Last year I reviewed "Tempest" -- one of 3 versions of Shakespeare's "The Tempest," mounted in NYC, and staged as a response to Hurricane Sandy (of all things). It is OK to tinker with the Bard? http://www.thestage.co.uk/opinion/future-players/2013/09/modernise-shake...
On Writing : The Stage: Should we modernize Shakespeare? by LindaAnn Loschiavo
Other topics in Authoring & Playwriting:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
2 people like this
I don't believe it's Shakespeare if you change the dialogue to modern language. I have no problem, however, putting the words in a modern setting. In fact, I recently completed a screen adaptation of "Macbeth" using most of the Bard's original dialogue (cut a few lines and changed "king" to "Sir" or "President") and placed it against the backdrop of the modern US presidency. Visual elements help the audience put things into context... and great actors can use their voice inflections and body language to help the audience understand arcane words. Just my two cents, for what its worth ;^)
1 person likes this
Honestly, Shakespeare's plays are produced so often, I don't have a problem with "modernizing" if someone wants to do a different take on them. More traditional productions are presented for any of us who like them that way.
English Lit Student: Why teachers should not assign Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ - - - is Kelsey May right? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/06/22/student-w...
Shakespeare's plays are often adaptations anyway. Many of his contemporaries did their own Hamlet, their own Julius Caesar, their own Richard III. Almost all of his stories were sourced from elsewhere. Shakespeare is the poetry, it is the language. For me, the fun, the challenge, is transforming the poetic language into something modern audiences get. That said, Cibber and others have messed with Shakespeare a bit, and got away with it. And I have seen translations into other languages.
Arguably, since we cannot know for certain some key details about staging the plays in the 16th century (Like was poor George Plantagenet drowned on stage or just off stage?) then all performances of Shakespeare's plays are adaptations on some level. It's a good question to ask as to when are the adaptation so far afield that it's no longer appropriate to put Shakespeare's name on it. Notably, even when Shakespeare was writing, there were plays about the same topic that would often have the same title, but be written, or performed by, different people, and therefore be decidedly different productions. I think art is fluid like that.