WHY WAS HE MURDERED? THEORY ONE
If Marlowe did not die from an argument over a bill (a "reckoning," as the Elizabethans called it), what was the motive for his murder? There are several possibilities, some more probable than others.
The first of these possible theories for "getting rid" of Marlowe was bandied about the small literary community of 1590s London. The several variations of this theory revolve around Marlowe's possible love life. One contemporary account reports that Marlowe was murdered by a jealous husband in a street brawl. Another suggests that the brawl was with a jealous competitor of Marlowe, both of whom sought the favors of a compliant and not too respectable mistress. A third, it has been suggested, proposes that Marlowe was a homosexual -- he was quoted as stating that those who love neither tobacco nor boys are missing something -- and that his murder somehow was involved with his aberrant sexual tastes. The implication is that he was involved with a rough crowd, or that he made the fatal mistake of approaching an unwilling young man who was not so inclined. Many of the interesting novels about Marlowe, particularly one written by the distinguished writer, Anthony Burgess, have scenes with Marlowe in energetic love trysts with boys and men. Marlovians defend their hero by arguing that sexuality in Elizabethan times was far more ambiguous than in the present day, and that sex between men was common. After all, did not Shakespeare suggest homosexual love for a youth in his sonnets? (It should be noted that in his sonnets, Shakespeare also expressed a passion for "a dark lady.")
All of these speculations fall into the category of gossip, and seem unlikely.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
MARLOWE: THE REAL STORY PART 4
WAS MARLOWE REALLY MURDERED?
For the past 50 years or so, a theory has been put forth that Christopher Marlowe was not murdered at all. The proposition is that his killing was faked, and that Marlowe escaped from inevitable prosecution as a heretic by fleeing abroad. The main proponent of this theory, Calvin Hoffman, maintained in numerous writings that Christopher Marlowe was the author of the plays of Shakespeare.
The outlines of his theory go something like this:
With the connivance of Thomas Walsingham, and through the services of his men Frizer, Skeres and Poley, a recently executed man was substituted for the body of Marlowe. Marlowe then fled to Italy, where he wrote Shakespeare's greatest plays (many of them set in Italy), sent them back to Walsingham, and Walsingham had William Shakespeare, an actor, serve as a front man for the authorship of the plays. Of course, Walsingham would have had Marlowe's manuscripts recopied.
Hoffman relied heavily on what he termed "parallelisms," phrases and lines from Marlowe's acknowledged works that are very similar to lines from the plays of Shakespeare. Further, he raised the cherished argument that no one of Shakespeare's limited education could have written the erudite and complicated plays attributed to Shakespeare.
If Marlowe had been spirited away into exile, it was cleverly done. There are a number of references to Marlowe's death in various documents of the time, and friends and associates seemed to have no doubts that Marlowe had been killed at Deptford.
The most convincing argument, however, is the difference in quality between Marlowe's plays and those attributed to Shakespeare. If one rereads Marlowe's plays, one is struck by the absence of plot, the two-dimensionality of the characters, and the almost simplistic moral presentation of the plays. With the exception of some moments of soaring poetry, and, in Edward II, a few scenes of dramatic power, Marlowe's plays are not comparable in quality to even the earliest and least popular of Shakespeare's plays.
In brief, if the non-murder of Marlowe is dependent on his assuming the authorship of Shakespeare's plays, the case is indeed weak. In all likelihood, the man murdered in Deptford in 1593 was Christopher Marlowe. The question is "Why?"
For the past 50 years or so, a theory has been put forth that Christopher Marlowe was not murdered at all. The proposition is that his killing was faked, and that Marlowe escaped from inevitable prosecution as a heretic by fleeing abroad. The main proponent of this theory, Calvin Hoffman, maintained in numerous writings that Christopher Marlowe was the author of the plays of Shakespeare.
The outlines of his theory go something like this:
With the connivance of Thomas Walsingham, and through the services of his men Frizer, Skeres and Poley, a recently executed man was substituted for the body of Marlowe. Marlowe then fled to Italy, where he wrote Shakespeare's greatest plays (many of them set in Italy), sent them back to Walsingham, and Walsingham had William Shakespeare, an actor, serve as a front man for the authorship of the plays. Of course, Walsingham would have had Marlowe's manuscripts recopied.
Hoffman relied heavily on what he termed "parallelisms," phrases and lines from Marlowe's acknowledged works that are very similar to lines from the plays of Shakespeare. Further, he raised the cherished argument that no one of Shakespeare's limited education could have written the erudite and complicated plays attributed to Shakespeare.
If Marlowe had been spirited away into exile, it was cleverly done. There are a number of references to Marlowe's death in various documents of the time, and friends and associates seemed to have no doubts that Marlowe had been killed at Deptford.
The most convincing argument, however, is the difference in quality between Marlowe's plays and those attributed to Shakespeare. If one rereads Marlowe's plays, one is struck by the absence of plot, the two-dimensionality of the characters, and the almost simplistic moral presentation of the plays. With the exception of some moments of soaring poetry, and, in Edward II, a few scenes of dramatic power, Marlowe's plays are not comparable in quality to even the earliest and least popular of Shakespeare's plays.
In brief, if the non-murder of Marlowe is dependent on his assuming the authorship of Shakespeare's plays, the case is indeed weak. In all likelihood, the man murdered in Deptford in 1593 was Christopher Marlowe. The question is "Why?"
Friday, May 04, 2007
MARLOWE: THE REAL STORY PT 3
WHO WAS CHRISTOPHER MARLOWE?
Christopher Marlowe, if he is known at all, is vaguely remembered as a playwright who wrote the immortal lines about Helen of Troy: "Was this the face that launched a thousand ships, and burnt the topless towers of Ilium?"
These lines from Dr. Faustus are repeated by actors auditioning for roles in the film "Shakespeare in Love," and serve as a cliche or the soaring poetry of Elizabethan drama. Yet, Marlowe was more than a single immortal line of blank verse. He was the most popular and successful playwright before and during Shakespeare's early years, having written five tremendously successful plays. It has been suggested that he collaborated with Shakespeare on the latter's three parts of Henry VI.
