Congratulations Rebekah Meyer!

Rebekah Meyer, Dean's Scholars in Shakespeare class of 2014, has received the English Department's Dewitt Clinton Croissant Prize (a $400 cash award) for outstanding essay in drama or theatre. Rebekah's essay, "Generic Constraints of Shakespeare's Dramatic Romances," her term paper for Professor Wade's Fall, 2010, Shakespearean Washington Dean's Seminar, focused on the seminar's major theme.

This is the second Croissant Prize won by a Dean's Scholar. Sophia Carter, class of 2011, won the prize three years ago.

Congratulations Rebekah!

2011 Dean's Scholars Shakespeare's Birthday Celebration--on YouTube!!!

Go to You Tube and search "Shakespearing Desire." 3 segments to this video documentary.

Cymbeline

The period of time after the audience is seated and before a show starts is never really discussed and highly underrated. This when the audience gets its first impression of the show based on the ambiance, how the stage is set, the introduction music, etc. As I first sat down in the large auditorium at the Shakespeare Theater Company, my eyes were immediately drawn to what appeared to be a girl, asleep in a bed set on the stage. The bed was dressed in flowing white satin sheets, which actually complemented the rest of the set. Behind and to one side of the bed were glass tanks in a wavy pattern, each filled with water and contained an arum lily floating on the top. All of it gave off a very serene feeling, as if the entire audience had stumbled upon a dream: the little girl's dream.
This dream style remained throughout the play as its theme, one that reflected Imogen's monologue in Act IV scene ii. The costumes had a light, flowing feel to them and used light and dark contrasts to show characters' personalities. Imogen remained in mostly white while the men wore dark clothing (Iachimo even wore a red shirt to show his dark intentions) and royalty wore gold and brown. Continuing the dream style, the fights transitioned into slow motion with bright lights flashing in the background as if in a nightmare and even the props used such as the throne were made of a metal that gave them an unreal appearance. Throughout each scene, the little girl and her storyteller wove between the characters, commenting on the plot, effectively serving a narrative purpose. In this aspect, the play was certainly aesthetic and beautiful to watch.
However, the production's beauty was as pleasant to observe as if it was a painting. For all the acting did for the show, it might have been better as one hanging in a gallery. The cast had a few actors on which the production relied on for its success in entertaining an audience, namely Leo Marks who played Cloten. While the rest of the cast was either a bore or overly dramatic and almost in tears with every line (Gretchen Hall's Imogen), Marks certainly gave a highly entertaining and well-developed portrayal of his character. The audience was instantly drawn to him each time he appeared on stage. Indeed, most were even disappointed when the normally unlikable character was killed. However, his anachronistic entrance on a moped was certainly unexpected and a bit confusing while still bringing chuckles from various audience members.

Comedy of Errors

The Folger Theater's production of The Comedy of Errors was entertaining, to say the least. I think the director, Aaron Posner, did a wonderful job of bringing Shakespeare's vision to life in a very original way. I overheard a few audience members saying the masks that the actors wore were distracting, but I thought they added to the overall silliness of the play. The set design by Tony Cisek was thoughtful and unique -- all the different doors in various colors definitely contributed to the storyline, as characters rushed in and out of them, slamming the doors as they went. I have two complaints, and they're very minor: first, I thought the actors (especially Suzanne O'Donell, who played Adriana) tended to yell a lot. I understand why they rose their voices, but it still got a little overwhelming at points. I was also unimpressed by the performance of the courtier, played by Rachel Zampelli. She seemed like a very one-dimensional, flaky character, and I thought she could've brought more to the role besides sex appeal. Overall, I enjoyed the play very much and I'd definitely recommend it.

--Mary Bryce Hargis

Cymbeline

I can't say I was a huge fan of this production. There were elements that I really did like but others I found to be confusing and distracting from the play itself. It got off to a weird start for me with the interpretation of the narrator and the little girl. Perhaps if I had gone into the play not knowing what it was about I would have liked it; to me it was over the top, we know this play is like a fairytale already! I also thought it was confusing because it seemed like the two slipped in and out of the action. The dialogue in the beginning made it seem as though they were involved with Cymbeline's court but clearly from the play they were not in the story. The narration got more confusing in my opinion with the addition of the dumbshow to foreshadow the events, like the girl with the blood on her dress. I felt it to be unnecessary and distracting.

