More Bloody Shakespeare! - Titus Andronicus Returns To The RSC



Stephen Boxer in rehearsal as Titus Andronicus



This week, at the Swan Theatre in Stratford upon Avon, the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) present their latest interpretation of this, perhaps Shakespeare’s most gruesome creation. Directed by RSC newcomer Michael Fentiman the play promises to pull no punches and I caught up with Michael during the penultimate week of rehearsals to discuss his approach to the play.

One of the least performed of Shakespeare's plays, outside of the world of actors and literature scholars not many have heard of the tale, let alone know what it's about. The text has no legendary quotes of "Alas, poor Yorick" or "Romeo, Romeo" status, no fairies or ass’s heads or star-crossed lovers, to mark it out in the collective consciousness. It has probably never been studied at GCSE level, (with good reason) and if any quick image were to iconically identify the story, it would be that of a (possibly one-handed) baker, resplendent in white chef's hat, labouring over a generously filled meat pie.

The story is little more than a revenge tragedy, no different from so many of the more famous Shakespearean tales.  After all, strip Hamlet down to its bones and it is the story of an aggrieved son looking to avenge his father's murder. It is however, the audacious nature of the revenge that sets Titus Andronicus apart , with either extreme violence or the consequences of extreme violence, visually played out in every act. Whilst the play may not be for the faint hearted, it should arguably be compulsory viewing for every devotee of well told horror. The story, the roots of which stem from mythology rather than factual history, starts out with simple homicide, but goes on to  include rape, mutilation and beheadings, climaxing with one of the most disturbing acts of murderous cannibalism staged.

The play opens with Titus Andronicus, a victorious army commander returning to Rome, with Tamora , Queen of the Goths, whom he has just conquered, in chains. With the Emperor of Rome recently deceased, the public clamour for Titus to be appointed as his successor, in place of either of the former Emperor's squabbling sons. So the play begins with these two brothers having a grievance against Titus, who then slaughters one of Tamora’s sons, in front of her, as vengeance for his own sons having been killed in battle. So now Tamora is out for revenge too – and this is just in act one! Unlike much of Shakespeare's violence, where the body-count doesn't really start to rack up until well into the second half, Titus Andronicus' storyline delivers heaps of smoking flesh at a fairly consistent rate throughout. Whilst it frequently occurs that members of a Titus audience pass out due to the violence on stage, none  fall asleep from boredom.



Katy Stephens in rehearsal as Tamora



This is Fentiman's directorial debut at Stratford, so whilst he is only being let loose on one of the Bard's minor works, the RSC are still taking that initial gamble that comes with all first-timers. The young man though knows his craft and his literature well. From a historical context, whilst we may today find the extent of the play's savagery shocking, Fentiman points out that in Shakespeare's time the audience coming to the theatre would be familiar with a judicial system that amongst other things, “had criminals heads impaled on spikes on London's bridges”, to say nothing of public hangings, so violent theatre was often nothing less than expected. He also observes that, whilst the play was rarely performed after Shakespeare's death, it having being deemed too violent until Olivier and Vivien Leigh tackled it ( also at Stratford) in 1955, during Shakespeare's lifetime it remained a regular and popular feature in the repertoire.

Fentiman is under no illusion that, notwithstanding the civilised way of the modern Western World, revenge remains a key driving force in society even to this day. Whilst vengeance may no longer be meted out via a dagger or a cup of poison, one need not look too far from home to have recently seen an adulterous politician's career wrecked over the matter of some speeding points as a wronged spouse sought satisfaction. (A mere trifle, excuse the pun, when compared to the vicariously gourmet filicide that is served up by Titus to Tamora.)  And considering a global perspective too, where death through conflict remains a sad current commonplace, Fentiman also contends that many (not all) wars of the modern era have had their origins in revenge and that other than advances in military technology, little has changed since the 1500's.





Michael Fentiman in rehearsal



Not only is this challenging director knowledgable in classic literature, he is also refreshingly up to speed on modern cinema.  It is rewarding to learn that the man responsible for helming this current take on Shakespeare's bloodiest rampage includes Wes Craven (he of Freddy Krueger renown) and Lars von Trier, a Scandinavian known for distinctive and sometimes disturbingly explicit imagery, amongst his influences.

With an innovative director in charge, who has the resources of the world class RSC creative team to assist in realising his vision and talented Magic Circle member and illusionist Richard Pinner drafted in to advise on making the scenes of bloodthirsty carnage and butchery as realistic as the stage will permit, expectations for this show run high and there is an increasing likelihood that those expectations will be exceeded. Fuelling this anticipation is the RSC's own trailer, released in line with the current trend for theatre productions to have mini movie-type promos that grab ticket-selling attention via YouTube.  Industry experts Dusthouse have produced the beautifully shot, but gruesomely gory mini-featurette (link below) that plugs the play, but be warned: the 90 second film re-defines the grindhouse genre and its viewing demands a strong stomach.

