17 posts
|
Post by kryz1000 on Oct 26, 2016 10:38:06 GMT
posted a number of links yesterday which went against that press release, not least from Rice herself. Surely in this day and age we weigh up sources and interrogate the evidence, not automatically accepting the 'official' line? Indeed you did. The LG and MT articles are the ones that I was particularly referring to as (in my view) unsubstantiated and, frankly, irresponsible. You've also quoted a piece that refers to 'rumours'. Since when were rumours evidence? My post suggests that we should take the time and consideration to separate the two and (importantly) be careful, in these post-truth times, to not give weight to the 'unbridled twitterings'. It doesn't help anyone. Well thank God for some sanity, kryz1000. I see you're quite a new member - do stick around Thank you. You're very kind. I posted quite a lot (under a different name) on the previous Message Board. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:01:23 GMT
posted a number of links yesterday which went against that press release, not least from Rice herself. Surely in this day and age we weigh up sources and interrogate the evidence, not automatically accepting the 'official' line? Indeed you did. The LG and MT articles are the ones that I was particularly referring to as (in my view) unsubstantiated and, frankly, irresponsible. You've also quoted a piece that refers to 'rumours'. Since when were rumours evidence? My post suggests that we should take the time and consideration to separate the two and (importantly) be careful, in these post-truth times, to not give weight to the 'unbridled twitterings'. It doesn't help anyone. Well thank God for some sanity, kryz1000. I see you're quite a new member - do stick around Thank you. You're very kind. I posted quite a lot (under a different name) on the previous Message Board. I would trust the board the least, as they have the greatest reason to obfuscate. The press, at least for the arts, have a knowledge of the people involved and who will have given them 'off the record' comments. Articles from the likes of Cavendish and Morrison too, although their attitude on this disgusts me, have a much greater chance of veracity. Of course the board will not want things to be discussed now, as it serves their own spin. It is the duty of those who disagree with them, however, to counter while the issue is in the public eye. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:04:40 GMT
Goodness. All this guff about Shakespeare being protected by the Globe and their responsibility to produce "authentic" and "proper" productions. They'll be banning women from acting in the plays soon! Weren't you blaming white men yesterday as if no black actors have a view that Shakespeare should be taken seriously? Bit racist, isn't it?
No-one except the loony left have suggested that she was replaced because she is a woman and no-one except, yet again, the same people have suggested that the plays should be performed by men only.
There are, however, many people, myself clearly included, who believe that Shakespeare should be treated with reverence and that is what The Globe should defend. If you want hip-hop, gangster (c)rap or even heavy metal (to avoid inevitable accusations of racism by weirdos) interpretations of Shakespeare there are plenty of theatres in London to accommodate such productions. Just let The Globe and The National defend and protect our culture and heritage.
I don't believe I did. Happy for you to point me in the direction where I may have done though. |
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Oct 26, 2016 11:10:34 GMT
Weren't you blaming white men yesterday as if no black actors have a view that Shakespeare should be taken seriously? Bit racist, isn't it?
No-one except the loony left have suggested that she was replaced because she is a woman and no-one except, yet again, the same people have suggested that the plays should be performed by men only.
There are, however, many people, myself clearly included, who believe that Shakespeare should be treated with reverence and that is what The Globe should defend. If you want hip-hop, gangster (c)rap or even heavy metal (to avoid inevitable accusations of racism by weirdos) interpretations of Shakespeare there are plenty of theatres in London to accommodate such productions. Just let The Globe and The National defend and protect our culture and heritage.
I don't believe I did. Happy for you to point me in the direction where I may have done though. My apologies, it wasn't you who said it. |
|
17 posts
|
Post by kryz1000 on Oct 26, 2016 11:10:34 GMT
It is the duty of those who disagree with them, however, to counter while the issue is in the public eye. Absolutely. But I'd prefer a debate based on balance and substantiation rather than rumour and gossip. board will not want things to be discussed now, as it serves their own spin Their priority will be getting to a position of stability and calm, I'd have thought, rather than 'serving their own spin'. |
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Oct 26, 2016 11:16:35 GMT
board will not want things to be discussed now, as it serves their own spin Their priority will be getting to a position of stability and calm, I'd have thought, rather than 'serving their own spin'. Charlie Falconer's having a turbulent 2016, isn't he. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:19:02 GMT
It is the duty of those who disagree with them, however, to counter while the issue is in the public eye. Absolutely. But I'd prefer a debate based on balance and substantiation rather than rumour and gossip. board will not want things to be discussed now, as it serves their own spin Their priority will be getting to a position of stability and calm, I'd have thought, rather than 'serving their own spin'. They should not be allowed to control the debate in the way you seek, where they become the supposed bearers of truth. If they have evidence to negate what is said let them show it, the law of the land is there for both accuser and defender. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:19:55 GMT
I don't believe I did. Happy for you to point me in the direction where I may have done though. My apologies, it wasn't you who said it. Apology accepted. So just so we're all completely clear, not racist at all. |
|
17 posts
|
Post by kryz1000 on Oct 26, 2016 11:29:48 GMT
They should not be allowed to control the debate in the way you seek, where they become the supposed bearers of truth. If they have evidence to negate what is said let them show it, the law of the land is there for both accuser and defender. I don't think that's very likely. That's something like 20,000 tweets to answer for starters! As I think we've established and, from whence I began, it's sad and it's complicated. And it didn't work out. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Oct 26, 2016 11:38:38 GMT
There are, however, many people, myself clearly included, who believe that Shakespeare should be treated with reverence and that is what The Globe should defend.
Wow. When you treat any art with "reverence" you have killed it stone cold dead. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:42:10 GMT
There is no one correct way to do theatre. THERE IS NO ONE CORRECT WAY TO DO THEATRE. And this applies to the Globe as much as to theatre as a whole. Shame the board disagree and are going with the whole reverence thing.
(Also Shakespeare really doesn't need to be treated with reverence, they're PLAYS, not religious texts. Simply from reading the plays, I find it all too easy to imagine the man himself HATING the very idea!)
|
|
353 posts
|
Post by cirque on Oct 26, 2016 12:02:38 GMT
Odd that RSC grab a few headlines...today's Telegraph identifies their support.Where was this much earlier....? You can't be an AD with creative hands tied and that's for sure. eyes will look to succession and there are some potential innovators out there who may well be able to accept a challenge
Lucy Bailey who electric shocked the space with Titus
Eve Best. Declared passion for the place and good to have actor led troupe
Jonathan Munby. Fine work and Globe track record
All would ensure a no stand still place but .......the job must allow individual passions to be followed.
I think it will be near impossible for Emma to continue in the poisonous surround for another year.How can you dream dreams or create passionate work with the exit door awaiting. I would not be surprised if a few of the plays ahead are changed as time draws on.
Perhaps Dromgoole could return as interim AD to help steer through this huge crisis.
|
|
4,154 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Oct 26, 2016 12:03:02 GMT
Absolutely there's no one correct way to do theatre. But that doesn't mean that all ways of doing it are equally as effective, wherever it is done.
What is effective at the Globe doesn't necessarily work elsewhere, what is effective elsewhere doesn't necessarily work at the Globe.
I was at the NT platform last night celebrating 40 years of the building, which had a presentation about the way the theatres were developed and some reflections on the effect of a theatrical space on performance. It was really interesting, especially to hear practitioners talk about what can come out of working with a theatre's imperfections and peculiarities.
|
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Oct 26, 2016 12:03:11 GMT
The response to Emma Rice’s departure really has been something to behold hasn’t it? I respect people’s right to react in whatever way they find appropriate but can’t we just consider the fact that it just didn’t work out? In the age of Twitter and, indeed, TheatreBoard there are a variety of opinions now available to us, 24/7. Some of the more influential and established commentators have out-done themselves though. She’s “clearly been pushed”, “it goes deeper”, “it’s not about lighting” says one. The Globe is “deeply divided” says another. I’m sure you’ll carefully lay out your evidence to support these statements won’t you? No? We all love a conspiracy theory but this unbridled twittering is, I would imagine, deeply unhelpful to an organisation that’s going through challenging times. If you want to support The Globe’s and Emma Rice’s future then a more measured response might be more helpful. On a few practical points. It is very easy to find the job description online. Amongst other things, it says :
[our] theatre practice is inspired by a sense of continuing experimentation and openness of approach, underpinned by a desire to reflect theatre practice of Shakespeare’s time.
and
[the job is] To ensure that the programming in the Globe Theatre and Sam Wanamaker Playhouse provide a satisfying and coherent balance of traditional, experimental and international work.
I’ll just leave that there for those who felt that a) the Globe Management were keen to stifle creativity and innovation and b) weren’t clear about their commitment to traditional ways of working too. Secondly. On the question of innovation. Mark R and Dominic D (and their rosta of visiting directors and companies) proved time and again that innovation is possible within these parameters. It will be possible again. Thirdly. On audiences. This has been the most interesting one for me (and many in this thread). The Globe has played to packed, diverse houses for 20 years. Just because you’re going now doesn’t mean that the audience has only now become more diverse. The Twitterverse has led us to believe that our bubble is the only bubble. Funnily enough, it’s not. I frankly think that it’s shaming that people have been saying ‘I’ve never been before, Emma Rice got me to come and therefore this whole situation is a scandal’. The scandal is that you never came before to support this award-winning, ground-breaking, internationally-important institution. Step forward Matthew Bourne. The theatre vs heritage vs academic debate doesn’t deserve any more airtime. The Globe was founded to deliver across all of those objectives and the previous Artistic Directors also wrestled with that balance, it seems. Yesterday’s news was very sad indeed. But it was delivered without leaks, unseemly rushes for the door and public slanging matches. This final element was provided by ‘the audience’ who supposedly care so much that they forgot context, complexity, good grace and the power of calm reflection. Then why, with their own job description in front of them, did the Board hire Emma? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 12:14:01 GMT
They should not be allowed to control the debate in the way you seek, where they become the supposed bearers of truth. If they have evidence to negate what is said let them show it, the law of the land is there for both accuser and defender. That's something like 20,000 tweets to answer for starters! Not really. Those 20,000 tweets will basically boil down to a few salient points in common. The Globe therefore simply needs to address those key points. For example, nash16 has just boiled an argument down to one question, above. |
|
353 posts
|
Post by cirque on Oct 26, 2016 12:15:55 GMT
The Board needs refreshing and a vow to carefully interview,understand,propose and support a new AD .....the sheer volume of response across the media proves that Shakespeare's Globe is the world leader for the plays and the passion clear.The theatre world response is predictable and to some extend phoney. Oh wonderful Emma.....now move on and get it right for the next 10 years with innovation,ground breaking work and international visits ....we were there before and be there again.I wishEmma had carried on with a few balanced compromises but so be it.Lets Go and get job ad out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 12:18:09 GMT
Absolutely there's no one correct way to do theatre. But that doesn't mean that all ways of doing it are equally as effective, wherever it is done. What is effective at the Globe doesn't necessarily work elsewhere, what is effective elsewhere doesn't necessarily work at the Globe. I was at the NT platform last night celebrating 40 years of the building, which had a presentation about the way the theatres were developed and some reflections on the effect of a theatrical space on performance. It was really interesting, especially to hear practitioners talk about what can come out of working with a theatre's imperfections and peculiarities. Slight side note, but an interesting one, Marvin Carlson's work 'The Haunted Stage' looks at this in depth-the idea of the space, theatre itself, previous productions and the surrounding area's influence on audience perception. (You reminded me because I've used his research in work on the NT)
Anyway, back to the Bard...
|
|
587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Oct 26, 2016 12:27:41 GMT
Interesting points made above about what she'd actually proposed for next year, if that was a contributory factor and whether she'll be able to see it through now.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Oct 26, 2016 12:36:15 GMT
There are, however, many people, myself clearly included, who believe that Shakespeare should be treated with reverence and that is what The Globe should defend.
Wow. When you treat any art with "reverence" you have killed it stone cold dead. Totally disagree.
Shakespeare is part of the fabric of our culture, our heritage and, without any fear of over-stating, part of who we are as a nation.