Like most of the playwrights of the era (except Shakespeare), Marlowe was a university graduate, having left Cambridge in 1585, about the time of his first success, Tamburlaine. He had left Cambridge under a cloud, and was denied his Master's degree until a letter from the Privy Council charged the university with granting it. "He has of late done the Queen great service." Cambridge relented, and he became Christopher Marlow, M.A. He had been born in Canterbury in 1564, the son of a shoemaker, two months before Shakespeare had been born in Stratford. Besides his fame as a poet, as well as a playwright, he was, in all probability, a spy.
Several accounts of fights that Marlowe had suggest that he had a violent temper. Other references to him propose that he was "sweet Kit Marlowe," an affable companion. The portrait in Corpus Christi College in Cambridge that has been purported to be the likeness of Marlowe shows a young dandy with a sardonic smile. Only one signature (as a witness to a will) exists. In contrast, the mysterious William Shakespeare is represented by two (perhaps three) portraits and a number of signatures. While we have a reasonably detailed paper trail of Marlowe's life, not much more is known about him than we know about Shakespeare. Calvin Hoffman has argued that, indeed, Marlowe was Shakespeare.
A great deal of evidence exists, however, that Marlowe was a spy. Under the power of Sir Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth I had the first of the British Secret Services, and university graduates were recruited for intelligence work. The enemy, of course, was primarily Spain, but, broadly speaking, it was an intelligence war against Catholics. Sir Francis's spy group engaged not only in intelligence gathering, but in elaborate schemes of entrapment. It was a very nasty enterprise.
One of Cambridge's objections to granting Marlowe a degree was his frequent absences with trips to the Continent. Were these espionage assignments in which he provided "good service to the Queen?"
Christopher Marlowe, if he is known at all, is vaguely remembered as a playwright who wrote the immortal lines about Helen of Troy: "Was this the face that launched a thousand ships, and burnt the topless towers of Ilium?"
These lines from Dr. Faustus are repeated by actors auditioning for roles in the film "Shakespeare in Love," and serve as a cliche or the soaring poetry of Elizabethan drama. Yet, Marlowe was more than a single immortal line of blank verse. He was the most popular and successful playwright before and during Shakespeare's early years, having written five tremendously successful plays. It has been suggested that he collaborated with Shakespeare on the latter's three parts of Henry VI.
Like most of the playwrights of the era (except Shakespeare), Marlowe was a university graduate, having left Cambridge in 1585, about the time of his first success, Tamburlaine. He had left Cambridge under a cloud, and was denied his Master's degree until a letter from the Privy Council charged the university with granting it. "He has of late done the Queen great service." Cambridge relented, and he became Christopher Marlow, M.A. He had been born in Canterbury in 1564, the son of a shoemaker, two months before Shakespeare had been born in Stratford. Besides his fame as a poet, as well as a playwright, he was, in all probability, a spy.
Several accounts of fights that Marlowe had suggest that he had a violent temper. Other references to him propose that he was "sweet Kit Marlowe," an affable companion. The portrait in Corpus Christi College in Cambridge that has been purported to be the likeness of Marlowe shows a young dandy with a sardonic smile. Only one signature (as a witness to a will) exists. In contrast, the mysterious William Shakespeare is represented by two (perhaps three) portraits and a number of signatures. While we have a reasonably detailed paper trail of Marlowe's life, not much more is known about him than we know about Shakespeare. Calvin Hoffman has argued that, indeed, Marlowe was Shakespeare.
A great deal of evidence exists, however, that Marlowe was a spy. Under the power of Sir Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth I had the first of the British Secret Services, and university graduates were recruited for intelligence work. The enemy, of course, was primarily Spain, but, broadly speaking, it was an intelligence war against Catholics. Sir Francis's spy group engaged not only in intelligence gathering, but in elaborate schemes of entrapment. It was a very nasty enterprise.
One of Cambridge's objections to granting Marlowe a degree was his frequent absences with trips to the Continent. Were these espionage assignments in which he provided "good service to the Queen?"
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
REHEARSAL UPDATE
Last night we moved inside the performing space. What a difference! To see the actors work out their characters, the blocking, and the language - its a thrilling process.
Being in the space so early can only help. Too many times you find yourself in the space the week the show opens. Then everyone has to get "comfortable" in four days before the show goes up in front of an audience.
Last night was the first day for being off-book. Nobody disappointed. It wasn't perfect but it was honest and they worked at it. That's all you can ask for.
We're on the right track. Everyone is working hard, which is what I would expect, even though it can be lacking in some shows. You don't want to take anything for granted. Personally, I like to be way out in front of an audience when the show opens. It can be surprising for an actor and director to see what lies just out of one's reach when you keep pushing to go further. There is always more to do and to see. The more you work it, the more see it.
Tonight we're moving to the next series of scenes in the play. My hope is that we build on last night's success and move forward, building the show like a pyramid, one block at a time. Sounds cliche, but it's the best way to do it.
Being in the space so early can only help. Too many times you find yourself in the space the week the show opens. Then everyone has to get "comfortable" in four days before the show goes up in front of an audience.
Last night was the first day for being off-book. Nobody disappointed. It wasn't perfect but it was honest and they worked at it. That's all you can ask for.
We're on the right track. Everyone is working hard, which is what I would expect, even though it can be lacking in some shows. You don't want to take anything for granted. Personally, I like to be way out in front of an audience when the show opens. It can be surprising for an actor and director to see what lies just out of one's reach when you keep pushing to go further. There is always more to do and to see. The more you work it, the more see it.
Tonight we're moving to the next series of scenes in the play. My hope is that we build on last night's success and move forward, building the show like a pyramid, one block at a time. Sounds cliche, but it's the best way to do it.
Monday, April 30, 2007
MARLOWE: THE REAL STORY PART 2
This continues our series on the various theories and speculations about Marlowe's death.
THE THREE MEN IN THE ROOM
More is known about the three other men in the room, Ingram Frizer, Robert Poley and Nicholas Skeres, than about Christopher Marlowe. Frizer, the man who killed Marlowe, was a servant of Sir Thomas Walsingham, a relative of Francis, the Spymaster. In this case, "servant" refers to a general handyman, a combination of secretary, administrative assistant, and gofer. Thomas Walsingham was not only Frizer's employer, but, as was often the case in Elizabethan times, a patron of Christopher Marlowe. To add to his mysterious resume, Frizer appears to have been an adept confidence man, specializing in schemes to lend money and extract more than he leant.
