RSC Productions in Stratford 2011

Emma Pearson June 28, 2011

The Merchant of Venice
Royal Shakepeare Theatre until 4th October 2011

Seldom do humour and horror keep such close company as in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. On the one hand, a beautiful heiress must be won by suitors choosing between three riddling caskets – the stuff of folk tale. On the other, financial gambling and religious hatred lead to a terrifying situation where a legal bond permits the exaction of a pound of a bankrupt merchant’s flesh, and his creditor is in no mind to show mercy. It is a play that manages to combine slightly absurd fairy-tale delight with the real darkness of prejudice and bad fortune, and director Rupert Goold was not afraid to play with both in his RSC production this year.

The portrayal of Venice as a modern, neon-plated, gambling metropolis is as bold as it is eye-catching. As we entered, the stage was already bustling. A night at the casino was in full swing, crap shooters and tiny skirts a-plenty, and this activity escalated - as the auditorium lights went down - into such a vibrant, all-singing, all-dancing Elvis number, that I must admit I was slightly disorientated by the time they started reciting Shakespeare.

The Vegas-like setting continued to influence both interpretation and tone. The winning of Portia (Susannah Fielding) through the caskets is portrayed as a TV game-show - Portia herself both presenter and prize, tripping about in high heels and a blonde wig, and talking to the camera in a giggly drawl. I did have initial misgivings about how this Portia would cope with the court room scene at the end and whether her whole story would be played just for laughs, but as the plot progressed I was surprised by how complicated she became. Fielding was confident in not only the comic but also the dramatic moments (such as when Portia’s love for Bassanio causes her to take off her blonde wig and admit herself to be an ‘unlesson’d girl, unschool’d, unpractised’), and the game-show proved an effectively claustrophobic setting, emphasising the motif of high hopes turned to disappointment which is more usually contained within the Jessica – Lorenzo story.

Patrick Stewart’s Shylock is understated, likeable and unusually dignified throughout – particularly at the end. Where many a Shylock has made his final exit crushed and humiliated, this one walks out with his head held high, still bearing to be spat at by the Christians as he goes. Shylock is much more of a closed book in this production than in many, and you do get the sense that the end of the courtroom scene was rushed, in order to arrive more quickly at the really juicy part of Goold’s interpretation: the trouble between Portia and Bassanio. Jessica too remained a shadowy figure, whose inner turmoil was hinted at more than played out.

In all, this production reinvented Portia and her journey with great sensitivity and imagination, but perhaps stopped short of fully unpacking the complexities of the other characters, who seemed to orbit around her. Having said that, the supporting cast was strong, frequently stealing the audience’s sympathy, and creating a vivacious world that had me fully entertained throughout.

This was a play of daring directorial decisions executed with confidence, and the result is an unusual and complex interpretation - hilarity with a sting in its tail. Far from ‘fair Belmont’ being a fairy-tale land where everything works out for the best, in this production everyone was prey both to the giddiness of love and the messiness of reality, and, in the end, no one’s life amounted to more than a gamble.

Su Jordan June 28, 2011

Dunsinane
Swan Theatre, 15 Jun - 2 July 2011

Macbeth is dead: Birnam Wood has arrived, concealing conquering soldiers (many English) supporting the new Scottish king Malcolm's claim and initiating a trail of slaughter. What happens next? This modern-language sequel by David Greig explains.

Dunsinane premiered in 2010, and a preview snippet when it aired on Radio 3 in January 2011 was enough to convince me it might be worth the Oxford-Stratford journey. It was. The idea of a new sequel to Macbeth may initially fill purists with dread (what next, a dramatic exploration of the life of the Montagues and Capulets after R & J snuff it, inexplicably starring Angelina Jolie?) but any fears will dissipate at the outset when the first fithy, unshaven soldier hits the stage with lights up.

