Shakespeare In The Park.

.....We saw a community presentation of Shakespeare's MacBeth up in Port Townsend. To a purist, there was much about it to criticize. But I have to say that even with all the wince inducing moments, I actually enjoyed it. As the play unfolded I found myself able to fill in the blanks in my mind, both in missing scenes and changes in language.

.....MacBeth is a harsh play. There is very little in it that is soft or redeeming. It is all dark and forboding. Not my usual favorite. I'm more the Midsummer Night's Dream type of person myself. :-)

.....On the surface I can see why interpretations of Shakespeare will often change the language to 'make it more modern'. The reasoning being that the modern audience will understand it better, easier, faster, more.

.....I don't particularly agree with this sentiment, for a couple of reasons. First, when you translate the language you start making changes to it. Words are changed, the positions of words in a sentence, whole sentences themselves are re-written. The risk, and what often happens, is that the original intent and meaning of the word, phrase and sentence is changed. If this is done over the course of the play, a lot of what made it subtly brilliant is lost.

.....Shakespeare was a language genius. Every word used was used for a purpose. In both the context of the scene, and in the context of the overall theme and intent of the play.

.....The second reason I have a difficult time with the re-writing of language for modern ears is the lyrical aspect of what was originally written. It flowed and had rhythm. It fit like interlocking puzzle pieces from character to character. If the language is changed, it really makes it that much more difficult to learn and to act (and to memorize) because of that flow.

.....The argument is often used that the original language will not be understood by the audience. I don't agree with that sentiment either. Sure, it will sound strange at first, because our ears are not used to that type of lyrical language in our everyday speech. But what I find is that if I listen to it for a space of ten or fifteen minutes, my brain starts becoming accustomed to it and it will start sounding natural. The subtle whit will start becoming clear and easier to understand.

.....On the issue of editing. I am an advocate of not editing, which is pretty much common knowledge. My belief being that just as the language used, every scene had a purpose to the overall scope and intent of the play. When you start pulling scenes and editing, you change the meaning and purpose of the play.

.....But having said that, I would not NOT see a play because it was edited. Just like last night's community presentation, I still enjoyed watching it. But the missing scenes were missing for me. I MISSED them as they added dimensions to the play that would have helped it overall.

.....When directors start editing Shakespeare, they do it in accordance with their own interpretation of what the scene said, the meaning behind it, and what it meant to the play as a whole. That alone is evidence that the very meaning and intent of the play is changed. This is a dangerous thing, especially in the hands of someone who doesn't really understand the play itself, or Shakespeare's intent.

.....Just my musings. But I do have to say that is has been a while since I attended any Shakespeare and I was surpised at how much I enjoyed it. The acting was not great. The language was recited from memory rather than acted or expressed. Scenes were glaringly missing. But I still enjoyed it. Must do that again sometime. :-)

.....Aaron / Arontius.