Robert Poley and Nicholas Skeres were, to one degree or another, spies in the employ of Francis Walsingham. Poley was deeply involved in "The Babbington Plot," a scheme by Roman Catholic dissidents to assassinate Elizabeth I and to replace her with the imprisoned Mary Queen of Scots. Evidence supports the idea that Poley infiltrated the plotters, encouraged their traitorous plans, and provided information to Francis Walsingham, allowing the plot to be both created and thwarted.
In order to maintain Poley's cover as a spy, Poley was comfortably imprisoned in the Tower of London for two years -- lenient, by Elizabethan standards. Skeres was also involved in the undoing of Babbington and his co-conspirators, and engaged in other assignments for Francis Walsingham.
Hence, all three were connected to the shadowy world of 16th century espionage and intrigue.
And so was Marlowe.
THE THREE MEN IN THE ROOM
More is known about the three other men in the room, Ingram Frizer, Robert Poley and Nicholas Skeres, than about Christopher Marlowe. Frizer, the man who killed Marlowe, was a servant of Sir Thomas Walsingham, a relative of Francis, the Spymaster. In this case, "servant" refers to a general handyman, a combination of secretary, administrative assistant, and gofer. Thomas Walsingham was not only Frizer's employer, but, as was often the case in Elizabethan times, a patron of Christopher Marlowe. To add to his mysterious resume, Frizer appears to have been an adept confidence man, specializing in schemes to lend money and extract more than he leant.
Robert Poley and Nicholas Skeres were, to one degree or another, spies in the employ of Francis Walsingham. Poley was deeply involved in "The Babbington Plot," a scheme by Roman Catholic dissidents to assassinate Elizabeth I and to replace her with the imprisoned Mary Queen of Scots. Evidence supports the idea that Poley infiltrated the plotters, encouraged their traitorous plans, and provided information to Francis Walsingham, allowing the plot to be both created and thwarted.
In order to maintain Poley's cover as a spy, Poley was comfortably imprisoned in the Tower of London for two years -- lenient, by Elizabethan standards. Skeres was also involved in the undoing of Babbington and his co-conspirators, and engaged in other assignments for Francis Walsingham.
Hence, all three were connected to the shadowy world of 16th century espionage and intrigue.
And so was Marlowe.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
MURDERING MARLOWE: THE REAL STORY PART 1
The backstory about Christopher Marlowe has many theories. Fortunately there is an excellent site http://www.crimelibrary.com/ that offers some fine scholarship on the subject.
The story is by Russel Aiuto and we will be sharing it on this blog as we grow close to our show opening (May 18).
THE OFFICIAL STORY
May 31, 1593. A widow's house in Deptford, three miles from London. She rents rooms for meetings, and provides food and drink to those who wish to spend the day in contemplation. It is just after six in the evening, the sun not yet set, the room suffused in a pale, golden light. Supper is over. In a matter of minutes, Christopher Marlowe will be dead.
Three of the men are seated on a bench, "cheek by jowl," as one of them is to report later, in front of a trestle table. They are playing an Elizabethan version of backgammon. The only other furniture in the beamed, dark, low-ceiling room is a bed, upon which the fourth man, recovering from too much wine, is reclining. One of the men at the table, the one sitting in the middle of the three, says, over his shoulder, that the bill for their day's food and drink must be paid to their hostess. The young, drunken man on the bed protests. His share of the reckoning is too large, he says. The man at the table replies that the share is only right. The young man lurches to his feet and grabs the dagger from the seated man's belt -- kept in his belt at the small of his back, "Spanish style" -- and strikes him on his head, a superficial gash that bleeds profusely. He strikes him again, opening a second wound. The man struggles to his feet, grabs the wrist of the young man, and forces the dagger into the eye of his assailant. He falls to the floor, instantly dead. The man at the table had no choice. He had to defend himself.
This is the account of the three men, given to the coroner the next day, June 1, 1593, as the coroner and his jury of 16 men view the room and the body. It is a case of self-defense. The next day, June 2, in the churchyard of St. Mary's, Deptford, the dead man is buried. The grave is unmarked.
Death was a common event in Elizabethan London. Plague, violence, execution -- each day brought the end of life to more than a few 16th century Londoners, with little regard to rank or station. Death hovered above the city day after day. Why should the death of this one man concern us?
Two weeks later, the man who thrust the fatal blow is pardoned by Queen Elizabeth I.
Who is he, the man who is dead on the floor of a chamber in a widow's house? And how did he really die?
He must have been important.
The story is by Russel Aiuto and we will be sharing it on this blog as we grow close to our show opening (May 18).
THE OFFICIAL STORY
May 31, 1593. A widow's house in Deptford, three miles from London. She rents rooms for meetings, and provides food and drink to those who wish to spend the day in contemplation. It is just after six in the evening, the sun not yet set, the room suffused in a pale, golden light. Supper is over. In a matter of minutes, Christopher Marlowe will be dead.
Three of the men are seated on a bench, "cheek by jowl," as one of them is to report later, in front of a trestle table. They are playing an Elizabethan version of backgammon. The only other furniture in the beamed, dark, low-ceiling room is a bed, upon which the fourth man, recovering from too much wine, is reclining. One of the men at the table, the one sitting in the middle of the three, says, over his shoulder, that the bill for their day's food and drink must be paid to their hostess. The young, drunken man on the bed protests. His share of the reckoning is too large, he says. The man at the table replies that the share is only right. The young man lurches to his feet and grabs the dagger from the seated man's belt -- kept in his belt at the small of his back, "Spanish style" -- and strikes him on his head, a superficial gash that bleeds profusely. He strikes him again, opening a second wound. The man struggles to his feet, grabs the wrist of the young man, and forces the dagger into the eye of his assailant. He falls to the floor, instantly dead. The man at the table had no choice. He had to defend himself.
This is the account of the three men, given to the coroner the next day, June 1, 1593, as the coroner and his jury of 16 men view the room and the body. It is a case of self-defense. The next day, June 2, in the churchyard of St. Mary's, Deptford, the dead man is buried. The grave is unmarked.
Death was a common event in Elizabethan London. Plague, violence, execution -- each day brought the end of life to more than a few 16th century Londoners, with little regard to rank or station. Death hovered above the city day after day. Why should the death of this one man concern us?