However, since they did have the narrator figure I really liked how they used her in other ways. Her ability to transition into other characters and become directly involved with the story was very interesting. The fairy tale elements that really made sense to me were the setting and costuming. The water tanks that snaked across the stage created a beautiful but very modern aesthetic. It was the modern blending with the old that made the play visually stunning and otherworldly to me. It made the play look timeless and gave it a feeling of fantasy. The costumes looked slightly medieval but all with a twist; the Queen looked like she could have been from science ficiton film. I think if the play had stuck to communicating the fantasy and fairy tale elements in visual ways rather than changing it like they did, the play would have just spoken for itself and we would still get the impression of a fairy tale.

cymbeline

My inital reactions to the production of cymbeline were much more positive than my reactions to the previous performance we saw at the theatre. Just by walking into the theatre and seeing the set design onstage was intriguing. the whole stage was in use witht he design of the tree and nature background including the limited lighting which created a mystical fairy tale atmosphere for the play. even the little girl sleeping onthe stage as the audience entered added to the fairy tale direction of the play. After reading and performing select scenes in our class last semeser, i know that the opening dialouge is not too much action or catching to the audience, yet simply a narration to help lead into the play. therefore, the director decided change those two characters into a more prominent narrator role where the little girl watchs and observed everything in the story and the story teller guided her through the story while also participating in the story. this technique allows the audience to open their imagination to the twists and turns of a story so they can further invovle themselves in the show. even for the audience who was unaware of the story, they would be able to accpet the impossible such as cloten's vesba. the actors and actresses were well selected in their roles ecspecially jacimo and cloten whoe overall apperance, voice, and twirks for the character fit perfectly for their roles. what was one unforgetable feature was at the end of the scene of the second act where the battle took place and visually explained the scenario, as well, as the significance of the rain effect used to wash away the blood of the battle, and create a clean start for the characters. it was a moment of awe when the rain fell to signifiy this power of nature in the fairytale world. this combination of actors, actresses, set design, effects, and mysticism created a captivating show.

Cymbeline

There's something very malleable about "Cymbeline," moreso than most Shakespeare plays. The hodgepodge of tropes, characters, themes, and even genres melds to create what I've always considered to be a sort of "Best-Of Shakespeare." It's an entertaining read, and I wondered how lively it would play on stage. Needless to say, I was very interested to see what direction Rebecca Bayla Taichman would take the Shakespeare Theater Company's production of "Cymbeline" in.

Generally, I was a fan of this production and would easily recommend it - regardless of their affinity for Shakespeare. The play, for the most part, stays true to the text. I was intrigued by the silent framing of the play as a bedtime story for a little girl (Zoe Wynn Briscoe), with her reactions mirroring the unfolding story. It was a sly reference to the play's fantastical, self-referential nature, though I think at times this method took itself too seriously and was a bit heavy-handed. For example, Act I closes with the girl lying bleeding - a reference to the violence and bloodshed just seen, but it wasn't really necessary, and I wish there wasn't such an emphasis on symbolism the more I think about it.

All around, the performances were superb. Gretchen Hall was very graceful as Imogen, though I couldn't tell if she was trying to emulate Juliet or break free from that constraint. Ted Van Griethuysen was fine as Cymbeline, though I do not think the changes seen in his character were emoted explicitly enough (though the guise of the bedtime story does excuse this, I guess). I wish Leo Marks (Cloten) and William Youmans (Pisanio) did more with their characters. Interestingly enough, they were not as self-parodying as i expected.

One move I 1000% support was the truncation of Act V. As much as I appreciated the play, I felt that the battle scenes of Act V (I'm not even going to discuss the dream sequence Posthumus has) were too much of a tangent and took away a lot from whatever emotional ground was covered in the previous acts (themes of separation, betrayal, familial relations, etc.). Its omission from this production is not something I miss at all. In my mind, it gives the play a more cohesive feel and gives greater emphasis to the final scene, in which all the pieces come together (like a Shakespearean "Scooby Doo," though I did like it).

