/454018 by Dragos Badea

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Table of Contents

Workshop Overview

II.

Session Outlines

III.

Responses

IV.

Report by Participant 8 – Penelope Woods

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Workshop Overview

Workshop Leader: Dr Catherine Silverstone, Queen Mary University of London

Participants: seven students enrolled on the MA module Early Modern Drama in Performance at Queen Mary, University of London (students can take this module as part of the MA Theatre and Performance or the MA Renaissance and Early Modern Studies); o Participant 1 -- Hsiaoju, Cheng o Participant 2 – anonymous o Participant 3 – anonymous o Participant 4 – Leah Peregrine-Lewis o Participant 5 -- anonymous o Participant 6 – Nushi Wijewardena o Participant 7 – no report submitted The workshop aimed to explore relationships between text, space and the performance of death at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre with specific reference to King Lear. The workshop was preceded by a seminar/workshop at Queen Mary on 27 January 2010 on early publication and performance practice. We also carried out a performance exercise that aimed to explore the performance space at QM in order to create a point of comparison for our work at the Globe (see session outline below). The workshop was followed by a session at Queen Mary on 10 February 2010 that sought to analyse the workshop especially in relation to writing about the Globe (see session outline below). It’s important to note that the terms of each session were (and are) open to interrogation and analysis. Many thanks to Farah Karim-Cooper, Madeline Knights and Globe Education for supporting this research workshop.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

II. Session Outlines

Session 1: Early Publication/ Modern Editing Wednesday 27 January 2010, QMUL This session is designed to lay the textual groundwork for our practical workshop at the Globe in Week 4. We will consider early publication and modern editing practice and the implications for performance. We will focus our discussion on sections from King Lear Q1 (first Quarto) and F (Folio) with particular emphasis on stage deaths and space. Reading: Shakespeare, William. King Lear, F and Q1 (these texts are printed on facing paces of the Norton Shakespeare). Please pay particular attention to 5.3. Please also consult 5.3 (Q1 and F) using Early English Books Online (EEBO), accessible through QM/Senate House electronic resources (you will need to be a member of Senate House to access this resource). Stern, Tiffany. Making Shakespeare: The Pressures of Stage and Page. London and New York: Routledge, 2004. 137-59. Kidnie, Margaret Jane. ‘The Staging of Shakespeare’s Drama in Print Editions’. Textual Performances: The Modern Reproduction of Shakespeare’s Drama. Eds. Lukas Erne and Margaret Jane Kidnie. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 158-77.

Session 2: Text, Space, Performance and Staging Death Wednesday 3 February 2010, Globe (9 am – 1:30 pm) Aim: To explore relationships between text, space and the performance of death at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre with specific reference to King Lear. Research questions: In what ways, if at all, does performing in the space reinforce performance choices suggested by the textual analysis and performance workshop conducted at QM? In what ways, if at all, does performing in the space suggest alternative performance choices? To what extent does performing in the space offer a means by which to historicise early modern performance practice? What are the strengths and limitations of using performance at the Globe as a means for this kind of work? What kinds of issues (dramaturgical, ethical, theatrical etc.) are at stake in the performance of death? Reading – please re-read: Shakespeare, King Lear, Q1, F (focus on 5.3)

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Session 3: Shakespeare, Heritage and Tourism Wednesday 10 February 2010, QMUL In this session we will discuss our workshop and consider relationships between Shakespeare, heritage and tourism with particular reference to Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre. Visit: Shakespeare’s Globe Exhibition (£8.50 student price) and the Globe complex including the gift shop. http://www.shakespeares-globe.org/tourexhibition/visitingtheexhibition/ View: King Lear at the Globe Archive (selected extracts will be shown as part of our workshop in Week 3). Research Task: Come prepared to discuss any element of the Globe complex in terms of the issues raised by the reading assigned for the week. Reading: Worthen, W. B. Shakespeare and the Force of Modern Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2003. 79-116. Further Reading: Hodgdon, Barbara. The Shakespeare Trade: Performances and Appropriations. Pennsylvania P, 1998. 191-241.

Philadelphia: U of

Kennedy, Dennis. ‘Shakespeare and Cultural Tourism’. Theatre Journal 50 (1998): 175-88. Silverstone, Catherine. ‘Shakespeare Live: Reproducing Shakespeare at the “New” Globe Theatre’. Textual Practice 19.1 (2005): 31-50. Report on the Globe Experiment: You will be asked to provide a short report on the workshop. Further details will be provided.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

III. Responses On completion of the three sessions, each member of the group was invited to respond to the research questions (listed above) and a series of additional questions and tasks (see below). The questions and tasks were designed to invite students to record their findings from the workshop and also to interrogate the terms of the workshop. The following section records each participant’s responses. Please note: Not all participants chose to answer all questions/tasks (one participant chose not to respond at all); the following responses have not been edited, except for the purposes of formatting; some participants requested that their responses be recorded anonymously. While the identity of each participant is protected, readers of this report can track a particular participant’s responses across the range of questions/tasks. The responses have been collated by Catherine Silverstone