Firstly: you don't have to know Macbeth, or Scots history, or modern politics, to be here - but it may help. The Shakespeare, the real life tales on which the Bard based the Scottish Play and echoes of modern conflict situations are meshed together in a harrowing tale of a misdirected quest for justice. Macbeth's Castle Dunsinane is the focal point for much of the cold, wet, grimy action and the key characters hungover from the original include Lady Macbeth, aka Gruach; the English commander Siward; Malcolm and Macduff. Our confused and comical narrator is a young soldier from Kent: he starts out with the excitement and enthusiasm of one in a new job and fades out disturbed, bewildered and longing for home. The unforgiving environment is portrayed effectively with bleak lighting, a blue-grey flagstone-effect stage surface, an ever-present stone celtic cross and steps and some rugged props including wooden chests and animal skins.

If Dunsinane is like anything, it's like a cross between a Tom Stoppard play and a Russell Crowe epic. It's fast-paced, the modern language feels appropriate (at times you pop back to the present and realise you're not listening to Shakespearean English), it's witty and funny and it takes you on a subtle, winding journey between right and wrong, the clear and the opaque, boldness and brutality, sanity and mental illness - all with an electrifying soundtrack of minimal live band and two astonishingly haunting Gaelic-language female singers. (I would love to know what the sung words meant.) The casting and costumes are excellent; the acting is superb and (though it's the RSC, so I guess this is a given) utterly convincing. Siobhan Redmond is a devastating and captivating Gruach. I found myself wondering what on earth Siward (Jonny Phillips) could possibly get up to out of hours apart from threatening people and drinking hard - whilst also wondering what it would be like to have a drink myself with the intriguing weak/strong King Malcolm (Brian Ferguson). We were left with plenty more meaningful things to think about too, which is always a good thing.

A final note must be made on the RSC building. As Dunsinane Castle is the focus for this production, so the RSC is the focal point for Stratford. Artfully incorporating oak-panelled Victorian gothic, 1920s brick deco (with statues in brick relief, squirming out of the face of the building) and a brand new glass-and-steel viewing tower, it sits on the river bank as confidently as Battersea Power Station. And so it might, since 2011 marks the RSC's 50th birthday season and this astoundingly successful 2010 site redevelopment weighed in at £112.8 million. With soaring inner spaces, a restaurant, cafe, shop, gleaming bars and rooftop riverside viewing terraces, it's a glamorous and impressive piece of architecture before you even get into its two theatre spaces. Pre-show on a sleepy, midsummer, midweek evening, its sleek, imposing halls were as bustling as any London theatre on a weekend, so they've clearly got it right.

Dunsinane closes on 2 July, so you haven't got long to get yourself there. If you miss it however, don't panic - there's a bulging programme of Shakespeare and more for this 50th birthday season, so you can take your pick at any time. Keep an eye out for the next time the play is on with this cast though. FYI, if you're driving, it takes just over an hour from Oxford and there is ample parking.

DI Staff June 14, 2011

Cardenio: Shakespeare's Lost Play Re-imagined
Swan Theatre until Thu 6 Oct 2011

Lovers’ trials, forced marriage, grief-driven insanity and a girl disguised as a boy: ‘Shakespeare’s lost play’ has many of the elements that you might expect – but carries them into a realm of such total frivolity as to make Love’s Labours Lost look like a gritty problem play. Cardenio is a nice middle class young gent (a little bit of a peacock, but ultimately good at heart and faithfully promised to his childhood sweetheart Luscinda) who has the misfortune to fall in with a spoilt posh boy, the duke’s son Fernando. Throughout the first half of the play Fernando’s intemperate desires systematically lay waste to the hopes of Cardenio, Luscinda, and the object of his own brief affection, the virtuous Dorotea, resulting in absconding, madness, convents and cross-dressing all round. Still in unknown territory, by the interval there’s some uncertainty as to whether we’re watching comedy or tragedy: will the lovers be reunited in happiness, or are we headed for a full blown madness-on-the-moor style disaster?