One thing I disliked more than I liked was the anachronistic nature of the production. To be fair, this is also true of the original play (which transitions between Middle Ages Britain and Renaissance Italy), but it's accentuated more here by radically different styles in clothing, and the random quizzical inclusion of a Vespa for absolutely no reason. I really really really did not like that.

Inclusion of the Vespa notwithstanding, I really enjoyed this production of "Cymbeline." It had a very nice framing device that excused nearly all the randomness of the play and allowed me to enjoy the smorgasbord of plots without wondering how any of this is supposed to be realistic. The editing of the second half of the play is much appreciated and the ending was perfectly executed. All in all, it was a really great production.

Cymbeline

I thought the Shakespeare Theater Company's production of Cymbeline was amazing, definitely the best of the productions we have seen so far this year. My favorite aspect of it was how the entire play was turned into a bedtime story for the little girl.
I liked the set, but I felt it looked too out of place in some scenes and didn't really make sense. Especially the thing with the water. While it looked really cool, it wasn't exactly necessary.
I thought all the actors were excellent, they fit their roles really well. Especially the actors for the Queen and Cloten. The only actor I might have issues with was the actor for Leonatus. His acting was fine, but I don't think he really looked right for the part.
Personally, when we read Cymbeline last semester it wasn't one of my favorite plays. This performance however has changed my mind and made me enjoy Cymbeline more than I did before.

Overall, the Shakespeare Theatre Company's production of Cymbeline succeeded in drawing the audience into a world of suspended belief. While taking many liberties with the scenery and characterization of the narrator, the production remained grounded by the consistency of those choices. While some seemed outrageous, the use of music, white fabric, and the little girl tied the production together.

One of the most significant changes was the inclusion of a little girl. She was featured on the stage as the audience was finding their seats. The whole play became a fairytale for the little girl. They allowed for directorial and acting choices to have more liberties. One of the most shocking of these choices came in the form of a Vespa that Cloten rode on in his search for Imogen. While audience reactions varied, the choice added to the idea of a fairy tale.

Another choice that tied the production together was the use of music. From the moment the play began, the music was used to set the mood of the scene. Music would grow louder at more intense times, i.e. the fighting scene, and calm down at other points. Music was used successfully to set the mood and draw in the audience.

The use of white fabric was consistent throughout the production. Both the narrator, the little girl, and Imogen were initially featured in all white clothing. This implies a sense of purity otherwise not seen in the confusing and blood-drenched story. One of the most successful directorial choices was when the book of Cymbeline opened up in front of the little girl to pour blood down the front of her dress. The sharp contrast between the pure white and the deep red drew out an emotional response from the audience otherwise not expressed.

Cymbeline is one of the harder of Shakespeare's plays to produce. The play seems as if Shakespeare had ten different ideas in his head, mushed them all into one story, and had everyone live to be one big happy family in the end (without the Queen at the curtain call). The STC tackled a difficult production successfully. Whether the audience liked the play or not, they had opinions and that is how success can truly be measured in theater.

Cymbeline

I was very impressed by the Cymbeline production we saw. The fact that they warped the play into a faery tale worked to its benefit. Without the "tale" element, I do not believe our disbelief would have been suspended so effectively. It also added a slightly creepy element to the play- especially right before the intermission where the woman and little girl open the book and "blood" spills from the book and drips down the little girl's white dress. It was absolutely amazing. And while I am on the subject of amazing the woman narrating who also played the doctor did a fantastic job- she spoke with such eloquence and the language flowed naturally. She tied the entire tale together and it was a very effective way of packaging the play. On a side note, the choreography, especially for the battle scene, was very well done. It held the audience's attention and solidified the feel of a faery tale.

However, on a less than positive note, the Posthumous was a little unfortunate which created a bump in the play. The older brother would have been a VERY nice Posthumous- he was someone that you look at and go "okay I get it". But the posthumous cast....not as much =(

