Shakespeare, gender, and transformativity

[darkest_light]

Wow, Ursula K. Le Guin, I disagree strongly with you.

I still haven't seen The Tempest (I... don't watch movies, mostly, unless I can do it somewhere where I can multitask.) But still. The best production I ever saw of Hamlet was at a women's college. Most of the parts were played by women in pants roles, but the role of Hamlet was envisioned as

Comments

[douxquemiel]

I so totally agree. So very, very, very much. I love the way art evolves and is shaped by the actors, the culture, the world around them. It is relevant and poignant and still entirely accurate to the original-- just different.

It's like looking at a sculpture from different angles. Still the same art, different viewpoints. If you took photos of the statue of David, from different angles, from different distances, at different parts, you would see different bits of the art. But it's still the original art.

I don't know, I'm not explaining it clearly. To sum up: YES, YOU ARE RIGHT. :)

[darkest_light]

Yes. One of my theories on why I find it so much easier to go see a play than to go see a movie is that there's just something about the chemistry of a theatre audience that's lacking for a movie. I love the degree to which a show can alter from night to night on the basis of the audience's energy alone even if the actors stand in the same place, say the same words, make the same motions, etc.