June 6, 2008
I recently had the question posed to me if I took a 'traditional' approach to Shakespeare.
What does that mean? Well, the asker wanted to know about the setting – a reasonable enough inquiry. And yet, I have had several discussions since the idea first floated into my brain about revisiting Rom & Jules relative to setting. Some people get very excited about my inspiration for interpretation, to the point I found myself red-faced at a Wednesday night dinner with the urge to explain. I've also had a fair share of raised eyebrows and mutterings about Leonardo DiCaprio.
Whatever.
And yet… I have to admit… I find this debate fascinating.
I will likely always end up on the side of leaving the 16th century. I mean… really… why would you want to go back to it? People smelled bad, mostly because they were always stepping in horse poo and people poo on the streets. They bathed… but they wore the same clothes and probably had a nice hazy cloud of insects around them. But you were probably used to it… not that anyone could get really close to you. As a woman you were tied up in a corset that pointed between your legs, not giving you any option but to sit up straight. And then there was a circle of bone and wire encompassing your hips. Ah… women's fashion… white make-up made from mercury, rouge made from the blood of insects… and then you shaved your forehead. Not that it mattered because women couldn't act anyway, not even as themselves. Women were too busy being pregnant 15 times over (if they lived) or sewing endless hems on linens or being allowed to be beaten or killed by a father who suspected that she was compromising her chastity. Never mind the fact she fainted all the time from her freakin corset.
Don't get me wrong. It's a very romantic era. Those knights in shining armor… who would kill you if you went to the wrong church. You had to go to church and believed all that fire and brimstone stuff. Those roomy castles with bone chilling drafts and rats that scurried across you while you slept. The majestical feasts of meats loaded with cloves and spices to conceal the rotten flavor. And Sir Monkeyface Greybeard vying for your hand in marriage at age 14. Good times.
But… is that essential to telling the story of star crossed lovers? Does it matter if they wear farthingales and codpieces? Is the story not the same if they are wearing jeans and listen to their iPods? Isn't the beauty of Shake-speare the very fact that it doesn't matter the clothes they wear or what dance it is that Romeo bows out of… but we still get swept up in his teenage passion?
The feelings don't change, no matter our bathing habits or costumes or dietary preferences. Is not Romeo & Juliet as relevant today in a world of violence and sex and impulse as it was 400 years ago in Italy? Or 2000 plus years ago in Greece? Speaking of… how Grecian was Midsummer anyway? Old Willy himself did not feel any need to be 'true' to the time of Pyramus & Thisbe in his tale... so why on earth does it improve the storytelling these days?
This all isn't to say I detest the era of the writer. I spent how many years living, eating, and breathing the 15th and 16th centuries? I loved wearing my red dress and teasing unsuspecting cub scouts about their evil left-handedness. And from that I learned you have to use the present to make the past interesting. Not everyone gets excited about iambic pentameter or the fact that there are truly three separate purposes of armor… and gold is the absolute worst metal with which to protect oneself. Our student audiences would let their attentions wander with the details of metal-making and the specific rules of jousting. But they always came back to the stories about relating to other people, the details of marriage and parties and wearing the right clothes to impress someone. Those things may change shape over the years… but ultimately we relate to them because somewhere in ourselves, we have felt similarly.
Romeo & Juliet speaks to me not because of the amazing description of Elizabethan swordplay or its references to Verona. I go back and listen to the dialogue over and over because there are still romantic and hotheaded teenagers walking amongst us. There is still a society that uses violence to deal with anger. There are still parents who are oblivious to what their children want and push them into lives that fulfill their own ambitions. There is still a hope we can learn to mend from this two hours traffic on the stage.
