Heh, yeah. Bob kicks ass. I've had that one for a while, though. May be time to put in a new one.

It hadn't occurred... Perhaps it will now...

That's what I thought, the unique language and word play defines Shakespeare more than the plot lines. That may be because the plot lines have been done so many ways, in so many mediums, they aren't unique to Willie's plays any more.

But then I'm told all that can change and still be Shakespeare. That's why I was trying to break down what makes Shakespeare, Shakespeare. But no help there, just nay sayers. I'm waiting for HM to tell us what the Tlingit show was like. :cool:

LoL

Shakespeare

reimagined

I fully support their right to sing and dance Shakespeare, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna get off my ass.

Aw c'mon, just a short video....oh, with sound, please. :D

Rumor has it, you might not be able to get a ticket, so be prepared to gate crash, ok?

If it's a hit, maybe they'll tour.

saw it last night:

OMG... we're just underachievers making up for lost time.

... thought I was gonna die!

response to especially Bruce
 

I'm actually an actor in Macbeth, I play Malcolm. We've had good responses, not a great review but with the Washington Post I hear a not great review is excellent.

I'm thinking there are a couple things that interest me: 1) I'm surprised and a little excited that people even care enough to offer a few passing thoughts. 2) I'm curious how people have thoughts on something they presumably won't see or haven't seen, or don't know the contexts. Is that how most of these blogs go? Opinions but without context or experience?

I can agree mostly with disappointment at Shakespeare being "reimagined" for its own sake. I hate Shakespeare in a Nazi camp or on the moon just because that's what a director wanted to do. That's why I didn't really like Ian McKellen's Richard III. But I LOVED Kurasawa's Throne of Blood. It depends on what you do with it, I suppose.

But, clearly, there are opinions on this thing without folks actually having a chance to see it for themselves. I'd love it for folks to see it and gain their own perspectives. Otherwise, what's the point of even a passing thought on the thing? The energy it takes to type on a keyboard and post a blog? To take time out of the day to read other people's thoughts on something they haven't seen? To form an opinion on something that is imagined, self-constructed? If you hate it, why not hate it for what it is, or love it for what it is.

It's been great to be a part of this play, for me, personally. Generally, the audiences have been great, and the cast has been a great group. I'm excited that we are sparking some debate, striking some cord. Thanks.

Ishmael

Congratulations, and thanks for visiting here.

Me too. Got myself into quite a lot of trouble over it, too. Yes, real people still read Shakespeare and attend the plays, and care enough to argue passionately about it.

Yep. That's pretty much how it is. In Real Life, too.

Congratulations, and welcome to the Cellar, Ishmael. :D
I assume you've read the thread. If you have, then you should know it's not about you, your production. The announcement of your production, which I opened with, only sparked the question of reimagining Shakespeare. As you said, it's been done often with mixed results.

My question is, if you change (reimagine) the costumes and language to a different context, a different setting/era/culture, how can it still be called Shakespeare? It's a different play. Is it the plot that makes Shakespeare, Shakespeare?

Hell. I'm no theater expert by any means, but I agreed with cowhead, that the language, the dialect, the word play, were always an important part of the experience of watching one of Willie's plays.

So that brought me back to the same question? How much can you reimagine one of his plays, how much can be changed and still consider it Shakespeare? Of course to know that, you have to know what's necessary to keep.
Since you have working knowledge, (ok sorry, that was a bad pun) of the play(s), can you help me out here?
This tells me you did think it was about your production, which is not the case at all.
Glad you had fun, that's a great reward in itself. Yes, you have sparked a debate. Cloud was appalled that I could question Shakespeare in any form, but why not? You said there were some reimagined productions you didn't care for, so evidently you agree there must be some line that should not be crossed. Saying Shakespeare on the marque doesn't guarantee a good show.

A million thanks for stopping in. If I'd known, I'd of had a beer for you. I'm really hoping you'll stop back an give us the benefit of your knowledge, trying to come up with at least a rough answer to my questions. Even if you feel it's just your opinion, I'd like to hear it. Thanks again...oh, and break a leg. :D

PS, are they recording video, or even audio, of any of the performances? If not, please put a bug in their ear....only two days left.

No you didn't. You scolded me and I told you to go to hell. So what? :p
Just because I'm obnoxious, doesn't mean your in trouble....at least not with me.

Did you see the director's interview at the end:
"We basically made this movie for stoners who just read the Cliff notes.!"

:)

[It's really hard to give an appreciative look on the net.]

Response to Bruce and Cloud
 

Bruce, you wrote that it's not about me or the production. I guess you're right, but on the other hand, I'm wondering what you assume "reimagining" means. The play is about 60 per cent translated into Tlingit, while the soliliquies and Macbeth and Lady Macbeth in their scenes together are in English. The idea being that there is a change when individuals choose to break from the group.

You see, it's not reimagined for its own sake-- the play does indeed highlight someone's fatal personal ambition. Putting others before the self is a huge value in the Tlingit culture.

I've been told by someone I respect, a poet named Robert Bringhurst, that you can dislike literature all you want, but it's like disliking food or air, if you don't use it you'll get sick. I think about this when folks try to use the old "dead white irrelevant man" argument for Shakespeare. Go ahead and dislike him, or "challenge the status quo". Your loss.

On the other hand, there are great, great poets, writers, artists, unrecognized. I'm thinking of the great oral poets of my area, in Southeast Alaska. Some are survived in texts waiting to be retranslated over and over again for each new generation, and perhaps read by those who learn the original language. I hope, as we gain more recognition, and bring out new artists, that we can bring out that side of the culture.

Thanks,
Ishmael

Ishmael, as Bruce asked about, I hope that you'll post a video (at least a part of it), or a link of a video, of your troupe's performance. I think I speak for a lot of us that we'd love to see it.

Also, will you take this show on the road?