In this blog we will be looking at our experience in reading Shakespeare in parts, from the perception of three first year students (Layla, Xinyi and Charlie) with no prior experience of this method of reading scripts.
Layla’s perspective –
In this extract I will be discussing my experience as an English literature student reading early modern drama in parts, specifically, Shakespeare’s Henry V. Throughout the four weeks I was assigned the roles of ‘the boy’, ‘the messenger to the French king’ and ‘the duke of burgundy’. Reading in parts was a new and daunting experience for me on the course. It felt unusual to have to listen out for the last three words of the previous persons lines, so I knew when it was my turn to speak. Focusing so intently on waiting for my cue made it difficult for me to focus on the storyline and understand who my characters were and the experiences they were having. However, it felt appropriate and insightful to know that we were reading the play in the same way that it would have been performed in one of Shakespeare’s plays. I think that while reading a play in parts, it is important to have a general understanding of the plot, and Alison allowed us to do this as a group by assigning us roles early on into the module which meant we could read over our script and annotate/research any confusion. There was also a large amount of group discussion which helped us understand each other’s role and what impact other characters had on our own. In week three we were encouraged to take part in a group activity which allowed us as readers to get to know each other better and establish who was reading each role. We were encouraged to tell each other something about our characters and asked if we could recall any information about anyone else. I found this session incredibly helpful as it allowed me to establish a place for my character in the text. After week three, I was always aware of who was talking and when the conversation involved my character, which helped me learn when it was my time to come in. At the beginning of the module, I found that reading in parts was incredibly difficult and more stressful than just reading a modern-day script. However, by week 4 my confidence with not only knowledge of the play, but comfort with my peers around me and my reading confidence had significantly improved. Talking to my peers about my own character allowed me to develop a further understanding about the roles they have in the play, for example I discussed with the group what I knew about ‘the boy’ in doing this I learnt about his interactions with other people’s characters and the way people has perceived him in relation to their own. Two characters I learnt a lot about when discussing ‘the boy’ were ‘Pistol’ and ‘Bardolph’. I learnt about their professions as thieves from the way the boy talked about them in his dialogue in act three where he states “for Pistol, he hath a killing tongue and a quiet sword”.
Xinyi’s perspective –
I’ve been engaged with a rehearsal process of the Early Modern Drama Henry by Shakespeare during the last four weeks. It’s been such a pleasure to explore how a play was originally produced in Shakespeare’s day. To add some interesting historical backgrounds, the text actors received only contained their individual parts and was made into a roll, on which the text was presented. Aiming to have a authentic experience, we replace rolls with two sticks to present the script in the form of a scroll. Here’s a little bit taste of our attempt to present early modern theater practice. If you find it interesting, please go ahead! The following blog will gain more insight into what we’ve done to make the early modern theatre alive and will discuss my personal reflection on the whole experience.
I play the role of Earl of Westmoreland and Governor of Harfleur. Westmoreland is one of Henry’s administrators and noblemen. He comes on to stage on Act two, strengthening the King Henry’s determination to launch a war against France. Governor of Harfleur is another interesting character who plays a vital role in Act three when France faces the challenge of defending the English soldiers. Among all the lines that that have been delivered, his speech impressed me most by his concise but powerful words. Despite facing the potential of being defeated, he insists on a fight and did not surrender to France, which manifests his courage, as well as his loyalty and commitment to his nation.
Apart from reading out and listen carefully to the lines in order to piece the whole plot together, certain skills of performance, such as the use of props and costume and the application of body movements and facial expression also make the whole rehearsal vibrate and help us build a better understanding of the role. For example, in the Act 3 of siege scene, classmates gathered around the center of the classroom and carried all kinds of probs, such as crown and sword. After listening to King’s call to defeat France, they shout together “God bless Henry, England, and St. George!!, to motivate the English army to attack the city. It is entertaining and educational for us to wear all kinds of different props and perform it. By immersing ourselves in this text and arousing our sense to engage with it, such as performing the drama with the props to visualize the whole text and closing our eyes to just listen and feel it, makes the rehearsal more vivid and therefore help better shape a dynamic character image. You can see a wild and unmatured image of the King Henry in his youth, as well as a strategic, intelligent and noble monarch when he gets older.
Another intriguing fact relating to the rehearsal progress of the early modern drama is the way of acquiring the whole storyline. One of the biggest distinctions between reading a text and listen carefully to each other to get clues of drama is that you have to learn about different characters through depiction of others’ characters. Along the way, you have to listen to the whole story and then to presume what’s going on. So there’s no surprise that there are lots of incorrect assumptions of relations between characters and draft mistakes. At the same time, I find difficulty understanding some old English vocabulary and some French words in this progress. Then I look up for the dictionary for the words’ meaning, which is a good opportunity for me to learn.
Charlies perspective –
The group exercise of reading through William Shakespeare’s Henry V was fascinating and engaging. We were distributed a variety of roles in the play to ensure that everybody had a part to play and engaged with the story at hand, and it really did feel as though we were coming together as a group around the play. Group exercises were employed to further strengthen the sense of community that was being built around the rehearsal. Our task involving asking each person who they were playing by first asking their names and referring to them as their characters whilst standing in a circle, and moving towards them, was an effective way of drilling the cast into our heads, and kept us active and engaged in the process as it garnered a level of interactivity that wouldn’t exist if it were simply us reading the text around the table. Though we did do this. Although it was a challenge on occasion to follow along with the text as we read due to archaic language, that involved me having to consult a transcript of the play on occasion to ensure I understood what was said, it was still an enriching experience to read through the play as I had never read the play before, and in a comedic way the practice of reading around a table brought back memories of doing so back in school. Though we found ways to make this more engaging too. Certain scenes, like Act 3 Scene 1 where we see Henry lead English soldiers into battle in the siege of Harfleur, we used rudimentary props like ladders and wooden swords to create a small battle-like atmosphere that we all enjoyed and it certainly made the experience more immersive. The reading process also allowed us to think about the characters that we played. I assumed the roles of Bardolph, Macmorris, The Duke of Burgandy and Pistol (In Act 5 Scene 1), all of whom were interesting in their own way. Although they may not have had much dialogue (with the exception of Burgandy) they all played a role in the narrative and I still felt I was contributing. Bardolph allowed us to learn about Henry’s pragmatic side (though his character is contested on this front) and the importance of religion in this period, wishing not to execute him after his theft. The dialogue from Pistol I read wherein he insults Fluellen’s leak allows for an interesting note about cultural differences at this time, with Gower informing Pistol that other cultures should not be made fun of being an interesting note. Burgandy’s soliloquy in Act 5 Scene 2 in which he uses decaying natural imagery to define France was interesting because it implies that England’s treaty would restore France to its former glory, as England has lain waste to it in the war. Macmorris allowed us to learn a little bit about racial conflict in the early modern period, as Macnorris’ offence to Fluellen’s remarks could be indicative of insecurities of being Irish due to amnesty that existed at the time, or due to a feeling that his background is problematic, scorning his nation as a “villain”. These example characters fell into wider discussions about the play and its messaging. Finally, we discussed whether or not the play romanticises war and conquest or whether it is critical of such things and whether or not Henry is a hero of the Hundred Year War or a tyrant expanding their territory.
You must be logged in to post a comment.