A. In what ways, if at all, does performing in the space reinforce performance choices suggested by textual analysis? Participant 1 Our workshop at the globe was aimed to explore how to stage death at the Globe. Elizabethan audience would have no trouble understanding staged death in a normal daylight as it was a common practice. Modern audience, however, tend to be reluctant to accept the fictional truth without the aid of lights or modern props. In 5.3, Shakespeare reflected on the theatrical effects of staged death by having Lear look for mirrors to verify Cordelia’s death, so it became a perfect study case for us. We were aware of the architectural structures of the globe, but we still felt amazed at the large numbers of tours passing through while we worked on the stage and this somehow reminded us of the relationship between Elizabethan players and groundlings. Throughout the workshop, we became more conscious of the significance of the material factors in staging a Shakespeare play. Participant 2 I found that, initially, performing on the Globe stage (or perhaps ‘within the Globe’ would be a better description since it is, literally, an all encompassing space) made me feel obligated to performer the text ‘properly’ or as Shakespeare wrote it. However, when analysing the text for clues as to how the final scene of King Lear might be staged, I found it quite a limiting experience. I felt tied to the text, rather than the space and for me that made our work seem more static and less dramatic and engaging. This is doubtless partly due to the fact that there were only seven performers present at the workshop so when the text suggests “Exeunt with a dead march *carrying bodies+” which, on paper, sounds like a dramatic conclusion, it was virtually impossible to experiment with staging. Equally, we were all dependant on our scripts and I wonder how much the physical presence of the text in our hands affected our initial staging of the scene; with the full versions of both the quarto and folio versions of the scene, it was difficult to move beyond textual analysis.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 3 (note: response combines A and B) The piece of text used for this exploration was an extract from the Folio edition of King Lear. Through analysis of the text our preliminary investigation centred on the entrance of Lear carrying Cordelia in his arms through the main entrance of the Globe stage. This decision was made due to the dramatic nature of Lear’s dialogue on entrance, ‘’Howl, howl, howl, howl! O, you are men of stones.’’ We had Lear carrying Cordelia far downstage with the other characters flanking DSL and DSR as suggested by the stage directions indicated by the text. This was done so audience focus was levelled at the spectacle of the dead Cordelia and the transformative nature of this on the character of Lear, as is identified by his dialogue at the close of the scene. This position would allow Cordelia and Lear to be clearly seen by most of the audience, and closest to those inhabiting the pit, rather than being flanked by the two pillars. Initially, at the close of Lear’s first speech we decided that the other characters should move closer to Lear, especially Kent on his line ‘’O, my good master’’ to show his loyalty/sympathy, Kent then remained at Lear’s side for the duration. A similar decision was made for Edgar on his line ‘’Tis noble Kent your friend’’. The main reason we decided to focus much of the action DSC was to emphasise the tragic nature of the scene. This was also the denouement to the action and so it was felt that it was important for this to take place in close, intimate (as possible) proximity to the audience. Lear remained relatively motionless throughout the scene cradling Cordelia in his arms on the floor of the stage. At his death we decided that he should fall over Cordelia with Edgar moving forward as suggested by his line ‘’He faints. *To Lear] My lord, my lord!’’ After the death of Lear we decided that Kent should leave the stage on his line ‘’I have a journey, sir, shortly to go…’’. We also decided that it was problematic for the remaining characters to take Cordelia and Lear of the stage, despite the suggestion from Albany to ‘’bear them from hence’’ so instead decided that Edgar should step forward to deliver his final line directly to the audience as well as directing it to the characters remaining on stage. The final stage picture in our interpretation was therefore one of Lear and Cordelia DSC, Edgar, Albany and Messenger. We found that the decisions as described above were to some extent supported by the performance space, especially having most of the characters DSC to overcome the difficulty of the pillars affecting sight lines and power positions. The other problem that this rectified was the ability of the characters to be in proximity not only to each other but to the audience. Conversely however, we did find that this positioning resulted in a lot of ‘dead space’ due to the size of the stage. There was also the problem of a lack of energy due to the static nature of the characters created by the decision to have them come forward at the opening of the extract. Subsequent experiments led us to having Lear enter USR holding Cordelia in a more ‘lifelike’ manner to create energy and a macabre spectacle – reflecting the nature of the scene. We also wanted to experiment with how this may affect power positions within the company. We decided to have the characters remain further back from Lear until the closing of the scene to combat the problem of ‘dead space’ created by the area of the stage and allow for greater movement. The reduction in stasis improved the quality of energy created by the characters. After experimentation the problem of the pillars was to some extent rectified in the freer movement of the characters. This ‘freeing up’ of the stage space allowed for greater interaction with different parts of the audience, which was important due to the nature of their formation. The above details our alternative performance choices as dictated by the stage space of the globe.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 4 (note response combines A and B) Performing in the space gave the opportunity to explore the space in a desirable way, with the text in mind. With each attempt of re-enacting the scene, performance choices changed and being in the space influenced that. Participant 5 Performing in the space, where the action has to be visible from a semi circular space, on several levels, makes you pay more attention to the implicit stage directions in the text (examples are in V.iii, Lear’s requests for a mirror and later to “undo this button”), when positioning a character close to Lear, without obscuring him, would be a consideration. Participant 6 I was struck by how little relationship there seemed to be between the text and the space. I did not necessarily notice anything about the space that reinforced any observations made about the text. This was surprising – I was expecting to see more of a relationship between the two.

