|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Articles
|
|||
|
Articles |
Star-Crossed Lovers (1)J.D. Atkinson looks at the performance history of Romeo and JulietDateline: 9th December, 2004Romeo and Juliet is one of Shakespeare's best-loved and most frequently produced plays, but the road to its present day popularity has been a long and rocky one. This article takes a brief look at how English theatregoers since Shakespeare's day have seen the play on stage. Romeo and Juliet was probably written between 1564 and 1566 and premiered at The Theatre, the first home of the Lord Chamberlain's Men. It seems reasonable to assume that the part of Romeo was created by Richard Burbage, then in his mid-twenties, but the identity of the first Juliet is uncertain. In 1927 T.W. Baldwin put forward the name of Master Robert Goffe, an apprentice with the company, but so little is known about the boy actors of the time that this must remain conjecture. When the theatres reopened after the Civil War actresses appeared for the first time on the professional stage. The first female Juliet was probably Mary Saunderson, who in 1662 played the role at Lincoln's Inn Fields opposite Henry Harris. Samuel Pepys (who took a dim view of both the play - "The worst that ever I heard in my life" - and the actors, who obviously hadn't learned their lines properly) attended the premiere. The urge to adapt Shakespeare's lines for what was felt to be a more polished age was already in evidence, and this production may have been an adaptation. The next important version of Romeo and Juliet to be offered to London audiences was a drastic revision of the original play. Thomas Otway's Caius Marius, first performed in 1679 at London's Dorset Garden Theatre, retained much of the balcony scene but reset the play in ancient Rome, stressing the political strife of the two rival families rather than the forbidden love of their children (renamed Marius and Lavinia.) However bizarre Otway's adaptation may seem to 21st century sensibilities, it foreshadowed a number of post-WWII productions in which Romeo and Juliet were depicted as the products of a bitterly divided society rather than the dewy-eyed young lovers of popular tradition. At the premiere Marius was played by William Smith and Lavinia by Elizabeth Barry, the leading tragic actress of her day. Although Otway's version was ridiculed by some critics it was still being performed fifty years later. In 1744 audiences at the Haymarket Theatre must have been somewhat taken aback by Theophilus Cibber's new production of the play. He played Romeo to the Juliet of his 14-year-old daughter Jane, the first of several instances of quasi-incestuous casting. Reviewer John Hill pitied Jane for having to play opposite "a person whom we could not but remember, at every sentence she delivered concerning him, to be too old for her choice, too little handsome to be in love with, and, into the bargain, her father".
Six years later Londoners were treated to the "Battle of the Romeos". For twelve nights in the autumn of 1750 playgoers could choose between David Garrick playing the role at Drury Lane, and Spranger Barry at Covent Garden (their respective Juliets were the Irish actress George Anne Bellamy and Susanna Cibber). The rivalry ended when Cibber had to withdraw from her production and Garrick played an extra night to celebrate his "triumph", but on the whole the critics favoured Barry's interpretation of Romeo as an ardent lover rather than the tragic hero of stage tradition. His reading was hugely influential and was not challenged until well into the twentieth century. However, Garrick's adaptation - which replaced the "jingling" rhymed couplets with blank verse, and allowed Juliet to awake after Romeo has drunk the poison but before his death - kept Shakespeare's original offstage for 90 years and was last performed in 1875. The end of the 18th century saw the rise of the brilliant Kemble family, who would dominate the London theatre for decades. In 1789 at Drury Lane Romeo and Juliet were played by John Philip Kemble and his sister Sarah Siddons, but neither were well suited to their roles. Their brother Charles was more successful as Romeo in 1829 but later abandoned the role to play Mercutio, at which he excelled. Other stars failed miserably in the role of Romeo, which became increasingly unpopular with actors. Charles Macready got off to a promising start in the role in 1810 but was never popular with the public. Edmund Kean was a total failure and withdrew from the role after nine performances at Drury Lane in 1815; he found the experience so humiliating he never played the part again. His son Charles later attempted the role and was also savaged by the critics. Ironically, at the same time that Romeo was becoming Shakespeare's least-liked male role, women were triumphing as Juliet. The part became a make-or-break role for young actresses - a failure could have a catastrophic effect on a budding career but success meant instant stardom. In 1814 Eliza O'Neill, twenty-four years old but looking much younger, received rave reviews when she played opposite the less fortunate Charles Macready. Youth and vulnerability came to typify the role, and O'Neill's characterization influenced the performance of Fanny Kemble at Covent Garden (with her mother playing Lady Capulet and her father Charles as Mercutio. When the production visited America Charles took the part of Romeo). In 1829 Helena Faucit played another passive, fragile Juliet and was still playing the role in 1871. Next>> A Female Romeo
|
||
|
|
