Hello again! We left Stratford this morning and are now on the way back to London.
Everyone on the trip seems to have greatly enjoyed our time in Shakespeare’s birthplace. My only complaint is that we’re leaving after only one full day. Yesterday, most of our class explored a number of sites in Stratford: Shakespeare’s childhood home and birthplace, the property on which he built his home “The New Place” after living in London, the home of his daughter and her husband, Anne Hathaway’s Cottage, and the church in which he was baptized and buried.
The town of Stratford is much quieter than London. There’s no frantic running across streets, no packed tube rides, and the people seem more interested in hearing about our lives and our class. Sitting in a pub for dinner, a few people came by saying they heard our accents and wondered where we were from. We tried to explain where Iowa is by saying, “Right in the center of the country. Do you know where Chicago is?” And they would tell us all about the places they had been to and knew about. One man had even read a few books by Bill Bryson, who is from Des Moines but lives in Britain, so he was rather familiar with Iowa!
The town of Stratford is really anchored in the roots of Shakespeare, so the names of various stores and cafes are from his works. We saw a “What’s in a Name” bookstore, and had lunch at a restaurant called “The Food of Love.” Stratford is also home to the Royal Shakespeare Company. Although we had seen 2 RSC shows in London (“The Taming of the Shrew,” and “As You Like It”), we were excited to see “King John” in the RSC Swan Theatre here in Stratford. I can almost definitively say that “King John” was the most exquisite piece of theatre I’ve ever seen. The work was modernized and the part of King John was played by a woman. The character was not rewritten to be a woman, however. Although she wore dresses and feminine clothing, no one called her queen, and they used male pronouns. She was not trying to play the character as a woman. Dance and music were woven throughout the piece, which felt cohesive and integral rather than disjointed. Integrating dance and music can sometimes be difficult in Shakespeare, and particularly in a tragedy. Mikaela even had a sort of revelation at intermission (known here as interval). She realized that, “Oh, it’s a tragedy, so someone has to die,” because the play had done such a good job of keeping us excited and energized rather than somber and serious the whole time. Members of our group who are less familiar with Shakespeare were delighted to find that they were able to understand what was happening! Although the language can often become a barrier for the audience to follow the plot, the actors in this piece were so intentional in their portrayal that we rarely questioned the action or emotion felt onstage. It was truly a remarkable experience.
However, we know that not everyone will have the same experience at a performance. After the show, a few friends and I decided to go to a pub to discuss the play. On our walk over, a man who had been at the show heard us discussing and asked if he could join us for a drink. We invited him along, and after learning that he was very familiar with the show and even taught Shakespeare for a number of years, we really got into it. He began with “I know I’m going to offend the feminists in the room, but I think a man’s part should be played by a man.” We were reminded at this point of Dr. Bobby’s statement that every audience member is entitled to their own experience and opinion and it is not wrong for them to disagree with us. We asked him to explain and elaborate, trying to indicate to him that although some of us might not agree, we were interested in hearing his opinion. This seemed to surprise him, as he did not have much of a prepared response. He told us that he’s 66 and “just not with the times,” and for him, a large male part should be played by a man. He conceded that the actor who played King John was spectacular, but that he did not think it was her place to be in that role. I hadn’t thought about this idea, that the actor could be fantastic in the role but still not be “right” for it. It was a particularly eye opening experience for us since in our class discussions we sometimes forget what the perceptions of other audience members might be. Where for us this was an incredible portrayal of a rarely performed piece, others felt that it was not a true portrayal if it wasn’t set in the right time period or with actors whose genders corresponded correctly to the historical figures represented. It wasn’t an uninformed or incorrect opinion, it was just different from our own. Our group leader Nancy had even sat next to a couple who were huge fans of the RSC, but left at intermission. For me, listening to his thoughts and explaining my own only strengthened my opinion about the play overall. I think is the purpose of our discussions in this course is to be challenged in our own thoughts and feelings and learn to articulate those concepts to others.
I am eager to continue that learning and growth through the remainder of this course and upon our return in only nine days.