Skip to main content

A Performance of Twelfth Night That's All Wet-Literally

Having been in Chicago for a medical meeting (yes, I do have a life outside of Shakespeare), I took the opportunity to attend a performance of Twelfth Night (well, maybe I DON'T have a life outside of Shakespeare) at the Chicago Shakespeare Theater on Navy Pier. It was wonderful! The CST (www.chicagoshakes.com) constantly amazes me with the quality of their productions (I have blogged about them before). I only wish that they would be a reperatory theater instead of a traditional one with one show at a time, so I could go and see multiple plays like I can at Stratford or Ashland. Well, maybe I can use it as an excuse to get away to Chicago more often.

Anyway, I will try to describe the performance. The stage there at CST is a modified thrust one, like the one at the Tom Patterson Theatre in Stratford, ON (only not as long). For this performance the part of the stage that "thrusts" out into the audience (surrounded on three sides) was turned into an actual swimming pool containing various levels from about six inches deep around the edges to over 5 feet deep in the center section. the actors delivered much of their lines while walking around the edges of the pool (in the water) or while swimming in the deep part. Other portions of the action took place on the "dry land" at the back of the stage (where there were many levels of decking built. You can see pictures of how all of this looked and see a video (sped up) of how the usual stage at CST was converted into the pool by going to
www.chicagoshakes.com/main.taf?p=2,31,1,22 (a page that seems not to be accessible directly from the main CST web site).

Throughout the play, just about every actor ended up submerged in the deep part of the pool, whether by being pushed (in a fight), falling in (while drunk), or jumping in (for various reasons). Whenever this happened I (being seated in the first row at the side of the stage/pool) was able to have a little "audience participation" by being splashed (but only a few drops).

All of the actors were wearing beautiful Elizabethan era costumes (informally known as "pumpkin pants") and I was constantly amazed at how these costumes were being soaked (at the start of the play, the actors would remove their outer garments as if they were going for a swim, which of course they were, but later on they would be in the pool in full dress).

Part of the fun of watching the play (aside from the extremely good quality of the cast) was waiting to see who would end up in the pool next and how. Of course, the one person everyone in the audience was waiting to see get dunked was Malvolio who, in his austere Puritan dress (shades of Christopher Hatton?) was the only actor who wasn't barefoot thorought the production (well Feste did wear shoes for a short time while pretending to be Sir Topas the priest). Sadly (maybe) Malvolio never did get into the pool, although he was splashed a little, even when he lost his outer clothes and shoes when everyone thought he was mad.

An added bonus was right at the end when Feste sang his melancholy song containing the refrain "the rain it raineth every day". Seeing him using a tattered umbrella to try to stop real rain (coming down from the top of the theater) made the whole thing very poignant.

All in all, one of the best productions of Twelfth Night I have ever seen.

The production runs until June 7 so there is still time to go see it. In fact, I think I will be proposing another Oberon road trip at our next meeting.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Was King Richard III a Control Freak? Science News ... from universities, journals, and other research organizations   Mar. 4, 2013 — University of Leicester psychologists believe Richard III was not a psychopath -- but he may have had control freak tendencies. University of Leicester psychologists have made an analysis of Richard III's character -- aiming to get to the man behind the bones. Professor Mark Lansdale, Head of the University's School of Psychology, and forensic psychologist Dr Julian Boon have put together a psychological analysis of Richard III based on the consensus among historians relating to Richard's experiences and actions. They found that, while there was no evidence for Shakespeare's depiction of Richard III as a psychopath, he may have had "intolerance to uncertainty syndrome" -- which may have manifested in control freak tendencies. The academics presented their findings on Saturday, March 2 at the University

What's a popp'rin' pear?

James Wheaton reported yesterday in the Jackson Citizen Patriot that the Michigan Shakespeare Festival high school tour of Romeo and Juliet was criticized for inappropriate content -- " So me take issue with sexual innuendoes in Michigan Shakespeare Festival’s High School Tour performances of ‘Romeo & Juliet’" : Western [High School] parent Rosie Crowley said she was upset when she heard students laughing about sexual content in the play afterwards. Her son didn’t attend the performance Tuesday because of another commitment, she said.  “I think the theater company should have left out any references that were rated R,” Crowley said. “I would say that I’ve read Shakespeare, and what I was told from the students, I’ve never read anything that bad.”  She said she objected to scenes that involved pelvic thrusting and breast touching and to a line in which Mercutio makes suggestive comments to Romeo after looking up the skirt of a female. The problem with cutting out the naug

Winkler lights the match

by Linda Theil When asked by an interviewer why all the experts disagree with her on the legitimacy of the Shakespeare authorship question, journalist and author Elizabeth Winkler  calmly replied, "You've asked the wrong experts." * With that simple declaration Winkler exploded the topic of Shakespearean authorship forever. Anti-Stratfordians need no smoking gun, no convincing narrative, no reason who, how, when, or why because within the works lies the unassailable argument: Shakespeare's knowledge. Ask the lawyers. Ask the psychologists. Ask the librarians. Ask the historians. Ask the dramaturges. Ask the mathematicians. Ask the Greek scholars. Ask the physicists. Ask the astronomers. Ask the courtiers. Ask the bibliophiles. Ask the Italians. Ask the French. Ask the Russians. Ask the English. Ask everyone. Current academic agreement on a bevy of Shakespearean collaborators springs from an unspoken awareness of how much assistance the Stratfordian presumptive would h