B. In what ways, if at all, does performing in the space suggest alternative performance choices? Participant 1 While we read through the lines and walked on the grid, we realized that we could disperse ourselves on the stage instead of gathering around in a small circle in the downstage center. This stage layout can bring stronger focus to the interaction between Lear and Cordelia. Also, we hoped that the stage could become stark and bare at the end of the play. Because neither Kent nor Albany has intentions to run the country, it is better that they exit to the upstage before Edgar delivers the final epilogue. Participant 2 For me, once I was able to move past this feeling of being tied to the text, the space suggested far more alternative performance choices. The size of the stage and the proximity and placement of the audience where big considerations and I found myself wanting to change moments to make them more engaging and use more of the space. Participant 3 See response to A above. Participant 4 See response to A above Participant 5 Alternative performance choices are suggested by the thrust stage: whether to use this downstage position to encourage or to provoke audience participation and then having to decide whether actors can still ‘control’ the action.(During our workshop, groups of visitors to the Globe were playing out their own agenda in the yard below us). Alternative performance choices are also presented in the final moments of the play by the variants of the 1 st Quarto and the Folio texts, which place Lear’s death at different points in the text.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 6 Textual analysis suggests that Early Modern monologues and soliloquies are addressed directly at the audience, in close proximity to it and sometimes even interacting with it. Yet, during the ‘power position’ exercise, all group members decided that Upstage Centre was the most powerful position on the stage. This begged the question: does Shakespeare’s Globe necessarily call for such ‘interactive’ performances after all? It seemed that if I wanted to show a character to be powerful and/or important, one way to do it would be to have them spend most time at the power position (Upstage Centre). Yet this would put them at the greatest possible distance away from the audience, giving them very little opportunity to interact with the audience. Also, during monologues, they would appear to be speaking to themselves, not to the crowd which would be made to feel like it was peering through a keyhole into a private moment. On the other hand, the audience would be visible to the character. I imagined that this would pose quite a challenge. At any rate, it was a surprising discovery.

C. To what extent does performing in the space offer a means by which to historicise early modern performance practice? What are the strengths and limitations of using performance at the Globe as a means for this kind of work? Participant 1 Performing at the Globe reminds me that early modern performance practice operated on a different spectatorship from modern theatre. The semi-circle in front of the stage must have been crowded with theatre-goers and the rowdiness must have rivaled the on-stage performance of Shakespeare’s plays. I am also stricken by the fact that actors can articulate their words gently but still create an ideal acoustic effect. Moreover, the audience in the early modern times could not always follow up every word of the characters. Their encounter with plays might be a conflation of text, their own imagination and reaction of other audience members. To make a connection between early modern performance practice and practical work on stage can be useful as the site reconstructs the architectural details of the original Globe. Yet, given that Globe functions as a living history theatre house, we cannot trace every fact at the new Globe to its historical origin. Participant 2 There is a significant body of work around the idea of early modern audiences and how they differ from modern audiences. For me, one of the most obvious ways in which a stage like the Globe helps us to historicise early modern performance practice is to give performers or researchers a sense of audience proximity or lack thereof. In some instances, an actor can address a specific member of the audience standing in the pit with ease however, this means effectively turning you back on a different section of the audience. Unlike proscenium arch theatres (which are of course not the only kind of modern theatrical set up but arguably the most common) in which the audience is nearly always all seated together facing the framed stage, the Globe demands a different kind of performance and engagement with the audience. I suppose what I found interesting about performing on the Globe stage was not so much what it taught me about early modern performance but what it highlighted about contemporary performance concerns. In some contemporary theatrical productions, there is a desire for

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

naturalistic, psychologically convincing characters. Intricate, naturalistic acting techniques seem to get a little lost on the Globe stage; suddenly, everything has to become ‘bigger’, more theatrical in order for it to translate even to those audience members not be addressed or who can’t even see the performers face. Participant 3 Performing in the space allowed us the opportunity to experience the possible practice and limitations a company would have had to address performing text in the early modern period. This included the challenge of addressing the area of the stage and the spatial relationships between the actors. The stage area was a lot bigger than at first thought and it was interesting to consider how a company working at the time would have choreographed their performances with this in mind. Another consideration was the proximity and formation of the audience, them being placed all around the stage rather than in a ‘traditional’ pros arch formation. This meant a re-consideration of movement was necessary in order for all parts, or most parts of the auditorium to be addressed. Another point of negotiation were the pillars placed either side of CS. Their position resulted in the area around becoming ‘dead space’, space that was not used by the actors, due not only to the difficulty of getting around them, but also because of how they affected sight lines. What was also interesting was considering how a company may have approached the end of the Lear extract. Without the advantage of modern technology (lighting, stage curtains etc) the challenge was to negotiate how to get the characters of the dead Cordelia and Lear of the stage. We discussed the possibility of soldiers or extras coming on and bearing away the bodies, as is suggested by the text, or the possibility of a simple freeze. It became clear through our discussions the advantage of having the jig at the end of tragic plays as one way to deal with this problem. The experience of trying to stage an extract from a play in a historicised space was interesting in that it allowed us to re-consider staging techniques and approach difficulties in a way that may have been unconsidered in another type of space. It would have been interesting to also have a working audience there as well in order to discuss our ideas and approaches to the text in performance in consideration of their own ‘early modern’ experience. We did have the advantage on the day of tours going around which certainly gave an impression of audience presence. Participant 4 Knowing that the Globe’s structure is a very true reflection of the original space helps the performance be depicted with conviction and truth, yet limitations could be considered as things such as the position of pillars, the size and shape of the stage etc, as these could possibly affect performance quality. Participant 5 Using performance at the Globe as a means to historicise early modern performance practice has its limitations. However, as Worthen says, it “recalls its (the play’s) original theatrical discourse, the power of...this theatre to infect the name of action.” While close attention has been paid to reproducing “authentic” handmade costumes and paring down stage scenery to the minimal, actors are trained by and directors still work with contemporary practices; they can “recall” the original play, but they remain 20th and 21st century people. Perhaps the most interesting productions are borne of this fusion of the past with the contemporary.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 6 It is easy to view the reconstructed Globe like a living museum, imagining what it was like to stage productions in the 17th century. The building gives us invaluable clues and allows us to experiment with established and new theories about 17th century performance. However, it must be remembered that all our experiments are carried out by us – 21st century practitioners with strong theatrical cultures of our own. It is inevitable that whatever experimentation we do within the Globe, we experience it through the lens of our contemporary theatrical culture. In my opinion, the building is not enough to strip us of our 21st century notions of theatre. In fact, I would argue that the safest approach is to use the reconstructed Globe as another clue about early modern performance (just like a reconstructed costume, for instance) and interweave it with our contemporary theatre practices. At the end of it, we would have created something new, not historical.

D. What kinds of issues (dramaturgical, ethical etc.) are at stake in the performance of death? Participant 1 In the case of King Lear at 5.3, Lear’s reaction with the corpse can make a big difference in creating a striking image. The corpse should be re-animated by other characters to create theatrical validity of death for the audience. It is necessary to make the image of lifeless movement very visible to the audience to arouse ethos. Lear’s death is a prolonged performance of struggles. This also creates suspense because the audience has to witness the process of death. The ethical issue arises because the more the theatrical death become facsimile of real death, the more responsible the audience feels for the death. Participant 2 The death of a character is, in my opinion, one of the most difficult moments to stage. It jars with theatrical performance which relies on its audience accepting, to whatever degree, that what they see on stage is ‘real’. Audiences might be able to accept love or hate or any other emotional responses between characters on stage - I might ‘believe’ or at least allow myself to be convinced that the actor playing Romeo and the actress playing Juliet are in love for example. However, when the lovers kill themselves at the end of the play, I as a member of the audience know that they, the actors portraying the characters are still alive – no amount of fake blood or convincing, naturalistic acting will persuade me of that. Often, the staging of death shatters the illusion of theatre. Indeed, in many instances not only does the staging of a death seem ‘fake’ at the moment it occurs, audiences are later presented with the same character they have witnessed ‘die’ taking the bow at the end or, as if often the case at the Globe, dancing a jig. With this in mind, during our experience of performing on the Globe stage I believe our most successful and interesting staging of the death of Lear and the presence of the corpse of Cordelia on stage occurred when we embraced the idea of theatricality to its fullest extent. The more naturalistic we tried to make the death and corpse appear, the less dramatic it appeared; it was anticlimactic, a disappointment. However, it was suggested that it might look interesting if the corpse of Cordelia was more ‘mobile’ and that Lear would animate the corpse, turning her head, moving her arms and holding her upright. Some of the movements we experimented with such as walking with the upright corpse would be virtually impossible with a ‘real’ corpse, however, visually it was more impactful. Cordelia became like a broken marionette in Lear’s arms and the

