10/16 Notes- Courtney

Oct 16 Notes-

Gavin Web, Richard III Director-

This is currently tech time. Richard III was written for an audience who knew all the characters in the play. We currently lack this context. Example, Jane Shore. Style of the production: motorcycle gang. The play takes place during the wars of the roses, which were gangland wars. These wars did not ruin the economy. Affinity for emblems, badges and tattoos. The major characters have their names on them. The characters are brutish in their behavior. This is not a modernization of the text. You won’t see modern technologies in the play. Reoriented the stage so that there will be a balcony. Shakespeare’s plays demanded a balcony. There are banners that represent who is king.

The substance-it was surprising to find that the story of the play is a lie. Shakespeare took the Tudor propaganda and made it into a play. Thomas More created a portrayal of Richard III as a monster. In effect Tudor had committed regicide and usurped the throne. This is why he had to rewrite history. Richard III was actually quite a good king. The goal is to reveal the play as a piece of propaganda. There will be a fact-check up on a screen, to try to demonstrate the effectiveness of propaganda. This play was written to glorify the Tudor dynasty. Wrote a prologue to explain the play, particularly the historical background. There are also some lines from Henry VI. Queen Margaret is a character in the play who is not real, she speaks to the audience and can tell the future.

Jennifer- How did being at IU change the production?

Gavin- It did not. But the election context did.

Amy- How do you make casting decisions?

Gavin- It is a mystery. Castings are terrible. It is not about the talent of the actor, but rather they fit the part. Sometimes an actor is so compelling that you change your vision.

Whitney- Did you make any other additions or subtractions?

Gavin- I cut the play considerably. If it is not based on action and character, it gets cut. If it is repetitive, it gets cut. The play is 2 hours without an intermission.

Ellen- Do actors ride motorcycles?

Gavin- No.

Ellen- Was there special training?

Gavin- Yes, for fights.

Sara- The women are not biker babes? What is the period?

Gavin- There is no period for the play. The music is from Nine Inch Nails.

Back in Class:

Ellen: We are moving toward the casebook project. Imagine we’re producing a collective casebook. Each person will be responsible for one page. Dramaturge agitates for the best interpretation by persuading the director. The play will be Richard III. Often have images and primary evidences. And some written account.

Amy- Focus in specifically on something. Ex, battle, mistresses, particular lines, etc.

Ellen- Some people have worked as dramaturges. You can think broadly. Mobilize evidence that matters to you.

Amy- Starting with Crane. Can someone start with a brief articulation of some part of the argument?

Jennifer: Etymological discussion of what words are used for performance in Early Modern performances. She explains the different perspectives shown in the different words for performance. Two different views of theater: productive and teachable or indulgent theater.

Ellen: What is the theoretical investment?

Andrea: She talks about embodied performance, as opposed to the meaning of performance.

Ellen: She is trying to turn early modern away from a failed understanding of performance.

Amy: She questions new historicism. What is her repair to Greenblatt’s use of the term performance?

Jenna: She advocates for Butler’s view over Schecter or Turner. She doesn’t want to view it as fraudulent or false.

Ellen: The cognitive is the last in the sequence because it is useful in breaking down the binary at the beginning of the article. Anti-theatricalism vs. pro-theatricalism. Those are two schools of thought, but there is actually shading between this. There are cultural processes that get lumped into the same categories as performance (theater). There is a more textured opportunity here. The key is the shift to The Alchemist.

Jennifer: The Alchemist undermined the way theater worked.

Ellen: How does she view Jonson’s theater philosophy?

Amy: What does she say about the difference between performance and exercise? Page 172.

Ming: The word performance was not around?

Amy: It was not used the way we use it.

Dorothy: It was used in the sense of performing an action.

Cody: There is a degree of materiality to the term performance. The idea of alchemy itself is seen as material.

Amy: Performing a door. What’s important for her is understanding the difference in the way these things were thought about. There is an interesting nexus of historicism. A cognitive science approach to historicism. She is resuscitating a conceptual difference in historical performance. Exercise does this work for her as well. We now have questions of performativity. There was not a sense of a representation being different from creation. Theater here is a much more powerful event. How then is she using The Alchemist? Page 181.

Ellen: Page 183-184. One of the valuable takaways from Crane is that performance studies talks about cultural construction. Embedded in Early Modern is the idea that culture is constructed, but is no less material. This is not a contemporary idea. That can’t be a retrospective discovery. She wants to build a philosophy of the theater that takes into account that seeming paradox. It opens up to much richer understanding the anti-theatricalism of the period. This actually notices the material consequences of performance. Alchemy is a useful metaphor here. Questions Crane’s notions of hierarchy. There are different systems of belief working in concert. That coheres well with our own experience.

Amy: Central to this is a different understanding of language and cognition. Central to her argument is the connection between thinking and speaking. Exercise of the brain does not just happen in the brain.

Ellen: Did other people see the link to Davis here? Let’s move to Hodgdon. This will lead productively into our next discussion. Sara taught it to her undergrads.

Sara: I showed them Looking for Richard. They had the same reaction as the yokels: “Shakespeare’s boring.” They were still resistant to the idea of replicating doubling the body. They can see that he’s Al Pacino and that he’s Richard. They did not quite understand.

Ellen: Hodgdon does a terrific job of addressing the frustration of watching the movie. What he’s looking for is potivistic historiography. I want to punch him. Having read Hodgdon’s account leaves me with the question: is this the most brilliant production of Richard III ever? This is a way that is nicely consonant with the genius of Richard III. Maybe this is dramaturgically really smart? Relationship to the fact-checking in our Richard III.

Sara: Moment in the movie when they decide on Wynona Ryder.

Amy: The takeaway is thinking about the power of casting. We’ll watch clips of Richard. These actor’s bodies are being performed.