramas to prove it. But will their love also end in tragedy in the plane crash?' [37]
The theme for this week’s journal entry is…adaptations. I believe, through adaptations, Shakespeare has truly remained culturally relevant in today’s society. I make this fairly blatant statement due to two, rather significant, New Historicist moments from my television viewing this week. On the weekend, I watched a documentary about Bill Shakespeare’s Italian Job. The production itself used the structure of the 1960’s film The Italian Job (Dir: Peter Collinson, 1969), while relying on the dialogue from Shakespeare. As the documentary points out how the production ‘hijacks the complete works of William Shakespeare into a modern plot. 5 actors will play 10 characters quoting from 38 Shakespeare plays’. This production also includes three ‘thespian’ minis on stage the whole time. ‘Bogdanov [the creator and director] is constantly inventive with both the visual images and the juxtaposition of Shakespearean plot and language’.[38]
Through this entire documentary, examples of Shakespeare’s influence were highlighted during the 2003 Edinburgh Fringe Festival. During this festival, over 32 associated Shakespearean productions were mentioned, including… Will Shakespeare’s Italian Job, The Reduced Shakespeare Company, one Henry the Fifth, one Titus Andronicus, two Much Ado About Nothings, three Hamlets, four MacBeths, one Othello, one Tragedy of Othella: The hip hop diva of Venice Beach, one Desdemona – A play about a handkerchief and one Rameo and Eweliet where ‘two sheep find love denied in a world of Hate, Betrayal and animal politics… from the Baaaaard… and you may now breathe!
'I'm disappointed... the sign up sheet for Henry the Fifth has been up for two days and there's only one name on the list... George Jetson!' [39]
Also during the week I watched the 60’s based show American Dreams, (2002 – 2005) where the play of Henry the Fifth was used to comment on the ongoing war in Vietnam. The main character, Meg Prior (Brittany Snow), is protesting, in her school, against the war. When caught by her teacher, rather than receiving a punishment, Meg is given the task of Director of the production. Her production focuses on characters from the war, yet uses the words of Shakespeare to communicate to its’ audience. The production on Vietnam, like the play, offer ‘a vivid sense of how war affects men and turns them into something like animals bent on savage destruction’ (Peck & Coyle, 1985:134). In the end, Meg creates a culturally relevant production, adapted from (Meg’s original opinion) a seemingly irrelevant writer. Adaptation allows for new ways of approaching the same texts. Romeo and Juliet was adapted into West Side Story, The Lion King is part Hamlet, so too Taming of the Shrew is part Kiss Me Kate.
Meg - ... but it's about a bunch of old English men and no one can relate to that
Sister - Make them relate! That's the Director's job
Meg - Wait... I can make it about Vietnam?
Sister - As long as the words are Shakespeare's, the rest is up to you [40]
In a similar approach, Ilona has adopted a gangster style reading of Titus Andronicus. This can allow the audience to make instant comparisons with identifiable characters (such as a mafia-style boss), thus permitting an understanding of the unknown. The same adaptation also works in reverse; in this case, how would you describe Titus? For this production, Titus is like Scar from The Lion King. He appears to be happy with the situation; however, it is also visible that he is plotting some evil plan. In this instance, it would appear the adaptation provides the actor with an instantly recognisable character to start their characterisation upon; but what about in the classroom? Within the classroom, students must be given the opportunity to ‘draw Shakespeare’s language out of the past and give to it the flesh, fabric, rhythms, and breath of present reality’ (Robinson, 1989:6).
For a lesson plan this week, I have constructed a range of activities that, I hope, will focus on the notions and importance of adaptation (The Tempest). As I have already mentioned in this journal entry, the strength of this approach allows the student to look at how to adapt a Shakespearean character. Then, in turn, use a known and popular character to describe their Shakespearean character. ‘Students can discuss the motives of the characters who appear in those scenes, and they can compare those characters with real people who are important to their daily lives’ (Robinson, 1989:6). I believe this works well as it allows the student to think of the cultural connotations and connections between the characters within the play and the identities within their current society.
[29] Tom Wills, the founder of Australian football, is compared to Hamlet as he manifested ‘the first signs of the madness that would eventually result in him stabbing himself in the heart with a kitchen knife at the age of 44’, in Martin Flanagan (2001) ‘Sport: Touchstone of Australian Life’, Deakin Lectures, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Radio National, TX 7/1/02, available World Wide Web: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/deakin/stories/s291489.htm
[30] ‘Freeze Frame’ phrase accompanying a photo of Brain and Danni, found on the Survivor: Guatemala website, http://www.cbs.com/primetime/survivor11/show/ep05/freezeframe.shtml
[31] Peter Davidson in Doctor Who, (1963 - 1989) broadcast on the Australian Broadcast Corporation, on the 10th October, 2005.
[32] ‘Much ado about muffin’, TV Week, September 24 – 30, 2005, p.23.
[33] ‘Up in arms’, TV Week, October 8 – 14, 2005, page unknown.
[34] ‘Green-eyed’ envy, TV Week, date and page unknown
[35] Daniel Craig, the new James Bond, talks about his feelings towards Shakespeare in ‘Plainly, he’s James blond’, in the Arts section of The Australian, contributed by The Sunday Times, Monday October 17 2005, p.16.
[36] Nick Miller’s ‘Shakespeare could be seditious: playwright’, in The Western Australian, Thursday, October 20 2005.
[37] Who will die? Plane Crash Horror in the TV Week, October 22 – 28, 2005, p.12
[38] Philip Fisher’s review of Bill Shakespeare’s: Italian Job, accessed on the 26th October 2005, http://www.britishtheatreguide.info/otherresources/fringe/fringe03-20.htm
[39] A Sister at fictional East Catholic High School comments on the drama production’s sign-up sheet, on American Dreams, (2002 - 2005) Network Seven, broadcasted on the 19th of October 2005
[40] Meg and the Sister discuss the director’s ‘role’ in creating a production, on American Dreams, (2002 - 2005) Network Seven, broadcasted on the 19th of October 2005
View other 'Performing Shakespeare in the Classroom' journal entries...
Week One - Week Four Study Break One - Week Eight
Week Nine - Week Twelve Week Thirteen - Week Fourteen
...or view other journals...
Semiotics and Performance: The role of the Actor (2005) Performing Shakespeare in the Classroom (2005)
Drama and The Curriculum (Summer, 2005) Children's Theatre (2004) Acting (2004)
... or view... Photo Gallery and Lesson Plans
... or view individual lessons plans... MacBeth: Graphic Novel Twelfth Night: Theatre Promotions
Twelfth Night: Women's Day Henry the Fifth: Swearing Shakespeare The Globe Theatre
Antony and Cleopatra: Construct a Character Character Debate Titus Andronicus: See the Emotion
The Tempest: Adaptation Shakespeare TV
Go to Children's Theatre: My Journal History Notice Board Your Work
Contact Andrew @ thechaseison@optusnet.com.au
This page last updated: 17th February 2006