Two weeks later, the man who thrust the fatal blow is pardoned by Queen Elizabeth I.
Who is he, the man who is dead on the floor of a chamber in a widow's house? And how did he really die?
He must have been important.
Monday, April 23, 2007
MURDERING MARLOWE MACABRE
In the coming days, we will be posting information relating to the death of Christopher Marlowe, his associates, and the back story that surrounds our production.
Sure, the play is apocryphal, but the characters are intriguing and the city of London was one teaming mass of malcontents, plotters and opportunists.
Stay tuned!
Sure, the play is apocryphal, but the characters are intriguing and the city of London was one teaming mass of malcontents, plotters and opportunists.
Stay tuned!
Friday, April 20, 2007
OLD "BUS STOP" GETS A FRESH NEW LOOK
Went to see the preview performance of "Bus Stop" by William Inge last night. The play was performed in the black box theatre at ECC. It was directed by Beata Pilch from Trap Door Theatre in Chicago.
Seeing a small town realistic American classic re-imagined with hints of the avante-garde is absolutely wonderful. I never read or saw the play or movie, so I went in raw, with no expectations.
Little touches like the asides, spotlight speeches, strobe-light blackouts, overlapping dialogue and the overall sense of playfulness in the production, really opened the show up to the audience. The predominately young cast did an excellent job throughout.
If you go to the show, keep your eye on the actor playing the sheriff. He has a subtle intensity about him that is very interesting. In fact all the actors stayed focused and providing good support to each other, even when the focus wasn't on the them. The relationship between Beau and Cherie is fiery and the Professor serves wonderfully as narrator/character/storyteller. And the actor playing the young waitress has enough spunk to jump-start a car.
My hope is that audiences come out to see this play and enjoys the fresh interpretation that's been applied. It's very theatrical and completely accessible.
Seeing a small town realistic American classic re-imagined with hints of the avante-garde is absolutely wonderful. I never read or saw the play or movie, so I went in raw, with no expectations.
Little touches like the asides, spotlight speeches, strobe-light blackouts, overlapping dialogue and the overall sense of playfulness in the production, really opened the show up to the audience. The predominately young cast did an excellent job throughout.
If you go to the show, keep your eye on the actor playing the sheriff. He has a subtle intensity about him that is very interesting. In fact all the actors stayed focused and providing good support to each other, even when the focus wasn't on the them. The relationship between Beau and Cherie is fiery and the Professor serves wonderfully as narrator/character/storyteller. And the actor playing the young waitress has enough spunk to jump-start a car.
My hope is that audiences come out to see this play and enjoys the fresh interpretation that's been applied. It's very theatrical and completely accessible.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
ONCE MORE INTO THE BREACH
Have been away for awhile.
Working on writing grants for the company, seeing shows and planning for the upcoming production of Murdering Marlowe.
Tomorrow night we start rehearsals. We had a reading almost two weeks ago. Now I'm eager to get going on this new story about some classic characters: Shakespeare and Marlowe. The play is very contemporary. The themes range from envy, jealousy, fame, marriage and desire. Breaking it all down should be a wonderful challenge.
The approach is fairly typical: block the play, work it, run it through and polish it to a fine sheen. That is the hope. The excitement comes from working with the actors and seeing what they bring to the play with their ideas and talents. What I see is only a part of the whole. The key is to see what is created by all of us working together, collaborating and dissecting, devouring and digesting the play. It's an interesting process that can be exhausting, because once you see something on stage that is intrigues you, the next instinct is to explore it further, which leads to other doors, new discoveries, and really long sentences like this one.
In any case, tomorrow will be the first major step into this new world, and I'm excited to see where we end up on May 18.
Working on writing grants for the company, seeing shows and planning for the upcoming production of Murdering Marlowe.
Tomorrow night we start rehearsals. We had a reading almost two weeks ago. Now I'm eager to get going on this new story about some classic characters: Shakespeare and Marlowe. The play is very contemporary. The themes range from envy, jealousy, fame, marriage and desire. Breaking it all down should be a wonderful challenge.
The approach is fairly typical: block the play, work it, run it through and polish it to a fine sheen. That is the hope. The excitement comes from working with the actors and seeing what they bring to the play with their ideas and talents. What I see is only a part of the whole. The key is to see what is created by all of us working together, collaborating and dissecting, devouring and digesting the play. It's an interesting process that can be exhausting, because once you see something on stage that is intrigues you, the next instinct is to explore it further, which leads to other doors, new discoveries, and really long sentences like this one.
In any case, tomorrow will be the first major step into this new world, and I'm excited to see where we end up on May 18.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
FIRST READ
Last night the cast of Murdering Marlowe read the play.
There is something so exciting about a first reading. Watching and listening to the actors work the language and get their heads around the ideas and expressions.
In this case, it's more thrilling than usual since the play is written in a pseudo-Elizabethan style with verse and prose. There is nothing more engaging than the sound of different words working together to form the music that is the play. And in this play the ideas are quite contemporary: envy, power, religion, fame and sex.
It should be a thrilling ride, but more on that later.
There is something so exciting about a first reading. Watching and listening to the actors work the language and get their heads around the ideas and expressions.
In this case, it's more thrilling than usual since the play is written in a pseudo-Elizabethan style with verse and prose. There is nothing more engaging than the sound of different words working together to form the music that is the play. And in this play the ideas are quite contemporary: envy, power, religion, fame and sex.
It should be a thrilling ride, but more on that later.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
HERE WE GO
After a week to scramble, a cast has been assembled for Murdering Marlowe.
We had auditions then conducted some callbacks (rare for me) and were finally able to put together a group of talented people.
Tonight we'll meet to read the play and go over introductions. This will give us roughly 9 weeks to get this play in shape. That should be enough and with the commitment of everyone involved, this should be another exciting show.
Currently, I've been tossing around the idea of staging this play with a film-noir/neo-noir style. Charles Marowitz, the playwright, says the play is above all a thriller rather than a period drama. I would agree. He actually has a wonderful mock interview with Will Shakespeare that sheds some light on moving classical plays to different time periods.
We had auditions then conducted some callbacks (rare for me) and were finally able to put together a group of talented people.
Tonight we'll meet to read the play and go over introductions. This will give us roughly 9 weeks to get this play in shape. That should be enough and with the commitment of everyone involved, this should be another exciting show.
