[identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com
So I was talking to [livejournal.com profile] faithhopetricks and [livejournal.com profile] speak_me_fair about things that should be done in productions of the histories but never (or rarely) are. (The specific thing that triggered it is that none of us had ever seen a production of the improv scene in 1H4 that took advantage of being in a tetralogy to play up the echoes of Richard II's deposition.)

And from this came the question of things we would totally put in the histories if we were in charge of the Shakespeare world.

I was going to write up my own list to start, but it would take me about three hours to write, so I will put them in in the comments. What sorts of things do you think should turn up in productions of the histories (but don't or probably don't)? ALTERNATELY what sorts of things do directors always seem to do that they shouldn't?
[identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com
I've made a community icon! This may not be worthy of a post, but it's pretty and I wanted to show it off. ;) (It's not the one I'm using for this post.)

Also, because you knew it had to happen, the obligatory History Plays survey: which one's your favorite? ;)
[identity profile] a-t-rain.livejournal.com
'Nother intro post...

Hi, I'm Nora, a.k.a. After the Rain and Fretful Porpentine, and I'm a grad student at a Large State University in the U.S. (which will probably not remain very anonymous after I've made a few more posts, but let's pretend, OK?) I'm writing my dissertation on English commoners and communities in the history plays (using a rather expansive definition of "history plays" -- I think Merry Wives is going to end up in there, along with Arden of Feversham and The Shoemaker's Holiday, but I've hit most of the conventional ones too).

I'm also getting ready to teach Edward II to undergrads for the very first time, so any advice on how not to shock them over-much is most welcome.
[identity profile] the-alchemist.livejournal.com
Why did [Shakespeare's] Richard III want to be king anyway? What it to fulfil some inner need, or just because everyone like power and so he wanted what everyone else wanted?

Do we believe him when he says (in 3HVI) that it's just because he can't get a shag? Why would someone see murdering one's way to the throne as an alternative to lots of hot nookie? What's wrong with masturbation, hiring a prostitute, or making friends with Jane Shore* just like everyone else?

Sorry, [livejournal.com profile] angevin2 for messing up your lovely community with my strange and obscene speculations. Anyone who suggests 'inner needs' that have nothing to do with sex will be adored and admired.



* I made Richard/Jane fanfiction once. I bet you wanted to know that. And come to think of it, why didn't he just accumulate some fangirls? But I don't want to go down the well-worn, 'look at the Lady Anne thing - actually he clearly didn't have any trouble with women at all path'... Actually I've made fanfiction that explains that one too. But that's all beside the point. 'Inner needs'. If you want to know why I want to know, I waffle about it here.

Profile

thisengland: (Default)
geeking out on shakespeare's histories

May 2013

S M T W T F S
   1234
5678910 11
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 26th, 2017 02:51 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios