Richard II By Shakespeare Essays - Shakespearean Histories

Richard II By Shakespeare How didst thou sway the theatre! Make us feel The players' wounds were true, and their swords, steel! Nay, stranger yet, how often did I know When the spectators ran to save the blow? Frozen with grief we could not stir away Until the epilogue told us ?twas a play. From the point of view of an actor, playing the part of Bolingbroke or Richard is a daunting task. There are a number of ways in which an actor prepares to assume a character's role, but many of these methods are wanting in certain areas. Despite the fact that both characters are rich in the literary sense, for the purposes of this essay the difficulties facing an actor preparing to play a part can be best served by addressing the needs specific to the role of Richard. The major issue, which is more pronounced in Richard is the necessity of trying to portray certain things directly to the audience while allowing other factors to filter through subtly as the performance continues. This factor is one that should be applauded, when one takes into account the manner in which audiences are treated in the modern theatre. Thankfully Richard II assumes there is an intelligent audience almost participating in the play, but this can lead to even more problems for the actor. Because of it's intellectually stimulating content, the actor must be aware of the fact that the character is being observed even more closely. A believable character must be portrayed or the dramatic impact of the play as a whole will be lost. The technical aspects of a part in a play are normally common throughout every performance. The learning of lines may be easily attained but the style in which they are delivered depends on a number of factors. Firstly, and foremost, the character will have the main influence on the manner in which the lines are spoken. However, this can vary greatly when one considers the huge variations that can result in any play at the behest of the director. Without delving into a debate on whether or not a play should be performed in the style of the time in which it was written, one must acknowledge that a director can very noticeably, or subtly make adjustments to characters and plots which an actor must reflect in their performance. Furthermore, the audience to which the actor is performing must be taken into consideration. Despite the fact that we are not the classless society that we wish to be in the 21st century, there are less class barriers in place than those of 1597. The aristocratic, highly - Christian society of Shakespeare's day differs hugely from our own, and this must be taken into account along with the fact that the modern audience is presumably better educated than their late 16th century counterparts. Finally, the type of stage being used may or may not be an issue for an actor in preparing to portray a character. The Elizabethan stage, such as The Globe would have been in Shakespeare's mind as he wrote, but the huge variety if performance stages today often means certain aspects of a performance must curtailed or expunged upon. Indeed the versatility of many pre - cinema scripts has been demonstrated on the silver screen, none more successfully than the Stratford Bard in recent years. Shakespeare's plays are also recognised for the number of plot undertones that can be discerned upon closer examination. Although not a 1990's phenomena, there has been in the recent past an upsurge in the debate over homosexual devices in Shakespearean plays. While some of these claims do have substance to them, with literature as intense and intricate as Shakespeare's, one can read anything that one desires into it to attain one's goal. Sometimes it is necessary simply to take a play as it stands, rather than questioning every element and deconstructing it into such a level of obscurity as to lose the intentions of the author in the first place. Analysis of a text is a necessary part of an actor's preparation assuming a role, but over-analysis may result in dubious conclusions, which may not work well on the stage, regardless of the manner in which they were met. In Shakespeare's Play in Performance, John Russell Brown contends that the formalist style of acting in the Elizabethan stage "was dying out in Shakespeare's age, and that a new naturalism was the kindling spirit in his theatre". While this does seem like a somewhat sweeping statement,