Coming Attractions

A trip to the Connecticut State Capitol in Hartford led to an unexpected Hamlet encounter.  At one of the building entrances was an exhibit of several costumes from previous productions of Hartford Stage.  Near the display was a poster advertising their 2014 fall season.  As luck or fate would have it, guess which play is included.  (Would I be mentioning this otherwise?)

In other developments, and because it's never too early to begin preparing, the Stratford Festival announced its 2015 season.  One of the headliners (or THE headliner, according to this blogger) is the return of Hamlet.  Information will be forthcoming on the Stratford website.  Stay tuned.

It appears that there are now two more trips on my calendar.

Approaching Hamlet

A recent trip to a local library provided another encounter with Hamlet.  The library was unloading its supply of obsolete VHS tapes in order to reclaim storage space.  The "sale" (they were free) allowed me to acquire a copy of a 1975 work entitled "Shakespeare and His Stage:  Approaches to Hamlet."

The program discusses different ways that an actor can approach the role of Hamlet.  The role, as described by narrator John Gielgud, is "the peak of every actor's ambition if he wishes to be remembered by posterity."  The memorable performances of Nicol Williamson, John Barrymore, Laurence Olivier and John Gielgud are juxtaposed against the developing performance of Stephen Tate.  In addition, the program includes numerous views of Shakespearean sites in the author's hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon.

Early in the program we see Stephen Tate working through the nunnery scene.  Later, we hear his voice-over of the "rogue and peasant slave" soliloquy.  That is followed by Nicol Williamson's performance of the same soliloquy.  Williamson's Hamlet is described by Gielgud as "deeply internalized...a full psychological rendering."  Interestingly, Tate and Williamson's performances differ in the text that is used.  While Tate's Hamlet refers to himself as a "stallion," Williamson's is a "scullion."  This is an example of the effect that a director and a particular translation can have on the performance.

John Barrymore's Hamlet is shown during the "Now might I do it" soliloquy.  As Gielgud comments, Barrymore's performance displayed the "exaggeration of the silent screen" (or is that silent scream?), although the clip that we are shown is a screen test that does include the audio.

The greatest degree of comparison is reserved for the greatest soliloquy.  We see Tate working on the "To be or not to be" soliloquy with his director.  We can forgive him for flubbing the words as he is still learning the part.  That scene is followed by a fully realized voice-over of Tate's performance.  Next, John Gielgud delivers a straightforward stage reading of the speech.  Finally, Laurence Olivier's film version of the soliloquy is shown, complete with shots of our protagonist atop a height watching waves crashing into rocks.  The point is not to decide which is better, but rather to show how Shakespeare's words can lend themselves to various approaches.

At the conclusion of the program, John Gielgud describes the role of any actor, not just one stepping into the role of Hamlet.  Acting represents a "gesture of sacrifice."  The actor's job is to create another life before the audience, and that creation requires the sacrifice of the actor to the character.  The program shows us four gentlemen who have made that sacrifice memorable, with a newcomer to the ranks hoping to join them.

Hamlet the Shadow King

Hamlet made a recent appearance at a local cinema.  This time, he was a character in a production of Kill Shakespeare, based on the graphic novel by Anthony Del Col and Conor McCreery.  The performance, hosted by the Little Theatre, was a dramatic reading of the script while slides depicting illustrations from the graphic novel were displayed on the screen behind the actors.  The production was presented by DVC, the group responsible for the Shakespeare-apalooza-rama! performance described previously (see 3/16/14 post).

The story involves numerous Shakespearean characters attempting to kill--or to save--the playwright responsible for their existence.  In terms of specifics, though, I must admit that I found the plot to be rather muddled.  This was undoubtedly a result of editing a large graphic novel series into a ninety-minute stage production.  As Mr. McCreery discussed after the performance, the story arc that comprises it fills twelve issues of the graphic novel series, so significant editing was necessary to fit the performance into a reasonable time frame.

Hamlet is the "Shadow King," the leader of the group that saves Shakespeare.  The young man we see in this production is similar to the tragic hero with whom we are familiar.  The death of his father and remarriage of his mother are part of the initial back story.  He is bothered by visions and ghostly visitations.  He is privy to the performance of a play entitled "The Murder of Gonzago."  In this work, however, Hamlet's romantic interest is Juliet.  (Romeo does appear, but his involvement with Juliet was not entirely clear.)

Following the performance, Conor McCreery was available to speak with the audience and to answer questions about his work. Kill Shakespeare contains numerous allusions to Shakespeare's original works.  Mr. McCreery stated that this was done deliberately, but he and his co-author avoided turning their work into a game of "Spot the Reference."  While transforming the novel into a stage production, many familiar lines and allusions were kept for benefit of the audience.

During the talkback, Mr. McCreery gave a comparison of Hamlet in the character's original setting and Hamlet in modern time.  He opined that Hamlet's Wittenberg would be equivalent to UC-Berkeley now, and Hamlet probably would be a liberal arts major.  One audience member asked the author if he thought the Bard would enjoy the work.  The response was an emphatic "Yes!"

Seeing Kill Shakespeare performed on stage enticed me to look for the graphic novels for a future read.  Based on Mr. McCreery's advice, though, I will wait.  The entire twelve-issue story arc is due to be released in October, 2014, as a hardcover Backstage Edition with annotations from Shakespearean scholars.  I'll look forward to adding it to my Hamlet collection.

