Day 103: Cymbeline, by William Shakespeare (BBC 1982 film adaptation)

I'm revisiting Cymbeline as the date for my Shakespeare Certificate exam approaches, since my monologue is one of Imogen's speeches. I was hoping to see if someone else's approach to the lines might help me get over the block I've been experiencing - Sod's Law being all-knowing, the entire speech was omitted from this particular version. It did give me an interesting perspective on the character though (played by a very young Helen Mirrin) as almost entirely opposite to how I initially read her. I suspect part of the difference comes from the style of the production - the whole thing felt very melodramatically Shakespeare, rather than the naturalistic approach that seems to be more common in recent play adaptations. But more specifically, Imogen looked a lot less like the wayward heir type on screen as on paper, less angry and stubborn and more hurt and broken.

This has led me to think more about the character type I see in Imogen based on my reading, and I think possibly looking up the "Kate/Bob" episodes of Blackadder might be closer to what I had been hoping to do. It's all valuable research though - seeing it done in a way I hadn't considered and that doesn't feel right for me still means engaging and understanding why it doesn't fit. (I should add, I'm not saying it's a bad performance or even the wrong decision for the production, it's just different and not how I want to do it, and I'm in a position to make that decision for myself.)

Day 102: War Horse (National Theatre simulcast)

I saw the film version of War Horse over the Christmas holidays, and have been looking forward to the opportunity to see the stage show since. It's a slightly different retelling of the story - some elements and characters are changed or combined... I may need to read the original book just to see which bits came from where.

This is an extremely emotional play, the puppetry is utterly fantastic. I was half-expecting something along the lines of the shadow-style puppets from The Lion King, but these were so much more dynamic and lifelike. The program mentions two years of workshop time that went into designing the look, movement and handling of the horses and the result is about as close to living horses as it's possible to have on stage. There was almost no set at all, just a few props where absolutely required - making the barbed wire scene all the more striking for being the only part of the play where the set actually took up the full extent of the stage. The score was fantastic as well, combining cinematic mood music and live singing of war songs (mostly by a "narrator" type character, but occasionally taken up by the rest of the cast). The minimalist set complemented by a constant soundtrack is similar to the staging of Coriolanus, the last NT simulcast I saw. Obviously this show has been running rather longer so I can't entirely put it down to being a current fashion or anything, but it's an interesting parallel. Partly I suspect less set and more sound translates better to screen than a busy stage with no music, so it may be that productions in this style lend themselves to simulcast screenings better.

Day 101: Tamburlaine the Great, Part One, by Christopher Marlowe

This is the second of Marlowe's plays I've read. Having seen a film yesterday which seems in favour of the theory that "Marlowe wrote/was Shakespeare" I have to categorically disagree. It's clear from the language it was written about the same time (and in the same verse form) but the way Marlowe uses that language is completely different. There's less distinction made in the speech patterns of various classes (courtiers vs slaves, etc) and the level to which it averages out is less grandiosely poetic. This does have the benefit of requiring less deciphering, but with less imagery it becomes far less interesting to read.

On an entirely unrelated note, this play contains possibly the least believable suicide method I've yet come across in any play of any era... headbutting prison bars hard enough to split your own skull and literally dash your own brains out, in one hit. And two people die this way. I'm almost intregued as to how you'd even begin to stage something like that and not have it come across as utter comedy.

As for the storyline, I found myself drawing parallels with the "backstory" and opening scenes of Coriolanus, and how that story could have gone if he'd been a little less utterly backstabbed and a bit more silver-tongued. Tamburlaine pretty much seems to show up, recieve an envoy from whatever army he's up against this time, and in the space of half a page of diatribe convinces them to not only surrender, but join him. When he finally comes up against the Sultan, he placates basically the only man in the world who seems likely to be able to stop him by... marrying his daughter. Not quite as implausible as death by headbanging, I guess.

Day 100: EAS Class

Firstly I will add that I spent the afternoon watching Only Lovers Left Alive. I've since discovered it's on a VERY short run, so if any of my readers want to see it check your local times very carefully! There is a DVD available on preorder on Amazon at the moment and I highly recommend the film to anyone who loves music, artistic photography, guitars, any of the cast members, understated/natural acting, and getting totally tripped out Hendrix-style.

Drama class today was a physical/mime session, taking in everything from slow-motion to Shakespeare via silent movies and one-sentence scenes. Got through a lot more water than usual, but I'm really starting to feel more confident and willing to play in these sessions. Pretty soon the new term will be upon us, which may mean a few new faces and names to learn, and hopefully will mean getting to revisit some of the styles and themes we've been introduced to this term. Next week we're to bring along the lyrics to a favorite song, though we've been assured we won't be singing, and to choose something accordingly lyrical. I have a couple of ideas...