Currently, I've been tossing around the idea of staging this play with a film-noir/neo-noir style. Charles Marowitz, the playwright, says the play is above all a thriller rather than a period drama. I would agree. He actually has a wonderful mock interview with Will Shakespeare that sheds some light on moving classical plays to different time periods.
CM: Does it bother you to have your plays radically reinterpreted, their time periods changed, the characters costumed in attire ranging from the Stone Age to the 21st century?
WS: Why should it? I did the same in my own time. We played in "modern dress," you know -- or what was modern in the l6th and l7th centuries. It doesn't matter to me what the clothes look like, or the settings. What does bother me is when these wiseacres impose a new story on to mine which disintegrates the original and makes a mush of both. It's like a bad organ transplant; the original organism rejects the new heart or liver and the fusion only draws attention to the incompatibility of both. Now that really does get my goat!
CW: So you don't mind being freely "reinterpreted"?
WS: Being reinterpreted is the only way my work can possibly survive. It almost perished in the Victorian era because a few fussbudgets were determined to protect and defend me against distortion -- but what they called "distortion" was really the Present interacting with the Past, which is the bounden duty of the Present to do. God forfend that I should fall into the hands of the Purists, the Scholars, and the Academics! They're the New Puritans and we have to fight them as staunchly today as I did five centuries ago.
Interesting stuff. And I couldn't agree more. The plays won't survive if we don't constantly play with them in order to discover what lies beneath the text. Or what new worlds are waiting for us to wake up.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
A WEEK TO SCRAMBLE
It has been a week to scramble.
After holding auditions last Sunday night for Murdering Marlowe, we went to work on making choices on how to cast the show. That is why I've been away this week.
You can go back and forth on what to do about casting a show. We had some fine talent show up and I would say all went well, except for the fact that we didn't have enough men to cover the parts for the play. Damn. Damn. Damn.
So the week was spent making emails and phone calls, trying to find people to fill out the show. I think I hit 1 for 8 from the field. Not my best week in office. The problem is that we're pretty shrewd about casting. This isn't the little league baseball team where everyone gets to play regardless of talent. If you don't fit the part or the play, and I can't wedge you in somehow, we don't do it. That's it.
That's not arrogance. It's a responsibility to the audience that sees the work. It's also a responsibility to the playwright who wrote the piece.
I've had to reschedule a few shows due to that situation. This is because I believe it's important to have the best people you can find on stage. Especially for a show that will be getting a Chicago premiere. That might sound tough but you have to have some guiding principles or standards.
Still, I was encouraged by the auditions, which featured some wonderful women and some energizing men.
Now the trick is finding a way to cast the play, or move on to a new production. I have a few days. The clock is ticking.
After holding auditions last Sunday night for Murdering Marlowe, we went to work on making choices on how to cast the show. That is why I've been away this week.
You can go back and forth on what to do about casting a show. We had some fine talent show up and I would say all went well, except for the fact that we didn't have enough men to cover the parts for the play. Damn. Damn. Damn.
So the week was spent making emails and phone calls, trying to find people to fill out the show. I think I hit 1 for 8 from the field. Not my best week in office. The problem is that we're pretty shrewd about casting. This isn't the little league baseball team where everyone gets to play regardless of talent. If you don't fit the part or the play, and I can't wedge you in somehow, we don't do it. That's it.
That's not arrogance. It's a responsibility to the audience that sees the work. It's also a responsibility to the playwright who wrote the piece.
I've had to reschedule a few shows due to that situation. This is because I believe it's important to have the best people you can find on stage. Especially for a show that will be getting a Chicago premiere. That might sound tough but you have to have some guiding principles or standards.
Still, I was encouraged by the auditions, which featured some wonderful women and some energizing men.
Now the trick is finding a way to cast the play, or move on to a new production. I have a few days. The clock is ticking.
Monday, March 05, 2007
ONE DOWN, TWO TO GO
We finished Life X 3 last night.
Endings are always difficult with theater. You work 6,8 or maybe 9 weeks with a cast, put up the show, ride the emotional roller coaster of audiences, reviews and wondering whether the heat will be on - then it's over. Just like that, it all seems to stop at once.
Usually you have a certain amount of downtime to reload and think of the future. In this case, we had scheduled auditions for Murdering Marlowe roughly two hours after Life ended. Luckily our strike only took 10 minutes (one of the perks with doing a Janus show).
The show stayed strong throughout the run, and the cast kept their focus, even with light audiences, fluctuating temperatures and hot and spicy cheez-its.
I felt fortunate to direct this group. They worked well with each other - onstage and off - which can be rare in theater; where moods change like the wind and people can get very strange very quickly. But this group did us proud for our first effort at the Elgin Art Showcase.
Now the challenge becomes growing our audience. It feels like we're starting from scratch.
Fortunately, we have two more "practice" productions to see how what we'll work best for us.
Yes, we're scheduled beyond the next two shows, but they are part of our "breaking-in" phase to see what works well in the space. So far so good, save for the fact that we need to find the secret to getting the ever illusive larger audience.
As the late (I'll call him great) theater producer Fred Solari (Athenaeum Theatre, Chicago) said to me a few years ago: "When you find out the secret, be sure to let me know."
Endings are always difficult with theater. You work 6,8 or maybe 9 weeks with a cast, put up the show, ride the emotional roller coaster of audiences, reviews and wondering whether the heat will be on - then it's over. Just like that, it all seems to stop at once.
Usually you have a certain amount of downtime to reload and think of the future. In this case, we had scheduled auditions for Murdering Marlowe roughly two hours after Life ended. Luckily our strike only took 10 minutes (one of the perks with doing a Janus show).
The show stayed strong throughout the run, and the cast kept their focus, even with light audiences, fluctuating temperatures and hot and spicy cheez-its.
I felt fortunate to direct this group. They worked well with each other - onstage and off - which can be rare in theater; where moods change like the wind and people can get very strange very quickly. But this group did us proud for our first effort at the Elgin Art Showcase.
Now the challenge becomes growing our audience. It feels like we're starting from scratch.
Fortunately, we have two more "practice" productions to see how what we'll work best for us.
Yes, we're scheduled beyond the next two shows, but they are part of our "breaking-in" phase to see what works well in the space. So far so good, save for the fact that we need to find the secret to getting the ever illusive larger audience.