The play is hot on the rewards of virtue and contains a fair bit of self-flagellation, but it’s all done with such enthusiasm you can’t help but be enthralled throughout. Fernando (Alex Hassell) is a wonderfully likeable antagonist. From his half-hearted crises of conscience to his hair-brained abduction schemes, he is at once despicably flawed and hugely entertaining. Cardenio (Oliver Rix) is engagingly hopeful – a young man on the cusp of adult responsibility, Lucy Briggs-Owen makes an intelligent and comic Luscinda (and emerges with credit from her unforgiving role in the second half), and Cardenio’s father Don Camillo is wonderfully, recognisably eccentric. Everybody is funny, the music is atmospheric and beautifully executed, and although the moral message is so unrelentingly hammered home as to slow some of the later action right down, it’s with such a creditable lack of conviction that it hardly detracts from the energy of the play as a whole.

But is it Shakespeare? To find out exactly what’s meant by the subtitle ‘Shakespeare’s Lost Play Re-imagined’ takes a little digging, and what emerges is a fascinating tale of literary detective work. The story, which follows an episode in Cervantes’ Don Quixote, appears to be Shakespeare glimpsed through the eyes of early 18th century aspiring playwright Lewis Theobald. Theobald adapted the (now lost) Cardenio manuscript for the sensibilities of his time into a play called Double Falsehood or The Distrest Lovers, which forms the basis of the modern reworking. As he prepared the play for performance by the RSC, director Gregory Doran fleshed out Theobald’s version by drawing on later works by John Fletcher (said to have collaborated with Shakespeare in writing the original Cardenio), and drew reference from a number of other versions from various countries. With such a turbulent past, one might expect Cardenio to have a rather patchwork quality, but in fact it flows very well with fast-paced action, and its carefree detachment from reality is one of its most endearing quirks. The play does lack structural complexity, however, and while certain weighty themes such as filial duty and the nature of romantic attachment are introduced, they’re never fully developed.

If this is Shakespeare, then it’s Shakespeare adapted for a later audience with a shorter attention span; which wears its moral code quite lightly; highly suitable, in short, for a modern theatre audience. What’s not to enjoy in this beautifully executed confection; part comedy, part revenge tragedy; an intriguing piece of history and a loving exercise in literary archaeology?

Susie Cogan & Emma Pearson

Jen Pawsey June 5, 2011

The City Madam by Philip Massinger
Swan Theatre, Thu 5 May - Tue 4 October 2011

The City Madam was written in 1632 by Philip Massinger, who had a foot in a lot of different camps. He went to Oxford University but didn't get a degree. He was a gentleman, with no money. His father became an MP but was also steward (high servant) to a nobleman and left his family in financial straits when he died. Massinger Jr was therefore in an excellent position to write about the social stresses and strains of the day: new money vs old, servant vs master in complicated hierarchies, pride vs humility, knowing your place vs ambition to rise above it.

In my historical ignorance I think of 1632 as a sort of interperiod - between the Elizabethan and Civil War eras. The costumes reflect this transition - the women are still in Elizabethan dresses with open lace ruffs, while the men have begun wearing long-ringletted wigs. The times are changing, and society is being stretched and strained. Eventually it will fracture into war, but that's still looming. Theatrically this is the post-Shakespeare generation.

The themes making an appearance in The City Madam do so literally - embodied in the beautifully-named characters: Sir John Frugal, Holdfast the steward, Shave'em the prostitute, the merchants Penury and Fortune and so on. In an early scene Sir Maurice Lacy provokes self-made Mr Plenty into a duel by reciting his ancestor's poor occupations. In response Plenty acerbically points out that at least new wealth pays tailors on time and does not live on credit.

While the characters may have stock names they are not just cardboard cutouts. And though the language is not as inventive as Shakespeare's, the characterisation is better - with psychological consistency more pleasing to a modern audience. Most characters undergo a change in guise, fortune or outlook, but the change is plausible. The villain even effects good ends by bad means. And there are none of those moments which make you want to bang the characters' and/or author's heads together.