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

two performers portraying the roles moved together in a disturbing dance macabre that had far more emotional and dramatic impact than Lear slumping straight to the ground with an immobile Cordelia in his arms. Perhaps then one of the ways to negotiate the problem of staging death is to embrace the fact that it is impossible to stage completely naturalistically; by embracing its theatrical qualities, interesting and fruitful experimentation and staging can emerge. Participant 3 One of the problems in performing the death of Lear and Cordelia was practical. As mentioned above the logistics of getting them on and off stage, where to place them on the stage and how to interact with them were difficult to negotiate. Initially we decided to have Lear enter carrying Cordelia in his arms. We then decided that we wanted to dramatise the spectacle of her death so we re-staged Lear’s entrance by having him animate Cordelia as he walks on and then interact with her for the duration of the extract. This created quite a macabre atmosphere and improved the energy of the scene. We came to no final conclusions about the best way get the characters of the stage at the end of the extract, so settled on a freeze as Edgar says his final speech to the audience. Representing death in the theatre is problematic because of the physical limitations of its representation. The audience are required to make the decision to suspend their disbelief and a mutual agreement is made between the performers and the watchers that this death is mimesis – it is directly represented action that is enacted. This has the possibility of allowing the audience the realization of their own death. Lear’s death represents the end of his consciousness and the break in his dialogue. In terms of the narrative this heralds a new status quo and the end of his monarchic rule. Death in this scene becomes an inescapable truth. Participant 4 In the performance of death, the issues involved depend on how the text is read and interpreted(dramaturgical). I also believe that it is culturally specific (ethical) Yet, I think staging’s of death should keep it’s ‘Shakespearean’ quality and should involve the traditional dramatic elements which may be compromised when such dramaturgical and ethical issues are at stake. Participant 5 The performance of death can present problems: whether it can ever be written plausibly or “realistically” into the text, for example, in a comment made by a bystander or by the more difficult enactment by the actor whose character dies on stage. In the latter case, should they attempt to mime the act of dying or accompany it with words ( or sounds, oos or aghs)? Should the actor who dies need to remain on stage for any length of time, there is the problem of remaining absolutely still with no apparent breathing i.e rise and fall of the chest. Any ethical issue presented has to be dealt with according to the sensibilities of the time and place. Participant 6 We decided to perform Corderlia’s death as if Lear was trying to bring her back to life, unwilling to let her go. We had the two figures engaged in a sort of dance macabre. We also decided that Lear should see Cordelia’s spirit rise out of her body on the lines “Look there, look there!” (5.3.317). These were, of course, very specific decisions on our part about how death and corpses should be handled. If, instead of just being an exercise on an isolated scene, we were aiming to do a full production of King Lear, we may not have been able to treat the deaths of Cordelia and

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Lear in this way. Our staging of death would have to be compatible with our other cultural and/or historical decisions about the production.

E. Write a short response which outlines your discoveries, if any, from each of the workshop activities a. grid walking Participant 1 I find this exercise beneficial as I am drawn to pay attention to my physical relations with the performing space. By walking at difference paces and different heights, I can imagine myself taking different roles and making a connection between actors and characters Participant 2 I found the process of grid walking most useful in coming to terms with the sheer size of the globe stage as well as appreciating the difficulty posed by the obstacles on the stage, specifically the pillars. Participant 3 This exercise resulted in a greater appreciation of the spatial awareness needed between actors on stage. The exercise helped improve levels of concentration and interaction. It also gave a feel for the area of the space in which action would occur. Participant 4 (note response combines a and d) Walking the grid and performing the scene on the grid was my least favourite exercise as I found myself getting frustrated by the rigidity of the task set. Although it served as a means of familiarising yourself with the space it meant that the focus was on ‘walking the grid’, and therefore being aware of other people on the grid, whereas I would have preferred spending more time being experimental with the space using a more creative approach. Participant 5 Grid walking at the Globe felt freer than in the Drama Studio at Queen Mary, which might have been, incidentally, due to the absence on the Globe stage of actual marked squares; discipline of the 90 degrees angle was self imposed. On the Globe stage, whilst acutely aware of the need to anticipate the moves and position of fellow performers, the greater space, including height, allowed more freedom of movement within its parameters. Participant 6 The pillars on the stage were very obstructive. b. ‘power’ positions Participant 1 It never occurred to me that finding power positions on stage can be so tricky. In modern theatre, the power positions are highlighted by the stage lights. But the Globe stage is big and sectored by four pillars so some positions are more visible than others. Also,