A Hamlet Request

While looking through old greeting cards, I came across a thank you note from nearly two decades ago.  It jogged my memory of a long-forgotten interaction and another occasion when Hamlet made a random appearance in my daily existence.

Working in a high school leads to many interesting questions, often from students.  Occasionally, though, these questions come from unlikely sources.  Such was the case in early January, 1997.  A gentlemen ventured into the school building looking for someone who could help him with a favor.  He needed a Latin translation of a line from Hamlet, but his own Latin skills were rusty.  Specifically, it was one of Polonius' parting wishes to Laertes:  "To thine own self be true."  I didn't know the answer, but I knew whom to ask.  I got the answer from one of our classics teachers and forwarded it to the gentleman.  I still remember the loose Latin translation:  "Sta temetipso," which translates to "Stand on your own."  Later a thank you note arrived at school from the visitor.  He was grateful for the response.  As he put it, "[this] was important to me at my stage in existence."

Nearly twenty years later, the brief interaction is yet one more example of the impact of Shakespeare's work.  For the visitor as for so many others, Hamlet holds a significant place.  It was important enough to this gentleman that he sought out a translation. And it is important enough to this blogger that it's been over one year since my first post...and still going strong.

Hamlet at the Plantations

A trip to Ithaca provided another occasion to see Hamlet.  This time, it was the Ithaca Shakespeare Company's presentation at the Cornell Plantations.  The stage was set deep in the woods, nestled among the trees, far from modern annoyances (and modern lighting).  It was a picturesque location.  Unfortunately, that was one of the few positives of the evening.

The stage set was very rudimentary, with multiple levels and an area beneath the stage floor to serve as Ophelia's grave.  (Amusingly, she stayed there during the duel and popped out for the curtain call.)  The painting of the set was reminiscent of a high school musical, though.  Furniture was minimal; in fact, the chamber scene between Hamlet and Gertrude had none at all.  The costumes were Medieval period, aside from modern footwear and (sometimes wrinkled) chinos.  Claudius spent the evening not in a crown but rather in a jeweled headband, which reminded me of Wonder Woman's head-wear.  The Ghost wore white make-up to give the appearance of a pale complexion.  When he removed his helmet, however, some of the make-up went with it, leaving his natural skin tone apparent.

The acting was emotive and overdone.  I did not find any of the actors believable in the roles.  The dialogue was stiff and unnatural, and the bulk of the lines were delivered while yelling.  Undoubtedly this was an attempt to project due to the lack of external amplification, but it removed a sense of natural conversation among the actors.  Hamlet was a combination of Jim Parsons' Dr. Sheldon Cooper (from TV's The Big Bang Theory) and Jim Carrey's Ace Ventura with overactive salivary glands.  The attempt to portray Hamlet's insanity was far beyond the pale.  By the end of the play I was waiting for the duel so that the rest would be silence.  The best acted parts were those of Ophelia, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, although the latter two actors spent much of their non-speaking scenes upstage whispering between themselves.  It may have been an attempt to play up the conniving, spying aspect of their characters, but it became annoying.  Their entrance to the play was marked by coin flipping, an inside reference to Tom Stoppard's play, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead.

The script was edited to fit in a running time of approximately 2.5 hours, a function of the decreasing amount of sunlight and the lack of artificial lighting.  While this is a typical length, the editing was atypically sloppy.  Gone were Polonius' instructions regarding spying on Laertes, "outward limbs and flourishes,"  beautified being a "vile phrase," most of Hamlet's instructions to the players, the dumb show, references to "herb of grace o' Sundays," the gallows maker and bungholes.  For all that was excised, however, the role of Fortinbras was left in the play.  As a result, the "How all occasions" soliloquy, the one most easily removed, remained.  It added nothing to the action and only made the play drag.

One major change was the movement of the "To be or not to be" soliloquy.  The director justified this in the playbill, writing that the speech "doesn't grow out of any specific dramatic circumstances in the play" and is a "movable set piece."  Hamlet thrice delivered the line "except my life" to Polonius and then, while supine on the stage, delivered the "To be" soliloquy.  It ended with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern entering to tell Hamlet about the arrival of the players.  The "rogue and peasant slave" soliloquy followed.  The action moved to Claudius, Gertrude, et al, discussing the players.  Ophelia was left alone on stage, Hamlet entered and the play moved into the nunnery scene.  For such a "movable set piece," the flow of action in this section of the play was largely disrupted.

The eventual arrival of the duel scene signaled that the evening was drawing to a close.  The role of Osric was not at all the fey, effeminate portrayal that is typical, and there was no discussion of the warmth of the castle or his hat.  In fact, he wore no hat at all.  The duel involved both rapier and dagger.  In a new twist, Laertes' dagger was the instrument envenomed.  Oddly, it was that weapon that fatally wounded Hamlet, Laertes and Claudius.  Hamlet's death was awkward, but all things considered, that was neither unsurprising nor unwelcome.  As one last example of the sloppy editing, the play ended seemingly mid-line.  Fortinbras commented that the sight of bodies "shows much amiss," and then the cast members still standing took a bow.  Did the actor forget the concluding line "Go, bid the soldiers shoot." or was its omission a directorial decision?

While I was awaiting the start of the play, I overheard a discussion between two audience members.  One asked what the story of Hamlet is about, and the other commented that she had never read it.  It is a shame that their first exposure to Shakespeare's masterpiece was this rather ham-handed attempt.  Hopefully they have a future opportunity to see it done much more respectably.