The plot is of the wind-up-and-go, "with hilarious consequences..." variety: Sir John Frugal's household is in disarray. His younger brother Luke, rescued from poverty of his own making, is instructing Sir John's apprentices how to steal the money they are supposed to look after, while Sir John's daughters are so obnoxious and demanding that one of their suitors tells Sir John he'd be better off declaring himself cuckolded than owning them. So Sir John tells everyone he's gone to live in a monastery and returns in disguise to watch and whip up the chaos that results...

Fortunately the consequences really are hilarious, which is perhaps not surprising given the comedic experience of the combined cast. The asides are milked for laughs, the "foreigners" charming, the magic breathtaking and the puppetry not only very good but also well-used. The costumes are fantastic - lavish and spectacular (and while credited to a great many people's workmanship, include one Ms Threadgold, which would surely have pleased Massinger). The music, particularly the singing, was apt and spot on. The children in the audience seemed to be enjoying it every bit as much as I was, and the moralising was kept in check, subordinate to the telling of a good yarn.

The new Swan Theatre is as lovely as I remember the old one being, and suits this production very well: it's a compact gem, not well enough known, but with no pretentions above its station. I can heartily recommend giving Shakespeare a miss for once and meeting this play instead.

Ambition, murder, madness and retribution: this imaginative and exciting production is a good choice for the inauguration of the RSC’s new Royal Shakespeare Theatre. It's a welcoming space - still in the traditional thrust stage style - which manages to be both grand and intimate. Director Michael Boyd’s stripped-down Macbeth is chilling, tragic and linguistically superb as ever – but also thoughtful, innovative and sensitively staged.

Set against the backdrop of a stripped church, with tumbled arches and icons literally defaced, this interpretation is inspired by the uneasy Jacobean religious and political climate in which the play was first performed. Only a few years since Henry VIII’s dynastically driven reformation, Catholic, Protestant and emergent Puritan factions vie for the balance of power, and the newly flowering Stuart line is far from secure. The themes of allegiance, kingship and the fragility of succession take on renewed significance, and the problematic porter scene is given depth and demonic humour by referencing the gunpowder plot, and by recasting the porter (Jamie Beamish) as a kind of semi-infernal presence and confessor. The play’s difficult relationship with its own supernatural elements is interestingly dealt with here, particularly in the casting of the witches as children, and in the wonderful treatment and double choreography of the arrival of Banquo’s ghost at the feast. While I can’t help feeling that an interpretation which requires actual textual changes (weird children) is a bit of a liberty, it’s certainly arresting, thought-provoking and genuinely creepy.

Casting in general is great. Aislin McGuckin is a highly-strung, patrician Lady Macbeth, whose own remorseful breakdown is foreshadowed throughout by the impression of nervy acquisitiveness she creates, while Aidan Kelly is an attractively brusque but feeling Macduff. Jonathan Slinger (will someone please cast this man as Iago?) inhabits the unfortunate Macbeth with a lip-twitching mixture of villainy and vulnerability; as Boyd puts it: ‘Jonathan… has more than proved himself in the role of disturbed Shakespearean kings’ and after seeing his mesmerising performances in Boyd’s Histories cycle, I’d have to agree. I’m not altogether sure, however, that Macbeth is the ideal vehicle for Slinger. His grace and subtlety seem slightly out of place in a progressively psychopathic warlord - even one seen as dangerously sweet-natured by his ambition-crazed wife - who is brought down in part by his very lack of complexity. That’s not to say that Slinger’s performance isn’t compelling - with his fluid intelligence and thoughtful delivery it’s hard not to be enthralled.

Unsettling and atmospheric, this is a powerful and memorable production which makes great use of a strong cast, and of a host of smart but sensitive theatrical innovations - a superb way to get your next fix of unravelling evil.

Susie Cogan 30 Jun 2011

Share this event