Going into this assignment, I wasn’t sure what scene I wanted to talk about, so I
started skimming through one of the online versions to see if anything caught
my eye. One of the scenes I ended up watching all the way through was Act
III Scene II, where the four lovers are gathered but both Lysander and
Demetrius are wooing Helena. And, in all honesty, one of the reasons I chose this
scene was because it was just hilarious. And then I started comparing it to the
Castle Theater version. It was really fascinating, because (though the words were
the same) the way that the actors presented it made all the difference. In the
live version, Helena was very (for me, unexpectedly) pleased by the courtship of both
men. She, did, indeed, condemn their mockery of her but she also seemed to sort
of enjoy it, which is an interpretation that had never occurred to me. Lysander
and Demetrius were also very, um, physical in their demonstration of their
love, fawning all over Helena. In the Rice University version, however, Helena
was all dignified scorn, while each of the men rather awkwardly tried to woo
her from a conservative distance and in an undemonstrative way, which was kind
of entertaining - especially having seen the live version beforehand. I looked
up a few more versions online and watched just this scene for comparison, and
every one of them was different, but still very entertaining. In one, Helena
was very modest, in another Lysander and Demetrius brawled across the stage
(and scene) and still yet another was very literal and a little crude… Not
exactly to my taste but, I have to admit, still funny.
The point that all of this made to me was that (as
we said in class) sometimes we ‘murder to dissect’ and we analyze and reanalyze
these works. But there comes a point when we need to just enjoy. Looking at
all of these differences made me appreciate (again) the universality of
Shakespeare’s works, so much so that no matter it's portrayal, this play is always humorous.
So while there are certainly many deeper meanings to be gleaned from it,
I think that one of A Midsummer Night’s Dream's main purposes is
indeed to entertain.
I agree with you on your comment about the play being made to entertain. I definitely felt that way when I was watching the live version. However, I wonder that since it is made to entertain, that is the reason why all the adaptations are a little different - simply because they are trying to entertain their audiences and so they are making it more appealing to their audiences. Maybe for the Rice University production, it was more appealing to be conservative because it was a university production. Where as the live version seemed more geared to students and young adults so it didn't need to be as conservative and the jokes were based on a young adult kind of pop culture that we understand. It is interesting to see what producers think will be entertaining to their audience.
ReplyDeleteHermia's portrayal in the live version was really unexpected for me to and I really liked it! I agree that we want to find the perfect and correct analysis for everything but the interesting thing about stage adaptations, as this scene shows, is that, no matter what the reasons for the different interpretations, different interpretations of a play can completely change its meaning. Theater is a much more collaborative art than I am use to dealing with as an English major and it is really fun to see that in action!
ReplyDelete