As the late (I'll call him great) theater producer Fred Solari (Athenaeum Theatre, Chicago) said to me a few years ago: "When you find out the secret, be sure to let me know."
Friday, March 02, 2007
I THINK WE CAN, I THINK WE CAN
Previous posts found me lamenting the lack of male actors in the suburbs. This post still has me pouting, but there is hope, as the numbers have changed.
At last count, we have six men lined up to audition for the pseudo-Elizabethan thriller Murdering Marlowe by Charles Marowitz. We also have 10 women auditioning for only two parts, which is very typical and unfortunate.
Perhaps we should do something with a dominant female cast. That would makes sense. Maybe The Trojan Women as suggested by Terry Domschke (Artistic Director) or a gender-bending take on a classical play with the author long dead (as suggested by Tara Schuman - Stage Manager). Perhaps the low turnout is due to the foreign title. This is, after all, a newer play, which will be the Chicago-area premiere.
This is a discussion me and my fellow Janus folks had last night.
Would a better-known play attract more people to audition as well as an audience to support them? The obvious answer is yes.
So why would we decide to do two new plays to christen our new space? It appears better to play it safe, right? Of course it does.
The problem is that I (Sean, the director of these two plays) have been seduced by their wonderful theatrical qualities.
These are great plays for actors with meaty roles, thrilling language and interesting stories. Oh, yes, the audience will find them exciting as well.
This is little consolation when your current show struggles to find an audience and your next show cannot easily be cast.
Still, I have hope that these next two days will present us with more actors to audition and a strong weekend closing of Life X 3. At least that's my hope. I thing we can, I think we can, I think.
At last count, we have six men lined up to audition for the pseudo-Elizabethan thriller Murdering Marlowe by Charles Marowitz. We also have 10 women auditioning for only two parts, which is very typical and unfortunate.
Perhaps we should do something with a dominant female cast. That would makes sense. Maybe The Trojan Women as suggested by Terry Domschke (Artistic Director) or a gender-bending take on a classical play with the author long dead (as suggested by Tara Schuman - Stage Manager). Perhaps the low turnout is due to the foreign title. This is, after all, a newer play, which will be the Chicago-area premiere.
This is a discussion me and my fellow Janus folks had last night.
Would a better-known play attract more people to audition as well as an audience to support them? The obvious answer is yes.
So why would we decide to do two new plays to christen our new space? It appears better to play it safe, right? Of course it does.
The problem is that I (Sean, the director of these two plays) have been seduced by their wonderful theatrical qualities.
These are great plays for actors with meaty roles, thrilling language and interesting stories. Oh, yes, the audience will find them exciting as well.
This is little consolation when your current show struggles to find an audience and your next show cannot easily be cast.
Still, I have hope that these next two days will present us with more actors to audition and a strong weekend closing of Life X 3. At least that's my hope. I thing we can, I think we can, I think.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
AND THEN THERE WERE THREE
This is the last week to see Life X 3. Only three performances left before we wave goodbye to this strange ride.
The weather has not been kind, which has led to sporadic attendance. But the cast has been a strong bunch - able to stay professional despite the myriad of distractions that comes with a new space. They've all done fine work on this Chicago premiere.
All in all, the run has proved fruitful from an artistic side. The play reveals new insights every time they run it. And, of course, the cast keeps it lively with slight variations every night.
The audience has been interesting. Some are quiet, some are loud, and some are completely amused by what's happening on stage. This play has that overall effect on those who see it. I compare it to Groundhog Day meets Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf. A heady mix that is like taking a ride on a roller coaster. Good times. Good times.
At this point, attendance is slim for this weekend, but I'm hopeful it will pick up. Final weekends tend to bring out the late rush of people who've been too busy to see past performances. Hopefully that is the case and maybe the weather will stay quiet.
The weather has not been kind, which has led to sporadic attendance. But the cast has been a strong bunch - able to stay professional despite the myriad of distractions that comes with a new space. They've all done fine work on this Chicago premiere.
All in all, the run has proved fruitful from an artistic side. The play reveals new insights every time they run it. And, of course, the cast keeps it lively with slight variations every night.
The audience has been interesting. Some are quiet, some are loud, and some are completely amused by what's happening on stage. This play has that overall effect on those who see it. I compare it to Groundhog Day meets Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf. A heady mix that is like taking a ride on a roller coaster. Good times. Good times.
At this point, attendance is slim for this weekend, but I'm hopeful it will pick up. Final weekends tend to bring out the late rush of people who've been too busy to see past performances. Hopefully that is the case and maybe the weather will stay quiet.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
LESS THAN TWO WEEKS TO GO
It seems like we have two scenarios working to their logical conclusions. The show Life X 3 will be ending, and the auditions for Murdering Marlowe will be starting.
The day we close one will give way to the night we begin the other.
This is the time where I begin to wonder if the last-minute masses will make their way to see our show. I can't see why not: a tight cast, interesting script, tons of press and a new space.
Of course what seems obvious on the one hand, can lead to empty houses on the other. A show like Life X 3 challenges and has that funky title. Not like Vagina Monologues or Santaland Diaries, but something else all together, which doesn't have them running up eight flights of stairs to see it. Just kidding - you can take the elevator.
Yes, this is the fun little struggle you deal with when you present your art. "And there was much rejoicing. Yeah."
As for Murdering Marlowe, the situation stays the same: where are the men? Can we get some guys, please? One of the most pressing issues with suburban theatre is the lack of quality male actors. And with the recent influx of theater activity in the last 7 years, it all becomes that much harder.
What you'll find is many male actors stay close to groups that star them, regardless of the material. Sure, there are exceptions, but usually it is a tall order getting people to travel. Still, the pool is very shallow when it comes to male actors, regardless of where you dip your feet.
Chicago has actors. The young twenty-somethings don't mind building a resume by doing a show in the burbs - once. That's it. Only one time will they make that drive. I can't blame them. When we worked in Chicago for four years, the drive wore me down like a Rachel Yamagata song.
So the plight with Murdering Marlowe is that he might never come to life to begin with. If I can't get the right cast, I will have to rethink the whole situation. The play requires 7 men and 2 women, which means that right now we have an inverted situation, with nine women and two men scheduled to audition. That's how it goes, so many plays with males parts and too many women to fill. Now don't get me wrong, I've worked with some wonderful women in the theatre. The problem is there aren't that many men left in the burbs. And so many plays are dominated by men.