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

whether the director wants to create effect of proximity or authority can determine the power positions. Participant 2 What struck me as interesting when experimenting with power positions on the stage was the relationship between the performer and the audience. One might assume that proximity to the audience might be the more ‘powerful’ position. For example, audiences might be more likely to direct their attention to the performer closest to them, particularly if that performer is addressing the audience. However, if the performer is farther upstage away from the audience, it enables them to observe not only the majority of the audience but the other performer on stage, creating the sense that this performer is overseeing the action of all the other performers and thus, is in a more powerful, dominant position. Participant 3 It was interesting trying to work out power positions on the grid and then on the globe stage. Power positions on the globe stage proved problematic not only because of the size/shape of the acting area but also because of the position of the audience. Most of the people involved in the workshop chose their power position as CS or USC – where there is the most visual clarity for both actor and audience. This was slightly different from the choices made on the grid in the original workshop because the space created was so different. Participant 4 When asked to walk to the spot we considered to be the most ‘powerful’ position on the stage, many of us chose different positions. This was interesting as I think a strength of the space is that it lends itself to several different positions of power. These would also perhaps differ depending on the type of character played, character motives etc. Participant 5 The position of most ‘power’ seemed to me to be mid-centre stage, further upstage and well away from the front. Being aware of the rooms for seating on the upper sides of the stage may have suggested this; it was also marked by the central point of the figure of eight, if paced from outside the pillars. Participant 6 It was interesting that we all picked Upstage Centre as the power position, instead of Downstage Centre like I suspect we would have at many contemporary theatres. Much of this was to do with sound – I felt my voice carried best from here – but it was also to do with distance from the audience. Greater distance meant greater power (less vulnerability, perhaps?) c. acting out the scene; Participant 1 I find it rewarding to try different staging options for the same scene. We can compare different stage effects and judge which option better fits our understanding of the play.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Role changing is also helpful because as we dwell into different characters, we discover new insights into the relations between characters. Participant 2 Again, the issue of the size of the Globe stage was a big part of our initial acting out of the scene. Since there were only seven of us present on stage and our natural instinct was to maintain physical proximity to the other performers on stage, it meant that a lot of the scene felt very static and ‘clumped together’; we all just stood in a semi-circle around the performers playing Lear and Cordelia who where centre stage at the front. This meant that the stage looked painfully bare and underused. We quickly realised that one of the conditions of working on a stage of that size is to try to resist what might feel the most natural – standing next to or facing the person you are speaking to – in favour of what worked better in the space. Participant 3 I discovered from acting out the scene the difficulties that companies may face performing on the globe stage – as discussed earlier. One of the most interesting discoveries was how different the acting space was from my perception of it – especially its depth, and how this changes the approach to dramatic text. Participant 4 Acting out the scene in the space was quite enjoyable as we were able to understand how actors are met with the challenge of moving around the space in a way that looks effective from an audience’s point of view but also in a way that allows the quality of the performance to be carried out as it should. Participant 5 Acting out the scene, when taking a one-line role, gave me a completely different perspective; I was more aware of the performers’ movements and voices. The latter had greater clarity and volume, helped no doubt by the Globe’s acoustic. I felt the group gathered together too closely, not sufficiently using the available space. Participant 6 There was a strange pressure to spread out over the stage, despite the instinct to huddle close to the dying Lear and Cordelia. The size of the space might have had something to do with this, as well as the fact that the audience almost surrounds the stage, so we wanted to spread out to remain visible. d. performing the scene on the grid; Participant 1 At first, the walking with reading scripts was chaotic because everyone could choose the direction and pace independently. After a few minutes of fumbling, we found out some interesting moments where characters could address to each other in a sensible way. We even discovered new staging options after we explored the stage by walking on the grid.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 2 I found performing the scene on the grid helped us to come to terms with resisting our natural instincts (by forcing us to move in an unnatural way whiles in dialogue with someone) as well as helping us to understand the different power positions. By walking around the entire performance space while speaking dialogue, it highlighted the way in which sound travels and changes in the space depending on where you are on the stage as well as how proximity to the audience might change a performer relationship to them. Participant 3 This was an interesting task because it changed the dynamism and relationships between certain characters that had not been considered when performing the scene ‘straight’. New ways of performing the scene were brought to light during these exercises which were than incorporated into the staging of the extract. New relationships between characters were discovered as were actor positions. Participant 4 See response to a above. Participant 5 Performing the scene on the grid was more choreographed and disciplined, promoting a more focused use of the available space. Participant 6 The stage is so large! Sometimes, the character I was addressing was on the other side of the grid. Subtle eye contact was not enough to communicate with them. I felt the need to cross the stage speedily to them. e. performing the scene from memory Participant 1 We shifted our roles for this activity so nobody remembered the lines very well and a lot of lines were deleted or rephrased into modern language. And yet we became more attentive to each other’s movement and words because this is the only way we could find cues for our parts. Participant 2 This was probably the most challenging exercise we tried. Despite working on the same scene all morning, it was amazing how little of it could be remembered! Not only specific dialogue but who each character was supposed to be addressing and key plot points were all forgotten. The only thing that we really managed to hold onto was the emotional intensions of the characters; we knew for example that Lear was distressed throughout or that Albany and Kent were concerned. We ended up looping back on ourselves a number of times until someone (perhaps out of desperation?) just jumped to a line of dialogue at the end of the scene to bring it to an end. This exercise did highlight how ultimately, a lot of what is said on stage could be considered superfluous and expendable and that it is the eventual outcomes or resolutions that are committed to memory and vital to the progression of the plot.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 3 The main discovery from this exercise was how well main, important plot points were remembered in order for the scene to run, but that other, more subtle narrative points were forgotten. Participant 4 This was the most interesting performance exercise as we were relying on our spontaneity as a means of forwarding the scene. Performing the scene from memory meant that the scene was more jarred than it had been in previous attempts but concentration levels had to be increased in order for the scene to achieve the series of events that it has set out to achieve. Participant 5 Performing the scene from memory released us from the constraints of holding pieces of paper, which enabled freedom of gesture and body movement to give meaning. With fewer words, emphasis was on the tone of voice to express emotion; I think there was a greater engagement with the character’s emotions. This seemed no less when we used only a nonsense, monosyllabic word (Blah,blah). Here the sounds acquired a musical quality with markedly changing voice rhythms and pitch to express emotion. Participant 6 With the new pressure of remembering the scene, suddenly the space mattered much less. Instead, we were moving and speaking in a way that I would describe as more natural. We weren’t trying to fill the whole space, remain visible to the entire audience or adhere to any supposed rules. It was liberating.