Very much looking forward to the comedy workshop run by EAS I'll be joining this weekend. Today's session felt like a good warmup, and I've been told there's only eight of us signed up to do it so far so it's likely to be plenty of hard work! In a good way, of course, and I suspect that'll also mean plenty of scope/time for individual feedback.

Day 99: Sweet Cider by Emteaz Hussain

"All action takes place in a park. The park is any inner city park in northern England where there is a strong Pakistani Kashmiri community..."

I'll admit straight up, I really have no background knowledge going into this. There are a lot of words and phrases used in the characters' native language - some of them are translated in the text, but not all. Their situations, talking about living in a secret refuge, selling drugs and stolen trainers and self-harm which is shown to the audience but never dealt with in discussion between the characters, even when one sees it happen. That last point in particular threw me, it's not entierly clear why they put it in if it's never really linked in. As a snapshot of a life I have no real context for, it's interesting. Ultimately though, I feel like in my mind I simplify the story down to "these are people with issues like being gay, poverty, estranged families, religion, self-harm and pregnancy... and nothing really gets addressed or dealt with in the course of the play". Granted some of the problems presented are probably specific to the community it's meant to portray, and maybe once again I've missed a critical point. Pointing out a group of people and saying "look, they have the same problems as everyone else" is great, but I would have liked to see a bit more of a story, maybe see how those particular characters actually resolve those problems. I know this is an issue I keep coming back to - I miss the point of "snapshot" style plays, particularly in reading them. Maybe if I read enough of them, I'll eventually get it.

Day 98: Cloud Nine, by Caryl Churchill

I had some reservations about picking up any Caryl Churchill, as I have less than happy memories of working with one or two of her scripts when I was at school. While those specific expectations didn't apply to this play, I can't say I found myself "splitting my sides laughing" as the blurb promised. Maybe it's just another case of missing the humour and "sexual politics" but all I really saw was a group of people with a variety of sexual identity issues, some of which change through the course of the play, including a blatant case of child molestation that is mentioned once, referenced again later and nobody ever does anything about it. My feelings on that last point might have been influenced by how strikingly different it is to Mouths of Mothers which I read and reviewed in an earlier post. Of course, there's only so much that can be understood from reading rather than seeing it performed, but my first impression is of everyone involved being incredibly flakey about issues that should be given more care and attention - it's a rare opportunity to cover race, gay/bisexuality, polyamoury, gender dysphoria AND child abuse all in one play, and it feels like a roll call and a missed opportunity to really discuss how those issues affect people. Nobody really seems to have a solid bar set as to how much exploration on the part of their partner they are willing to tolerate, or even a clear idea of what they want for themselves (with one or two exceptions). Once again I have a play where I have to admit, I don't get it.

That all said, the genderbending for certain roles is interesting, and I might come back to this if I find a performance or film to watch. I would need to see it performed to make a judgement one way or the other on the direction that the black slave/servant is to be played by a white man - it makes sense for the script, to a point, but the reason for it "in character" is just as uncomfortable ("you'd never know he was black") as if it were a casting decision not dictated by the script. I realise I'm struggling to phrase that in writing.

The blog slipped. (Days 87-97 placeholder)

I have been keeping up with the reading. However, I let the blog slip for a few days, and then only managed one or two catchup entries so it slipped more, same again a couple of days later and now I'm sitting here with a list of over a week's worth of reading and viewing that I haven't written up, along with a handful of photos taken of me during that week (which are probably not quite as unflattering as I think they are) and feeling frustrated and worried about the next step. It would be exaggerating to say that everything is slipping away from me, that's not the case. EAS classes are going well and I am still reading or watching my requisite 5-6 plays a week. With that in mind, here's the list of what I haven't written up:

• Dido, Queen of Carthage, by Christopher Marlow
• Into the Woods, by Stephen Sondheim (at BIG arts, Sanibel)
• Sunshine Over Leith (film adaptation)
• EAS class: Introduction to Meisner
• The Laramie Project (film adaptation)
• Futureproof, by Lynda Radley
• William Shakespeare's Star Wars, by Ian Doescher

I will be doing these at some point, but for the sake of my sanity and getting the blog going again, I'll be posting short thoughts only, and updating this post to do so. Tomorrow the blog will resume with Day 98 and whatever I chose to read/see. Once again I find myself in a position of trying to reiterate this year was never going to be easy or flawless, and this is the safe time to make mistakes and learn to recover from them.