Enfant terrible or visionary director ? Only this run can determine how history will regard Fentiman's take on Titus. The production is in rep until the autumn and whether you know the play well, or are simply intrigued by how a top theatre company will present high-budget on-stage slaughter, treat yourself to a trip out to Stratford and a ticket to a show that promises to be one of 2013's most intriguing as well as exciting productions.

In repertory until October 26 2013

Links:

My review of the production can be found here

Trailer

http://www.rsc.org.uk/whats-on/titus-andronicus/pre-trailer.aspx

RSC website for the production

http://www.rsc.org.uk/whats-on/titus-andronicus/

King Lear - Review

Almeida Theatre, London

****

Written by William Shakespeare

Directed by Michael Attenborough

The Almeida's image of Jonathan Pryce as King Lear

King Lear at the Almeida is a raw production, designed and costumed with a pre Christian simpleness of stone, flax and linen that serves the story well. Lear's pagan kingdom, rife with base human motives of bastardy, lechery, jealousy and greed, as well as deep love and loyalty is clearly depicted in this interpretation by Michael Attenborough.

At 65, Jonathan Pryce is realistically aged for the title role. At times majestic, his wild ( not entirely grey ) hair and luxurious beard combined with a partially exposed chest, suggest a man still in possession of many physical faculties. His is a rare Lear that still has the potential to make members of the audience swoon. The performance is pitiful too as we witness the fraying of the king's powers of reason with his age. "Oh let me not be mad " has rarely conveyed such power, coming from a man who whilst at that juncture of old age where his mind is becoming increasingly muddled and  impaired, is young enough to still be painfully aware of his own decline.

Clive Wood’s Gloucester is as good as any. He easily suggests a man who enjoys life and who enjoyed begetting Edmund out of wedlock, yet is sufficiently naïve to be hoodwinked by his bastard son into believing Edgar's plot against him. Even more than Lear perhaps, this Gloucester is a man more sinned against than sinning. As Edmund, Kieran Bew possesses power, presence and evil will. He exudes the sexual attraction that sees both Goneril and Regan lust for him and up until his final swordfight he remains a plausible villain. Richard Goulding provides a thoughtful Edgar and in an interestingly creative touch, Attenborough has us introduced to the young man whilst he is whoring. A credible concept given his father’s track record and with a further degree of inventiveness provided by Edmund paying off the whore. This small detail by the director provides a slightly refreshing perspective on the two brothers, clearly demonstrating Edmunds perceptive and manipulative skills. Goulding’s Edgar goes on to be a moving performance, particularly after he encounters his blinded father, but he has more in the tank that can be given to this production and he needs to find it to truly win the sympathy and pathos that an exceptional Edgar can garner. 

Attenborough has also had some creative fun with Regan and Goneril. During the opening scene in which the kingdom is divided, as Lear awards each sister their portion, he kisses these two older siblings fully and inappropriately on the mouth, clearly suggesting an abusive sexual relationship. This sexual connotation almost justifies the sisters’ subsequent cruel stance towards their father and provides another refreshing perspective on a critical aspect of the tale. Zoe Waites is a worthy Goneril, but no more than that. The moment when Lear curses her with sterility, is a point in the play that has the power to bring an audience to tears. Where a well acted king requires an "as strong" actress as his daughter, to flinch at her father's venomous words, Waite's response to this pivotal speech lacked emotional power. Jenny Jules’ Regan also needs greater depth. Attenborough could have and should have extracted more from both these women, they deserved it.

Chook Sibtain’s Cornwall was nasty throughout. He oozed contempt with word and action, blinding Gloucester in a scene that owed as much to Eli Roth’s “torture porn” as to classic writing. When he throws the ripped out eyeballs at his bleeding helpless victim, the audience flinch and rarely has Gloucester’s Tenant needed to have been as kindly as Alix Wilton Regan’s, her warmth almost soothing the crowd before they rush out for much needed interval G&Ts.

The Almeida stage is sparsely adorned for the production. Laid with heavy flagstones, a pre mediaeval time is clearly suggested. The production is generally lit well too, though there is an occasional incongruity with electric bulkhead lights flickering on external castle walls that sit at odds with the setting of the play, particluarly true with traditional flaming torches burning in the production. 

Without doubt this is a King Lear that demands to be seen. Whilst Attenborough could have made the company more exciting around their star, Pryce remains one of the leading actors of his era. His performance as the ageing raging king is memorable, moving and will stay with one for a long time.

Runs until November 3 2012 

FOOTNOTE

Much anticipation surrounds each new production of both Hamlet and King Lear. Within an actor's professional life cycle, to play the Dane marks an accession to Shakespeare's great roles, whilst Lear is a role typically tackled in the twilight of a career. At 65, Jonathan Pryce plays the ageing king at perhaps the commencement of a twilight chapter with his performance presenting a more "youthful" take on the ageing monarch when compared to some of the other relatively recent Lears of Jacobi and McKellen. As a footnote and albeit long before blogging was invented, Hecuba was fortunate enough to see Pryce's astounding 1980 Hamlet at the Royal Court and it is pleasing to witness part of the revolve of this actor's Shakespearean career.