Yee-haw, Titus Andronicus!
Nov. 19th, 2006 07:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
magidLast night I went to the Wellesley Shakes Society production of Titus Andronicus.
First off, it was in Shakespeare House, a half-timbered building I'd never been in before, so it was cool just to look around. On the ground floor, most of the space was taken up with one room, which had padded benches and bookshelves around the periphery, under multi-paned windows, and a fireplace. There was also a small kitchen and an area I think used as a changing room tucked under the stairs. The performance was upstairs, under the eaves, so the ceiling slanted, I could see the half-timbering, and the windows meant that even with all the lights out, it wasn't completely dark (though none of the light shed was on the three-steps-up stage area).
I had heard that this is the bloodiest of Shakespeare's plays, but I'd not read it. Just as well; it really is rather grisly, with 'mere' stabbings, more ritual killings, and rather a lot of loss of hand, not to mention a rape and other mutilation. I think Shakespeare used his entire quota of fake blood for his entire career on this one play. That said, there are some funny moments, too, at least as this show played it.
The text is Romans v. Goths*, but the setting was Wild West, cowboys and Indians, which worked fine (becoming emperor meant being pinned with the sheriff's star, which I thought a nice touch), though it did make the one Moorish character trickier to play, since the classic Westerns don't have a third faction. It wasn't a big hindrance, however.
(Side note: this is the second Moor I know of in a Shakespeare play, and he's a total snake, doing nasty things for the fun of it. Othello gives in to his irrational jealousy, but is at least human; this Aaron is not. Not that I think Aaron is a 'Moorish' name, more Jewish, so perhaps he's the generic scapegoat of otherness, outside the war-based bounds of 'us' and 'them' to be wholly other.)
I enjoyed the production, being fairly good for college theater, though not amazing. I was amused, though, when I thought about how the original show was all men, even for the female roles, while this production was all women, turning the original on its head. I wonder what they'll put on next semester.
* I could totally see someone choosing to have their goths in leather and so on, perhaps in high school. Would the Romans then become the jocks?
First off, it was in Shakespeare House, a half-timbered building I'd never been in before, so it was cool just to look around. On the ground floor, most of the space was taken up with one room, which had padded benches and bookshelves around the periphery, under multi-paned windows, and a fireplace. There was also a small kitchen and an area I think used as a changing room tucked under the stairs. The performance was upstairs, under the eaves, so the ceiling slanted, I could see the half-timbering, and the windows meant that even with all the lights out, it wasn't completely dark (though none of the light shed was on the three-steps-up stage area).
I had heard that this is the bloodiest of Shakespeare's plays, but I'd not read it. Just as well; it really is rather grisly, with 'mere' stabbings, more ritual killings, and rather a lot of loss of hand, not to mention a rape and other mutilation. I think Shakespeare used his entire quota of fake blood for his entire career on this one play. That said, there are some funny moments, too, at least as this show played it.
The text is Romans v. Goths*, but the setting was Wild West, cowboys and Indians, which worked fine (becoming emperor meant being pinned with the sheriff's star, which I thought a nice touch), though it did make the one Moorish character trickier to play, since the classic Westerns don't have a third faction. It wasn't a big hindrance, however.
(Side note: this is the second Moor I know of in a Shakespeare play, and he's a total snake, doing nasty things for the fun of it. Othello gives in to his irrational jealousy, but is at least human; this Aaron is not. Not that I think Aaron is a 'Moorish' name, more Jewish, so perhaps he's the generic scapegoat of otherness, outside the war-based bounds of 'us' and 'them' to be wholly other.)
I enjoyed the production, being fairly good for college theater, though not amazing. I was amused, though, when I thought about how the original show was all men, even for the female roles, while this production was all women, turning the original on its head. I wonder what they'll put on next semester.
* I could totally see someone choosing to have their goths in leather and so on, perhaps in high school. Would the Romans then become the jocks?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Third Wild West faction
Date: 2006-11-20 02:16 am (UTC)Re: Third Wild West faction
Date: 2006-11-20 04:29 am (UTC)Re: Third Wild West faction
Date: 2006-11-20 06:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-20 09:18 am (UTC)But, I'd understand if you waited a few months, the play is one of the harder things to watch. It gets me when he reveals that the mother ate the boys.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-20 03:02 pm (UTC)