Final Anaylsis of My Characters

As a member of “All the Queen’s Women”, I played a few different characters. While there were moments when I filled in as Lady Capulet and Benvolio, the more important roles were the friar (or in my case, the nun) and the nurse. Baz Luhrmann’s modern version of Romeo and Juliet presented innovative interpretations of the characters while maintaining the integrity of the text. I studied the film for a second time to refresh my memory on the portrayal of Miriam Margolves as the Nurse and Pete Postlethwaite as the Friar and discovered they were more involved in the lives of our main characters than I had perceived when I read the text. While Margolves’ name appears unfamiliar, her face is not and as the movie continued, I really wanted to know why the director cast her for the role and what she brought to the world of Shakespeare.
Miriam herself is a chubby, stout woman with her hair styled in curls on top of her head. But she is sturdy-- and the nurse certainly has to be sturdy and secure for Juliet when her mother is so flaky and insensitive to Juliet’s dilemma of the heart. She charges around the mansion, yelling Juliet’s name numerous times simply to let her know her mother needs to speak with her. The nurse behaves more like her mother than Lady Capulet does. While making Juliet’s bed, the nurse’s attention is seized by her father’s extreme anger. In the scene entitled “Juliet Learns Her Options”, the nurse is the one who restrains him and while she cannot stop the inevitable, she defends and protects Juliet.
When Juliet first speaks of a boy she likes, the nurse is pleased to learn that Juliet is in love and gladly tells her to “go seek happy nights to happy days” (Romeo and Juliet. 1.4.106). The nurse is happy when Juliet is happy and seems to understand teenage love. But then she finds out that this boy Juliet likes is a Montague and as her guardian she is obligated to warn her of the dangers their relationship will present to the family. “His name is Romeo and a Montague”, she tells her, “the only son of your great enemy!” (Luhrmann 2002). Luhrmann’s scene “The Revelation” is very effective in demonstrating the urgent need for Juliet to know the truth and longing Romeo is stricken with when the nurse angrily pulls her away. This is a feigned anger though, because she frowns upon Romeo and drags Juliet off, but once they are out of sight she changes her expression to a hopeful one—hopeful Juliet will be taken care—whether or not is Romeo who takes care of her.
But even though the nurse knows that Juliet’s love for Romeo is a risk, she encourages her to attend the secret wedding ceremony. Luhrmann develops the relationship between Juliet and the nurse in the scene “The Nurse Teases Juliet”. The closeness seen here is unique to the movie; the nurse is giggling and speaking well of Romeo and she stands in the back of the church, smiling as the two are married. The nurse is played as a warm, bubbly, caring lady who is Juliet’s only confidante. Later, however, she gives into the reality that Juliet must marry Paris or else. Luhrmann reinforces the guardian role of the nurse which is harder to envision in the text. But because she is not included distilled liquor and the letter plan, this bond is severed when she thinks Juliet is dead.
While the nurse is Juliet’s backbone, Friar Laurence helps both Romeo and Juliet and plays an important role in the survival of their relationship. He is a character in parallel to the nurse. Luhrmann’s film shows him working with plants in his greenhouse, and his soliloquy, while directed at the children, is a foreshadowing of future events. He says “The grey-eyed morning smiles on the frowning night” (Romeo and Juliet. 2.3.1), meaning Juliet, the innocent angel, admires the scorned Romeo. After Romeo walks in, he says “Within the infant rind of this weak flower, poison hath residence and medicine power” (Romeo and Juliet. 2.3.23-24), suggesting that Juliet be greatly affected by the negative consequences of pursuing Romeo, but do something drastic about it. The Friar and the Nurse both have life knowledge that allows them to envision the future of Juliet. The two of them simultaneously support everyone else in the play even if they are unaware of it, and because they realize what is happening, they do what they can to help while staying within their boundaries. The Friar comes up with the idea of the elixir as Juliet’s way out while the Nurse supports Juliet whether she wants to stay with Romeo or marry Paris for her family. Luhrmann makes characters and their relationships to Romeo and Juliet more defined than we see in Shakespeare’s text, adding an intriguing element to the plot as a viewer.