The last few shows I've directed have found me dodging the bullet when comes to casting. The Laramie Project, We Only Have Ives For You, Squirrels and Life X 3 - all these plays almost didn't happen because the male actors I needed didn't show until the last minute. Sometimes the last minute wasn't enough, leading me to make many, many phone calls.
That's why you have a backup plan (new play) if you need to change directions. It's also why I take Aleve on a regular basis.
The day we close one will give way to the night we begin the other.
This is the time where I begin to wonder if the last-minute masses will make their way to see our show. I can't see why not: a tight cast, interesting script, tons of press and a new space.
Of course what seems obvious on the one hand, can lead to empty houses on the other. A show like Life X 3 challenges and has that funky title. Not like Vagina Monologues or Santaland Diaries, but something else all together, which doesn't have them running up eight flights of stairs to see it. Just kidding - you can take the elevator.
Yes, this is the fun little struggle you deal with when you present your art. "And there was much rejoicing. Yeah."
As for Murdering Marlowe, the situation stays the same: where are the men? Can we get some guys, please? One of the most pressing issues with suburban theatre is the lack of quality male actors. And with the recent influx of theater activity in the last 7 years, it all becomes that much harder.
What you'll find is many male actors stay close to groups that star them, regardless of the material. Sure, there are exceptions, but usually it is a tall order getting people to travel. Still, the pool is very shallow when it comes to male actors, regardless of where you dip your feet.
Chicago has actors. The young twenty-somethings don't mind building a resume by doing a show in the burbs - once. That's it. Only one time will they make that drive. I can't blame them. When we worked in Chicago for four years, the drive wore me down like a Rachel Yamagata song.
So the plight with Murdering Marlowe is that he might never come to life to begin with. If I can't get the right cast, I will have to rethink the whole situation. The play requires 7 men and 2 women, which means that right now we have an inverted situation, with nine women and two men scheduled to audition. That's how it goes, so many plays with males parts and too many women to fill. Now don't get me wrong, I've worked with some wonderful women in the theatre. The problem is there aren't that many men left in the burbs. And so many plays are dominated by men.
The last few shows I've directed have found me dodging the bullet when comes to casting. The Laramie Project, We Only Have Ives For You, Squirrels and Life X 3 - all these plays almost didn't happen because the male actors I needed didn't show until the last minute. Sometimes the last minute wasn't enough, leading me to make many, many phone calls.
That's why you have a backup plan (new play) if you need to change directions. It's also why I take Aleve on a regular basis.
Monday, February 19, 2007
LENORE ADKINS GIVES PRAISE!
Sunday's edition of the Daily Herald featured some kind words from staff writer Lenore Adkins.
Says she:
...Elgin play’s backdrop gives it a trendy feel.
I don’t know if you’ve been to see the
Janus Theater Company’s latest
production, “Life X 3,” inside the new
Elgin Art Showcase in the Professional
Building, but if you haven’t, you should
totally check it out.
My friend, Elisabeth Carrel, a copy editor
at the Daily Herald, and I took in a sneak preview
of the show a day before its official release. A party
followed afterward in the green room that featured
champagne, cider and dozens of pastries.
Anyway, I must say the new performance
space is phenomenal, with sweeping views of
downtown Elgin. And the play, set in a Paris
apartment, included those views in the backdrop
that, to me, made the production all the more realistic.
As I told Elgin Mayor Ed Schock, who also
was there with his wife Karen, the open view gave
the apartment a trendy loft feel. You should
definitely check it out for yourselves.
Adkins was one of many people that made it to the "sneak preview" night. Her comments were welcome and she's right. The space has a trendy feel, but more importantly, it gives off an urban atmosphere, reminiscent of what you would find in Chicago or even New York. Definitely a new jewel in Elgin's downtown revival.
Says she:
...Elgin play’s backdrop gives it a trendy feel.
I don’t know if you’ve been to see the
Janus Theater Company’s latest
production, “Life X 3,” inside the new
Elgin Art Showcase in the Professional
Building, but if you haven’t, you should
totally check it out.
My friend, Elisabeth Carrel, a copy editor
at the Daily Herald, and I took in a sneak preview
of the show a day before its official release. A party
followed afterward in the green room that featured
champagne, cider and dozens of pastries.
Anyway, I must say the new performance
space is phenomenal, with sweeping views of
downtown Elgin. And the play, set in a Paris
apartment, included those views in the backdrop
that, to me, made the production all the more realistic.
As I told Elgin Mayor Ed Schock, who also
was there with his wife Karen, the open view gave
the apartment a trendy loft feel. You should
definitely check it out for yourselves.
Adkins was one of many people that made it to the "sneak preview" night. Her comments were welcome and she's right. The space has a trendy feel, but more importantly, it gives off an urban atmosphere, reminiscent of what you would find in Chicago or even New York. Definitely a new jewel in Elgin's downtown revival.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
WE'RE BACK!
This is a little late. About one year to be exact. But after producing the successful Laramie Project in Chicago, we had to regroup and refocus, while we prepared to move into our new digs - the Elgin Art Showcase!
That's right. After eight years of wandering, claiming the irreverent titles - nomadic stalwart and gypsy troupe - we are now settled and prepared to enter middle-age in an old/new space.
Some background. The Elgin Art Showcase is an old ballroom with high ceilings and hardwood floors. The space has been fully renovated to provide gallery/performance space for Elgin artists and performing groups. We jumped at the chance and when they asked groups to provide dates, we said we could do five shows accounting for 19 weeks!
That's a little nuts. I liken the experience to and all-you-can-eat fish fry, where you think your able to consume at least a dozen pieces of perch, when, in fact, you only finish two.
In our case, we hope to put our stamp on the space, and survive in the process. And maybe people will come and consume the theater. Always perched precariously close to the edge of what is considered mainstream, our group has survived - somehow, someway - despite producing an eclectic mix of theater in an array of venues.
We're thinking that being in one place, over time, can only help our chances.
Time will tell the tale.
Stayed tuned for updates, anecdotes and information.
And if you want more "professional" information about us and what we're doing, please go to our website at http://www.janustheatre.org/. "It's in there. It's all in there."