F. Consider the assumptions that underpinned our workshop (eg. about acting, rehearsal etc.). Participant 1 Stage performance should get better attention not only in terms of its relation to the play texts but in terms of the theatrical effect in its own right. Our workshop is more an experiment of performance than a proper rehearsal of the play. On the one hand, our prior textual study gives us a general scenario of the play. On the other hand, it does not preempt our performance choices. We have the theatre itself develop out of our acts of performance. Thus, our workshop can be a laboratory where we manage to put both texts and performance in play and examine divergent relationships. Participant 2 I’m not sure what specific assumptions underpinned our workshop other than the fact that I feel we approached the scene more as ‘scholars’ or ‘researchers’ than actors; the workshop was never about creating a brilliant piece of theatre or demonstrating our acting skills. Indeed, several of the members of the group had little or no acting experience. This meant that, occasionally, I felt we perhaps didn’t experiment enough with performance techniques and were very much lead by the text. For example, when it was suggested that Lear get to his feet before collapsing again upon his death, it was discarded because we could find no evidence in the text to

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

suggest this might have happened, despite the fact that it would certainly have been more dramatic. Participant 3 One of the aims of the workshop was to discover the textual differences between the Quarto and Folio editions of King Lear and how this may affect productions of meaning. It was also to consider how a text may play itself out in performance and the considerations that have to be made performing an early modern text in a historicised space, such as the globe. One of our considerations was company formations and how this can help an extract not only evolve and take on new meaning, but also how it can help an actor approach a text in a new way – these are some of the benefits of rehearsal exercises. One of the assumptions that I made was concerning power positions and where the best power positions recognise themselves. It was interesting to see how universal this idea is, and that the power positions chosen on the grid were not that different from those chosen on the globe stage – the differences that there were, were subtle and a result of the shape of the stage and the auditorium. This not something I had necessarily considered before. Participant 4 During the workshop, several groups of school parties also entered the theatre space which was an interesting dynamic as I suddenly felt the pressure of being an ‘actor’ simply because we were being watched. It left us feeling quite insignificant as we were such small figures on such an enormous stage it seemed. As grand as the space is, we experienced a slice of reality when we noticed that there was someone drilling away at one of the pillars on the stage. When the pillar’s beautiful casing was removed, it looked quite plain and ‘normal’ and made our rehearsal feel far more ‘real’, rather than being overwhelmed by the fact that we were workshopping on the Globe stage. Participant 5 It was an assumption of our workshop that we had no rehearsal time and that, although working through a text with which we were familiar, we were far from word perfect with the lines of individual characters. We took turns in playing key parts to allow everyone in the group a chance to experience briefly “acting a role” on the Globe stage. Given that this, including discussions and warm up exercises, was achieved in a morning by mostly non-trained actors, we were aware of the limitations, and still worked well within these parameters. Participant 6 One of the fundamental assumptions we were exploring was that actors respond to their space when performing. There was also a sense that the audience and its proximity has a bearing on performance. The third question we were looking at was whether the Globe on its own - outside its spacial differences and material specifics – has an impact on performers simply because of we think of it as the reconstruction of Shakespeare’s theatre.