Importance of FAiry TAles--G.K. Chesterton's Ideas

Travis explores G.K. Chesterton’s high praise of fairy tales, looking at the story of the frog prince to show what they can still offer us today.
G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936) was an accomplished author of detective fiction, poetry, Christian apologetics, philosophy, and fantasy. He is well-known for his “Father Brown” stories, The Man Who Was Thursday, and Orthodoxy, a little volume of Christian apologetics that remains popular among theologians to this day. In chapter four of Orthodoxy, “The Ethics of Elfland,” Chesterton provides a defense of the fairy tale that is rivaled by few.
The term “fairy tale” is not easy to define, but we recognize one when we see it. “The Frog Prince,” a story that most would consider a fairy tale, was traditionally the leading story in the Grimm collection. A handsome prince is imprisoned by a curse, turned into a frog. One day, a princess loses her favorite ball in a well where the frog dwells. The princess accepts an offer by the frog to retrieve the ball, and she promises to keep him and love him and be his companion for life — a promise she has no intention of honoring. Her father, the king, makes her keep her word. In her anger, she throws the frog against the wall. But a frog does not get up from the ground; a handsome prince does. The curse has been broken. (Many readers will be more familiar with the modern version of the tale, in which the princess kisses the frog to break the curse.)
There are, in Chesterton’s view, necessary ethical lessons to be learned by children and adults from fairy tales. Jack and the Beanstalk teaches the reader to launch an assault against pride; Cinderella, to embrace humility; Beauty and the Beast, to overcome prejudice with love. In “The Frog Prince,” the king makes the princess reject her selfish behavior and keep her word. These moral lessons are fundamental to learning to live honorably and compassionately towards others.
But Chesterton believed the fairy tale had a more important value than just the ethical lessons. (After all, adults do not need magical frogs to learn how not to lie.) At a higher level, the fairy tale placed in Chesterton’s heart the conviction “that this world is a wild and startling place, which might have been quite different, but which is quite delightful” (67). Chesterton believed that what modern people called incontrovertible and unalterable scientific facts were in reality mysterious. He explains the difference between this “scientific fatalism” (67) and the views of the “fairy-tale philosopher” (68):
[Learned men in the modern world] talked as if the fact that trees bear fruit were just as necessary as the fact that two and one trees make three. But it is not. […] You cannot imagine two and one not making three. But you can easily imagine trees […] growing golden candlesticks or tigers hanging on by the tail. (59)
Fairy tales challenge the reader to imagine magical worlds different from our own. We are reminded by the fairy tale of the thing we never should have forgotten — that our world might have been different and is magical the way it is: unexplainable, unpredictable, wild, and surprising. With our imaginations awakened, we can see with new eyes our own world filled with wonder once again.
Unlike the fairy-tale philosopher, the scientific fatalist does not believe in this unpredictable magic: everything either already has or eventually will have a law-abiding explanation. Everything in nature is predictable and can be counted upon to happen. Things could not have been any other way than they are, and nothing is surprising or wild. Chesterton believed that the fairy-tale philosophy prompted a better response to reality than the one constructed by anti-supernaturalistic versions of scientific inquiry.
When we are asked why eggs turn to birds or fruits fall in autumn, we must answer exactly as the fairy godmother would answer if Cinderella asked her why mice turned to horses or her clothes fell from her at twelve o’clock. We must answer that it is magic. It is not a “law.” […] It is not a necessity. […] We have no right to say that it must always happen. (60)
There are thousands of years of the fairy tale tradition, but the folks who have the most to say about it are those who defended it through the period we now call modernity (very roughly, from the Enlightenment until the 1960s) — the rise of scientific fatalism. The fairy tale is a protest against the Enlightenment, for the writers and defenders of fairy tales like Chesterton (and C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Madeleine L’Engle after him) were writing worlds of magical refuge in the midst of modernity. Without the magic of the fairy tale, the magic of life disappears in a morass of strictly rational, naturalistic facts, theories, propositions, experiments, and arguments. The fairy tale frees us from the law-based, unchangeable world of the scientific fatalist, where explanations are everywhere but wonder is lost.
________________________________________

News from the Class of 2010

From Darci Frinquelli

Allison is working at a zoo in NJ.
Cameron and I are both at NYU Law so we can drive each other crazy for another three years.
Taylor, Brittany, and Annie are still in DC--Taylor just finished his Master's at GW and is working at the Dept of Education. Brittany is working in the Development Dept at Children's Nat'l Medical Center. Annie is working at the Corcoran and getting her MA from GW in Museum Studies.
Dom is on Long Island working at Creative Writing, and earlier this year Cam, Alli, and I went to see him perform as Laertes in NYC.