After this scene of foreshadowing in the greenhouse, Romeo approaches him and when he hears the name of Romeo’s love, the camera closes in on the friar’s face, showing his expression of “Oh, no!”. But he continues to listen to Romeo as he asks him to marry him and Juliet. Luhrmann does something interesting here: he shows the friar’s thoughts through daydream images of the two families making peace due to this new pending marriage. The director stays true to the news media motif as a newspaper headline reads “Capulet and Montague men make peace”. Experiencing this revelation and staying loyal to Romeo, he agrees to marry them, in secret of course.
While the friar is well aware of the risks, he also wants to make the situation more pleasant for Romeo and Juliet throughout the play. After the wedding and a short period peace, we find out that Romeo is unjustly convicted of murder and if he doesn’t flee, he will be imprisoned or worse. This is when the friar meets Juliet and attempts to console her and finds her on the brink of suicide. Right after “Juliet Learns Her Options” (which are marry Paris or “slay thyself” (Romeo and Juliet. 4.1.72)), this scene between them appears and he tells her he “spies a kind of hope” (Romeo and Juliet. 4.1.68). As he tells her about the potion, Luhrmann again reveals the mindset and plan of the friar through a daydream, and interestingly, the purple vile seen earlier in the greenhouse is shown and is the same as the elixir he gives Juliet. Baz Luhrmann creates this scene as very high-strung and dramatic, which it may have been on Shakespeare’s stage, but you don’t get that from the text alone. He speaks quickly with a determined fear in his eyes. He is desperately trying to get Juliet to think rationally and he speaks of his plan with flourish and detail, slowly taking the gun from her rather than quickly snatching it as I would have imagined. He concludes with the advice “be strong and prosperous in this resolve” to carry out this alternate plan as she leaves him (Romeo and Juliet. 4.2.122). He later finds her “dead” and acts nonchalant as he scoops her off the bed and brings her to the church. Without words, Luhrmann then shows the devastating realization that the friar’s plan fell through by showing his panicked face in the back of the church.
By studying both of my counterparts, I discovered even more about the inner structure of Romeo and Juliet than in all the other times I was asked to read the play as a text. Each director, each actor and each version of this or any play can bring new insights never before seen in any other version. Luhrmann related to the contemporary audience by using modern settings such as a beach and a swimming pool, but kept the original language. His interplay of modern and original elements was exceptional. This version of Romeo and Juliet provided an excellent gage between itself and my performance because both performances were only six years apart.
While I am certainly not an actress, I did have a unique portrayal of both the nurse and the friar (nun). I found out the nurse was more attentive and close to Juliet than I thought, whereas the text made her out to be merely a babysitter, someone to watch Juliet and make sure she stays out of trouble while the nurse obeys Lord Capulet’s orders. She is also very knowledgeable and wise in the film and again, we don’t see this much in the text. While she does say “He that lay hold of her shall have the chinks” (Romeo and Juliet. 1.5.118), we are unable to see the concern in her eyes and the urgency in her messages shown in the movie when we simply read the text. In my performance, I was still under the first impression of the nurse—her as the babysitter—if I had reviewed the film first, I may have altered my approach.
My small speeches of the nurse in our group’s performance were essential in completing the framework of the plot. From observing Miriam Margolves’ adaptation, especially in the beginning when she informs Juliet about who Romeo is, I found her approach to be the right balance between being truthful with her and remaining sensitive to her feelings. I was more indifferent, scolding Juliet for even thinking about Romeo. Later on in the movie, the nurse stays out of Juliet’s way when she asks her to let her sleep alone the night she is to take the elixir. Miriam plays her as suspicious of a master plan, but in my approach, I was oblivious, discovering Juliet later and being totally shocked. (At least that was the plan before we changed the ending at the last minute). I learned from the movie that the nurse is a more complex and important character than I had previously realized. I am unsure if this approach was Shakespeare’s intention or the director’s decided direction. Either way, Miriam was a good fit for the role and added to the innovation of the film and the integrity of the original play.
