Day 150: Shakespeare in Review-- "Henry 4" at the Sydney Opera House

The cast of Henry 4 | Drama Theatre, from crikey.com.au

I read a review of a recent Australian production of Shakespeare's King Henry IV, Parts 1 and 2, titled "Henry 4," that called the play "the best place to start for Shakespeare novices." 

Reviewer Lloyd Bradford Syke gushes: "If there was ever a production designed to cure theatre novices of their aversion (to Shakespeare in particular, probably developed at high school), it’s John Bell’s deft adaptation of ye olde Bill’s history plays, Henry IV, parts one and two." 

REALLY? 

Henry IV?? THAT'S where you think the "Shakespeare averse" should start? That must have been one HELL of a production because I can't imagine recommending anyone start in the midst of the bard's histories as their first introduction to Shakespeare. 

But Syke has a huge boner for the modern language and bawdy characters. He goes on:

Lloyd Bradford Syke

"When one considers that Shakespeare never published any of his plays and that we’ve ever relied upon unauthorised versions transcribed posthumously (not by him, obviously), it seems fitting to transcend the falsely sacrosanct approach to his work and make it sensible for a contemporary audience."

Well, that may be technically true but it's not the best argument in support of translating Shakespeare into modern language. There are other, better arguments for that. Just saying "Shakespeare didn't publish this, therefore we don't know what the hell he actually said" isn't a good one. Dismissing Shakespeare's words entirely because some of the oldest written copies that have survived to this day were transcribed by his actors instead of by the man himself seems to go against the spirit of Shakespearean study. And I'm guessing the director of this particular play chose to modernize the language to make it more accessible, not because he didn't believe in the accuracy of the folios.

Later in that same paragraph, Syke writes:

"From the get go, it’s electric with with energy; the stage populated by sharply-drawn and defined characters, played by a fine ensemble of imaginatively cast actors" (emphasis mine). I guess Syke's article must have been an unauthorized transcription.

If you're curious to see the play that's getting such rave review, you're out of luck. It closed May 26. Bummer.

via

Now I have to get back to actually reading the damn thing. From what I can tell so far, it is pretty good and quite funny, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it "designed to cure theatre novices of their aversion to Shakespeare." I guess that was only the Sydney production.