[Ishmael]

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