I can understand why some will want to interpret it differently or use alien cultures such as hip-hop, for example, to bring it a new audience but there needs to be an establishment that preserves it in its purest form. There is a responsibility to preserve Shakespeare in the manner in which we inherited it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 12:39:13 GMT
I wonder ldm2016 and this is a genuine question, do you think we should stick to only original pronunciation? because most of the traditional performances, and certainly most of the Globe's don't use that, which would technically be the way we 'inherited it'
Secondly, again genuine question, but much of the 'way we inherited it' is passed on via interpretation across the years, so there's no actual definitive 'historical' approach it's all interpretation of a sort, how do you approach that?
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Oct 26, 2016 12:57:36 GMT
I wonder ldm2016 and this is a genuine question, do you think we should stick to only original pronunciation? because most of the traditional performances, and certainly most of the Globe's don't use that, which would technically be the way we 'inherited it' Secondly, again genuine question, but much of the 'way we inherited it' is passed on via interpretation across the years, so there's no actual definitive 'historical' approach it's all interpretation of a sort, how do you approach that? I attended a Macbeth in original pronunciation in the Wannamaker Theatre last year, it was hard, hard work.. So no, I don't think we should use original pronunciation. What do I mean by "traditional" and inherited? The Shakespeare of Garrick, Irving, Kean, Gielgud, Olivier, Dench, Richardson and Branagh. Yes, I know that audiences who witnessed Garrick and Kean performances would think that Olivier and Branagh were from a different planet and vice-versa but the inherit belief that Shakespeare should be taken seriously and is part of who we are. I'm not saying that the cast of Diversity shouldn't be cast in any production and that modern interpretations shouldn't be staged but someone, somewhere has to preserve the Shakespeare we inherited and The Globe should be that place in London. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 13:00:11 GMT
Meanwhile, the Summer of Love beckons. And then we're promised a final Winter Season before the Globe sinks into permafrost in April 2018.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 13:05:26 GMT
someone, somewhere has to preserve the Shakespeare we inherited and The Globe should be that place in London. In fact, Shakespeare's Globe was supposed to be an opportunity to present Shakespeare in a near-original theatre, with occasional explorations of specific original practices and associated experiments. Its whole purpose was to strip away the later divergent practices of "Garrick, Irving, Kean, Gielgud, Olivier, Dench, Richardson and Branagh" etc. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Oct 26, 2016 13:16:45 GMT
Wow. When you treat any art with "reverence" you have killed it stone cold dead. Totally disagree.
Shakespeare is part of the fabric of our culture, our heritage and, without any fear of over-stating, part of who we are as a nation.
I can understand why some will want to interpret it differently or use alien cultures such as hip-hop, for example, to bring it a new audience but there needs to be an establishment that preserves it in its purest form. There is a responsibility to preserve Shakespeare in the manner in which we inherited it.
You speak of Shakespeare if he were - to quote a line from Ragtime - an accoutrement of patriotism. What an awful fate for a working writer who happened to be the best there ever was at his job - creating theatre that touched people in his own time and ours because it was so true and so alive. You want to prop him up in Mme. Toussaud's. I would see him rather as a free flowing spirit constantly renewed by new minds and new insights. Respect, sure. Reverence, never.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Oct 26, 2016 13:19:06 GMT
Totally disagree.
Shakespeare is part of the fabric of our culture, our heritage and, without any fear of over-stating, part of who we are as a nation.
I can understand why some will want to interpret it differently or use alien cultures such as hip-hop, for example, to bring it a new audience but there needs to be an establishment that preserves it in its purest form. There is a responsibility to preserve Shakespeare in the manner in which we inherited it.
You speak of Shakespeare if he were - to quote a line from Ragtime - an accoutrement of patriotism. What an awful fate for a working writer who happened to be the best there ever was at his job - creating theatre that touched people in his own time and ours because it was so true and so alive. You want to prop him up in Mme. Toussaud's. I would see him rather as a free flowing spirit constantly renewed by new minds and new insights. Respect, sure. Reverence, never.
Do you think hip-hop versions of Shakespeare are respecting him or our culture? |
|