Thanks
Sean
That's right. After eight years of wandering, claiming the irreverent titles - nomadic stalwart and gypsy troupe - we are now settled and prepared to enter middle-age in an old/new space.
Some background. The Elgin Art Showcase is an old ballroom with high ceilings and hardwood floors. The space has been fully renovated to provide gallery/performance space for Elgin artists and performing groups. We jumped at the chance and when they asked groups to provide dates, we said we could do five shows accounting for 19 weeks!
That's a little nuts. I liken the experience to and all-you-can-eat fish fry, where you think your able to consume at least a dozen pieces of perch, when, in fact, you only finish two.
In our case, we hope to put our stamp on the space, and survive in the process. And maybe people will come and consume the theater. Always perched precariously close to the edge of what is considered mainstream, our group has survived - somehow, someway - despite producing an eclectic mix of theater in an array of venues.
We're thinking that being in one place, over time, can only help our chances.
Time will tell the tale.
Stayed tuned for updates, anecdotes and information.
And if you want more "professional" information about us and what we're doing, please go to our website at http://www.janustheatre.org/. "It's in there. It's all in there."
Thanks
Sean
Sunday, March 12, 2006
A SHORT TAKE - TIMEOUT CHICAGO
TIMEOUT CHICAGO
Kris Vire
March 9, 2006
The Laramie ProjectBy Moisés Kaufman and members of the Tectonic Theater Project. Dir. Sean Hargadon. With ensemble cast. Janus Theatre Company at the Athenaeum.It's tempting to call The Laramie Project a foolproof play. The docudrama, built from interviews conducted in the wake of Matthew Shepard's murder, is so well constructed that you might think it would be impossible to screw up. Truthfully, though, there are plenty of opportunities to go wrong. It wouldn't be difficult to go too maudlin or too self-righteous, or to get caught up in attempts at realism. Even the all-star HBO film of the play, directed by Kaufman, went too far in that direction, losing the sense of theatricality that makes a project like this thrive. Luckily, Hargadon hasn't lost sight of that. He and his cast keep things simple. Recurring characters are identified with simple costume pieces; props and design elements are kept to a minimum, allowing the performances and the words of the interview subjects to be the focus. The result is as thought-provoking and as moving as the subject deserves.
Kris Vire
March 9, 2006
The Laramie ProjectBy Moisés Kaufman and members of the Tectonic Theater Project. Dir. Sean Hargadon. With ensemble cast. Janus Theatre Company at the Athenaeum.It's tempting to call The Laramie Project a foolproof play. The docudrama, built from interviews conducted in the wake of Matthew Shepard's murder, is so well constructed that you might think it would be impossible to screw up. Truthfully, though, there are plenty of opportunities to go wrong. It wouldn't be difficult to go too maudlin or too self-righteous, or to get caught up in attempts at realism. Even the all-star HBO film of the play, directed by Kaufman, went too far in that direction, losing the sense of theatricality that makes a project like this thrive. Luckily, Hargadon hasn't lost sight of that. He and his cast keep things simple. Recurring characters are identified with simple costume pieces; props and design elements are kept to a minimum, allowing the performances and the words of the interview subjects to be the focus. The result is as thought-provoking and as moving as the subject deserves.
Monday, March 06, 2006
LARAMIE PROJECTS PACKS A WALLOP
CHICAGOCRITIC.COM
BY TOM WILLIAMS
Posted Monday, March 5, 2006
Recommended
Janus Theatre’s eight member ensemble landed the powerful, heart-wrenching saga of the horrible hate crime against Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming in 1998. The famous and saddening story of homophobia gone to extremes is told through the eyes of the Teconic Theater Project under Moises Kaufman’s leadership. This company traveled six times to Laramie and conducted over 200 interviews with everyone involved in the crime from town residents to law enforcement officials to religious leaders covering the complete story in a slick documentary style. Matthew Shepard was kidnapped, tortured and killed by two men simply because he was gay.
Lynn Wirth, Jeremy Schaefer, Seth Remington, Zachary Clark, Laura Schwartz, Jonathan Shalvi, Karen Pappas and Helen Young deftly played dozens of characters using first person narration that aptly told the story with enough background and local color to give context to how and why this terrible crime happened. This is an amazingly well performed show showcasing the versatile talents of each actor.
This documentary completely covers Matthew Shepard’s story that unfolds as powerful journalism and emotionally strong theatre. This approach contains a look into the lowly depths humans can reach when fear, ignorance and bigotry are allowed to exist. Kudos to the cast and director for mounting a fast paced sincere energetic telling of a story that needs to be heard often so it will not be repeated.
The talent of this ensemble is evident as they let the power of the story lead us into compassion for the victim and rage against bigotry. This is a polished production of an American tragedy. I think Matthew Shepard would appreciate the dedication of the Janus Theatre ensemble.
BY TOM WILLIAMS
Posted Monday, March 5, 2006
Recommended
Janus Theatre’s eight member ensemble landed the powerful, heart-wrenching saga of the horrible hate crime against Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming in 1998. The famous and saddening story of homophobia gone to extremes is told through the eyes of the Teconic Theater Project under Moises Kaufman’s leadership. This company traveled six times to Laramie and conducted over 200 interviews with everyone involved in the crime from town residents to law enforcement officials to religious leaders covering the complete story in a slick documentary style. Matthew Shepard was kidnapped, tortured and killed by two men simply because he was gay.
Lynn Wirth, Jeremy Schaefer, Seth Remington, Zachary Clark, Laura Schwartz, Jonathan Shalvi, Karen Pappas and Helen Young deftly played dozens of characters using first person narration that aptly told the story with enough background and local color to give context to how and why this terrible crime happened. This is an amazingly well performed show showcasing the versatile talents of each actor.
This documentary completely covers Matthew Shepard’s story that unfolds as powerful journalism and emotionally strong theatre. This approach contains a look into the lowly depths humans can reach when fear, ignorance and bigotry are allowed to exist. Kudos to the cast and director for mounting a fast paced sincere energetic telling of a story that needs to be heard often so it will not be repeated.
The talent of this ensemble is evident as they let the power of the story lead us into compassion for the victim and rage against bigotry. This is a polished production of an American tragedy. I think Matthew Shepard would appreciate the dedication of the Janus Theatre ensemble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)