G. Write a short critique of the Globe's performances of 5.3 [available from the Globe Archive]. What performance decisions were made? How do these operate?

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

Participant 1 The earlier production (2001) created a more enclosed theatrical world than the late production (2008). In 2001 production, the end of the play is made up of three separate exits. Both Albany and Kent exit after they speak. Edgar finishes his soliloquy and exits. So the corpses of Lear and his three daughters are left alone on the stage. To continue the dismal atmosphere, the actors do not dance gig as the convention. In 2008 production, King Lear seems to see images in hallucination before he breathes his last breath. This interestingly coincides with our stage performance choices because this wraps up the theme of madness perfectly. Participant 2 I responded far more positively to the 2001 Globe production of King Lear. In the final scene, the stripped back, ‘rustic’ wooden cladding covering the majority of the back of the stage was reminiscent of outer city gates or battlements and gave the impression that these final moments of the play and of Lear’s life where taking place outside what was once his kingdom, as though he had been exiled. I also liked the unadorned, rough looking costumes (that appeared to be made of some natural material like hemp or rough cotton), particularly in conjunction with the cladding. This production of Lear was almost the antithesis of the 2008 production that, to me, seemed like a very straightforward, ‘classic’ staging of the play; the characters were dressed in appropriate period dress, the scene staged as I would expect – nothing seemed particularly novel or exciting. I found the staging of the bodies of Goneril and Regan interesting at the end of the scene. Again, I found the way in which this was staged in the 2001 production more engaging; the bodies were brought on and then placed almost in a triangle around Lear before he collapsed. Returning to my previous concerns about making the death of Lear more dramatic, this was a nice way of negotiating this and I felt it really unlined the tragic conclusion of the play. The only other thing I would note was that it was interesting that the 2001 production chose not to end with a jig (the traditional ending of many Globe Shakespeare productions and that was part of the 2008 production). Perhaps this was in keeping with the productions stripped back, almost barren aesthetic and contributed to the sense of tragedy and loss at the end of the final scene. However, this does seem slightly at odds with my earlier suggestion that once of the ways in which a production might deal with the problem of staging death or a corpse is to embrace its theatrical potential. Surly, with four corpses present on stage at the plays conclusion, the jig can function as a way of explicitly acknowledging the limitations of theatre by having these corpses suddenly spring to life again and dance? Participant 3 The performance of death in both productions was approached in very different ways. The first production set the final scene outside the city walls. The set was of a grey/brown hue which was suggestive of the location. The decision to perform Lear’s death in this environment negated the problem of how to get the bodies of the stage at the close of the scene. The idea that was suggested was that the bodies would be left, outside the city walls, as is apparently traditional in cases of war. The performance of Lear’s death and of his reaction to the death of his daughter was subtle and thoughtful, and reflected the overall atmosphere created by the setting of the scene in such muted colours. There were not many characters on stage during this final extract; this also gave the scene a very personal feel, again reflecting the subject of the narrative.

Shakespeare’s Globe / QMUL Collaboration Text, Space and the Performance of Death: King Lear 3 February 2010

The second performance of the death of Lear was executed very differently. The acting technique employed was much more visceral and ‘dramatic’ then the previous production. This was clear from Lear’s entrance carrying Cordelia across his back USC and his communication with the other characters on stage. Lear’s performance in this production was very grand and emotionally wrought; the subtleness evident in the first example was somewhat lost here. This production felt a lot more ‘traditional’ not only due to some of the acting styles employed but also because of the inclusion of a jig to finalise the play. I thought the decision to include a jig dealt very well with the problem of removing the bodies of Lear and Cordelia and was also an interesting way of communicating the idea that what had just be performed was just that, a performance, a re-enactment of a set of events. It was nice to see the audience really enjoying this jig and there seemed to be mutuality between them and the actors performing. This gave the performance a very strong sense of community and participation, reflecting what I imagine a globe experience may have been for an early modern audience. Participant 4 This scene in the Globe’s archive ended with a rather cheery jig. The three sisters are fronting the dance and the whole cast joins in, following Lear’s final words as he holds on to Cordelia’s limp corpse. I prefer this ending to the alternative finale of ending the scene with the dramatic climax of the death, as I feel it would raise the mood of the space, giving the audience the opportunity to reflect on what they have just seen before them without being distracted by the serious atmosphere that the death has caused. It also gives modern audiences an insight into traditional convention, hearing music and viewing a dance that was relevant to the time. Participant 5 No response. Participant 6 It was interesting to see how different the two stagings of 5.3 were. It was perhaps the characterisation of Edgar that was most striking. In the 2001 production of the play, Edgar was portrayed not as the calm bestower of power, but a hysterical figure who disappears after his final lines. The 2008 production had fewer surprises, meanwhile.