In the twentieth century, theatrical representations of A Midsummer Nights Dream (The Dream) underwent a revolution. Leading the breakthrough was Peter Brook’s 1970 production, a challenge to traditional interpretations of Shakespeare’s work. Directors like Robert Lepage (1992) and Tim Supple (2006) followed Peter Brook’s success and explored their own interpretations of The Dream with famous and influential productions. Each of these directors accentuated the contrasts between the play’s intertwined stories while drawing out certain themes of the play: order versus disorder, the fragility and power of love in its sexual expression, and the line between dream and reality. This essay will analyse the work of these three directors in their
…show more content…
Since Supple’s performance was tailored for India, Sri Lanka and the UK, he decided to include in his production, not only his performers’ theatrical background, but also their 7 native Indian languages (Muñoz Valdivieso, 101).
Characterization:
Because of the resulting language barrier, the characterization of his characters was very physical so as to make the story understandable to all audiences. For this reason, the box office at the Roundhouse described the production not as a play, but as a “music and dance show’’ (Hampton-Reeves). Although the production’s multiple languages reduce the audience’s understanding of the text, critics reported that this loss was made up by the energy of the production, which made the performance understandable beyond verbal communication (Muñoz Valdivieso, 102). Reviews also described Lepage’s characterization as energetic and physical (Halio, 127). However, in Lepage’s case, critics highly critiqued this aspect of the production, as they felt the text was lost, as actions yielded lines and not vice versa (Halio, 125, 127). This was one of the main differences with Brook’s production, in which the text was the driving force of the
Since Supple’s performance was tailored for India, Sri Lanka and the UK, he decided to include in his production, not only his performers’ theatrical background, but also their 7 native Indian languages (Muñoz Valdivieso, 101).
Characterization:
Because of the resulting language barrier, the characterization of his characters was very physical so as to make the story understandable to all audiences. For this reason, the box office at the Roundhouse described the production not as a play, but as a “music and dance show’’ (Hampton-Reeves). Although the production’s multiple languages reduce the audience’s understanding of the text, critics reported that this loss was made up by the energy of the production, which made the performance understandable beyond verbal communication (Muñoz Valdivieso, 102). Reviews also described Lepage’s characterization as energetic and physical (Halio, 127). However, in Lepage’s case, critics highly critiqued this aspect of the production, as they felt the text was lost, as actions yielded lines and not vice versa (Halio, 125, 127). This was one of the main differences with Brook’s production, in which the text was the driving force of the