Met with Scott today and talked through the time transition issues. Both he and Julian have cautioned that the time change and use of anachronism needs to be very deliberate to work.
The issue Scott raised is why would Macbeth and Banquo speak in Shakespearean dialect before the 'thrall' and not in modern English.
Of course they're not speaking in dark ages Scots either.
I think the answer is going back to the script and looking at all the people and events outside the Macbeths' ambit.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The bloodiest Macbeth ever?
The production of Macbeth 2008 for Elmwood Players, Christchurch New Zealand. This is where the ideas and concepts will be developed. Will contain school resources closer to production in August. WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS
Who is the least memorable named character in Macbeth?
Our poster
Teller's Macbeth 2007
The bloodiest Macbeth ever?
Labels
- Articles (3)
- Audition pack (6)
- characters (3)
- Characters Lady Macbeth (7)
- Characters Macbeth (8)
- Characters Macbeth Lady motivation (2)
- History (1)
- Images (5)
- miscellaneous (5)
- motivation (2)
- other productions (8)
- Our production (49)
- Personal observations (16)
- Rehearsals (10)
- Superstition (2)
What should we have on the posters?
Is Lady Macbeth dominant over her husband?
Irving as Macbeth
Top themes in Macbeth
- Equivocation and deception
- Vaulting ambition
- Civilisation and love versus isolation and treachery
- The natural order and what happens when it is upset
- Thought/desire and action (or the inner versus the outer world)
- Polarity - good versus evil, right versus wrong, day versus night etc...
4 comments:
Heaven spare us from literalists! I agree with Julian (as always) that the change needs to be quite marked, but the language is irrelevant (IMNSHO) as in a good production of a Shakespeare, which if course this will be, the actual form of words never sticks in the mind, it's the characters and the story that do. Kind of like how when remembering a french movie with subtitles, we tend to remember the characters speaking English. The language doesn't inform the setting of the play at all, it tells the story.
Maryanne is right. I sat down with the script and looked at what would need to change... and in my current edits the answer is not much BUT whatever attempts I made at iambic pentameter sounded awful.
The distinct marking of the changes and the clear indication that anachronisms are deliberate not dumb direction is essential. This goes through set, costume, and effects.
Hi Sam, I'm Ben, a friend of Mel and Scott's and various other people (not quite sure how he haven't met before actually - maybe we have and I've forgotten :) Anyway, Mel's tying to talk me into auditioning and I've been following the blog in an interested fashion. Just wanted to ask: with the modern-day framing device, why not keep it consistent with the rest of the modern army setting and make Duncan Field Marshall Duncan, or something? As a top general Macbeth would be in line to succeed him, and it's still a position of great power to covet, which is the important thing (I think in a recent BBC modern day remake Macbeth was after the position of head chef at his restaurant, which just goes to show you it works as a power thing, rather than just a monarchy thing). It might just feel a little bit less anachronistic than a "newly restored monarchy", was all I was thinking - just a thought, anyway.
Hi Ben
Yes this is something Scott and I have been discussing - except perhaps Duncan is president and that means it's a better match with King by the time he gets to the nightmare bit. I think though that you've noted this as well means it is the sort of thing that may well occur to audiences. I don't like head of the Armed Forces so much and can't get my head around why. Maybe it's that Kings and rulers are more interesting? Given Scotland is likely to have full self Government and be a sovereign country aqain within 20 years originally I had thought that Duncan should look and sound like Sean Connery (who in one poll I saw Scots thought whould be president). howver the potential for silly parody is something best left as a footnote and for 3 in the morning when I had the idea.
i have got the kitchen version of Macbeth and it has a lot of useful insights but it did make the the Duncan figure a plagarist and bignoter. I think this screwed the original intent of him being a respected and good leader making the murders more awful but was their way of coping with how to make Macbeth's actions seem credible in a modern age without resorting to him being a psychopath.
I am really interested in comments on the merits of 'king' 'President' 'field marshall' etc... I want to know what will work for the play, the cast, the audiences and (dare I say it) any critics that wander through.
Post a Comment