Pete Postletwaite approach was innovative as well. He broke the calm and reserved mold that a friar role should have. He was happy and relaxed in the greenhouse as he tended to his precious plants and foretold the audience about upcoming consequences and got excited at the possibility of mending the feud through Romeo’s marriage to Juliet. He expressed extreme fear and determination when Juliet came to him wanting to kill herself. As he pulled the gun away, his eyes were open wildly and he trembled as he slowly set the gun down. Then as the plan was revealed, his voice grew much louder and more assertive. His eyes glazed over in wondering whether or not Juliet would agree to this plan and when he did his expression changed to one of intensity, handing her the vile. His soliloquy in this scene is the one I did onstage. My version was much calmer, maybe because I was actually a nun. Maybe gender makes a difference in this role in that a nun would have approached the situation with more worry than determination as I did. My performance came across as worried for Juliet’s safety and the intensity Pete put into the role was not in my approach. My performance was affective, but not the rollercoaster of emotions that we see in Luhrmann’s film.
New Historicism suggests that plays like Romeo and Juliet is a “product of the time, place, and social, political, and economic circumstances in which it was written”. While this may be the case with the original text, the story is so much more than that and is adaptable to other time periods, such as the twenty-first century in 2002. Therefore, the actors in this film have different interpretations of the characters than the actors in Shakespeare’s time and I have a slightly different interpretation in 2008. There are some similarities, especially in the role of the nurse. The nurse is Juliet’s confidante in both roles. She is loyal to Juliet, having her best interest at heart in all the situations of the play, and while she has obligations to the Capulet name, she does not stand in the way of Juliet’s true love. She mediates between all the characters, keeping the peace as best as her role allows. These characteristics can be seen in both Margolve’s performance and mine, all of which develop Shakespeare’s character of the nurse in a positive light.
However, there are areas where I fell short, of course. As previously mentioned, the close bond between the nurse and Juliet was not as visible in my performance as in the movie. Also, I was harsher with Romeo than Margolves was in the movie especially when I said “I nursed her daughter that you talked withal” (Romeo and Juliet 1.5.116) and angrily frowned upon Romeo. I also did not bring in the physical affection or restraint the nurse often showed Juliet in the film. She grabbed her arm at moments when she needed to speak to her privately. She hugged her shoulders when she told Juliet to “seek happy nights to happy days” and excitedly hugged her when she was to go to the church. When she was dealing with the conflict between Juliet and her father, she touched Juliet’s shoulder gently. While doing all of this in my performance would have been both awkward and unnecessary, considering all of this beforehand would have added warmth to my version of the nurse.
As the nun/friar, I understood the urgency of the message I was delivering to Juliet and I stressed how important it was to get all the details correct, just as the actor did in Luhrmann’s film. I conveyed concern for Juliet’s well being and willingness to assist her in remaining with Romeo. But while Postelethwaite’s performance in this scene began as almost threatening, my tone as the nun was regretful concern. I was not loud and intense in my delivery of the soliloquy, but rather matter-of-fact. It is debatable which approach is more effective, but both were clearly distinctive unlike the text in which the reader creates their own interpretation.
Studying multiple materials of Romeo and Juliet-the text, the movie, and our own performance created a complex inner structure of each character. Combining these three versions was an effective way of understanding Shakespeare’s intentions for the characters and its relationship to modern takes on what these characters should look like, behave like, and believe in. While no one’s performance was exactly like the original text, the actors in the film and I all brought interesting and valuable inferences to the story. Looking at the inner minds of these characters helps us to tap into the inner mind of Shakespeare himself.

A New Point of View on Our Onstage Peformances

Initially after the evening of our performances, I heard many comments such as "Well, we tried really hard" or "I'm so glad this is over, we did so bad". While I had been eager to perform before November 20th and felt that no matter what happened the evening would be a success, afterward I fell in the trap of worrying about what people thought before hearing all the positive feedback. So I wrote the previous blog in that state of mind. However, after reading the mass emails, reviewing the text, movie, and seeing our performance on tape, I realized that the real success of the evening came from our bonding as a class and deciding that Shakespeare's plays can be studied in a fresh and interesting context. With the right mindset, we gained contemporary insights from each of the plays studied this semester. After reflecting on all of these things, I was filled with regret for posting a blog so negative and so focused on what people might have thought when they really didn't think those things (that we were "bad" and that all we did was "try really hard") at all. I suppose the lesson learned from all this is to maintain the excited, non-self conscious attitude and I sincerely hope future classes will experience a project like this and benefit from it.

Shakespeare Scenes Night: Romeo and Juliet

This entire week, the our play group worked very hard to work out all the kinks in our performance. We met three extra days and felt that we had prepared as best we could considering how little time we actually got in the auditorium and despite the fact that we never had the chance to run through the ending. I am confident the audience thoroughly enjoyed our performance, however rough and unpolished it ended up looking. I stumbled a couple times, with an awkward pause as the nun, forgeting my last three lines. I ended up saying "Hold then go home....take thou this vile." At least it kind of fit. I enjoyed the rest of the groups' peformances. While no one was flawless, we all brought humor and entertainment to the work of Shakespeare. Every group took a unique spin on the adaptation, and I hope that our shortcomings, (especially mine), will be overlooked by the audience and that they focus on our great effort.

MacBeth

I have read MacBeth once before and watched a full-length theater production on film in my Introduction to the Theatre class. I found it to be the darkest, bloodiest, most unbearable play of all of Shakespeare's. Reading the text was interesting, but watching the play peformed was horrific.
However, looking at MacBeth a second time in Shakespeare's Tragedies, the approach the class took to the text was much more interesting and comfortable. Analyzing the witches and whether or not they were good, bad, or just prophetic was interesting, and the wizard in Throne of Blood was an interesting character to compare to the witches. I now also understand Lady MacBeth's character more than I did before this class. The manipulation of her husband and her thirst for power which bypasses all empathy for others is the most horrifying part of MacBeth. While I don't plan on reading MacBeth again, I have a different, more interesting opinion of the play now.

RAN and King Lear

For an audience of today's college students, the Japanese movie Ran takes patience and an open mind to watch. I found it difficult to relate to the characters and the hostile nature of the storyline. It was so different from any film, foreign or American that I have ever seen (and I've watched more recent Japanese films such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon which I enjoyed). I was not used to the choreographed moments that realistically would not be choreographed-like the men falling off the horses exactly the same way. However, the movie featured amazing scenery, costumes, and stunts and successfully attributed eastern religion and culture to a western play. The tragedy here, rather than death itself, is the foolishness of a "wise" man which occurs in the beginning, resulting in separation and destruction. Unlike other Shakespearan plays where I enjoyed the movie adaptation more, reading King Lear was easier to do than watching Ran was.

The Queen's Women: work in progress

For a while this semester, Shakespeare Scenes Night (Nov. 20th) seemed far enough away. But as we near the end of October, it is definitely time to "get our act together", no pun intended. Anyway, I feel that the workshop with the theatre majors (Rebecca helped our group) was beneficial and she gave us a lot of good blocking pointers: never stand in complete profile to the audience, over-the-top expression is easier to work with than monotone, things like that. She also gave us good ideas about when to walk over to whom depending on how close the relationship is between the characters. While we feel confident now about blocking (of course we still need to perfect it), now we need to focus on memorizing lines. Once we have a couple intense rehearsals, we should be good to go.

Othello, Acts 4 and 5

In the closing acts of this trajedy, Othello reaches borderline insanity because of the mind games he has endured from Iago. The big question of whether or not Othello's troubles with Iago are related his race alone comes to a head at the conclusion of the story where he kills Desihmona. Was he sooo brainwashed that he really believed that she was unfaithful to him or was it just the thought of her being with someone else and him thinking "if she's not with me, she can't be with anyone?" Did Iago target Othello because he was a moor or because he really wanted Desi for himself? Maybe it was a combination of both, but in my opinon, her death could have been prevented in spite of all the mind games. If Othello could have stepped away from the madness for just a minute to uncover the real story from Desi and Emily, he would have saved her life and his. Jealousy combined with rage is always a deadly cocktail. Sadly, in our contemporary modern society, situations like these do escalate to the extremes seen at the end of the play. If more people read Shakespeare's trajedies (especially Othello), maybe there would be less violence and hatred in the world.