- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated Feb 14, 2019, 11:59 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
-
When reading a Midsummers Nights Dream I got a very different interpretation for most of the characters than I did when watching the two films. I found it interesting how in the more modern film some of the characters communicate through texting which makes it harder to see the actual reactions they have in a conversation. ( kind of like how sometimes we type LOL but didn’t actually laugh). In my opinion the most perfect version of the story was Dromgoole version. I think having the characters act out exactly what is in the reading makes it easier to follow along with what is going on. I felt like the two films seemed like different stories. One of the characters I felt differed with each version was Quince. When I was doing the reading I pictured him as being disorganized and not able to handle the group of people. In the reading when he is first introduced it seems like he doesn’t know what he is doing and so Bottom is telling him what to do ( he tells him to call the actors one by one based on the roles). When I watched the more modern film this was definitely not how Quince is perceived. Not only did they perceive Quince as a woman rather than a man like in Dromgoole’s version, but they made her out to be this bossy person holding a clipboard who had everything in order. It seems like in this version she is respected by the actors. She even proceeds to yell at Bottoom when he wants to play the lions role. In Dromgooles version Quince is not like this at all here he seems a lot more how I interpreted it in the reading, he seems a lot less bossy and it seems like he can’t control the crowd, and in this version when Bottom asks to play as the lion it seems like Bottom is talking over Quince not letting him get his thoughts in.
-
I also took note of the texting and I’ve been thinking about it.
The texting part in the movie is a section of dialogue that happens on stage private between Hermia and Lysander. In a play, everything needs to be said, so Shakespeare has the lovers talk to each other about their plan. But the movie takes advantage of narrative technique that is unique to movies and novels–we can have reported to us a private conversation. The only purpose seems to be to allow the director to silence Helena, thus showing (perhaps more strongly than in the play) that Hermia’s focus is all on Lysander and is the director’s way of explaining why Helena would betray her “friend’s” trust.
The gender of Quince (and Flute) change a lot in modern productions. Perhaps because there’s so little detail about him in the play. It is interesting to see how important Bottom is to Quince. If Bottom is the most skilled of a very low-skilled group, then he bosses Quince around. If, however, Bottom is the most wrong of everyone, then Quince has to try to control him.
On a personal level, though. I love the idea that here you have this middle-class guy who is tirelessly putting together a mythical story for the duke. He’s got to be a romantic, someone who aspires to be a writer at a time when that’s nearly unheard of. I also wonder who in the audience Quince speaks to? Which tailor or butcher in the audience was going to Shakespeare and thinking at home that he could write a little play, too? It’s a cute kind of story that gets lost in the absurdity of their play and Bottom’s clowning!
-
The role and importance of the character Peter Quince chances drastically when put into different settings with different performances, as can be seen through the performances in both Bennett’s and Dromgoole’s adaptations of A Midsummer’s Night’s Dream. The text itself seems to characterize Quince as a flat character, whose job it is to read out the names and give out the parts. I did not see a great deal of personality in the character of Quince in my original reading and found him vastly overshadowed by the character Bottom (in both personality and in the size of dialogue they are allowed). In Bennett’s adaptation of the play, Quince is given a position of power and authority, and is even given depth through the inkling of romance between Quince and Bottom- allowing Bottom as well a bit more complexity in character. The decision to portray Quince as a woman here, while it does provide depth by bringing in a previously unwritten element of romance, sexualizes the role of Quince, and allows the production to fall into the too-common theme of leaving no room for women to exist simply as people without the need to place them in a heterosexual romantic plot. Regardless, the choice made in the Bennett production does provide Quince with a bit more power. The Dromgoole
production, however, gives the entire scene at Quince’s house the air of merriment and humor, where the production fits more closely to the text itself and floats farther away from the precipitation of drama in the Bennett adaptation. Dromgoole places Quince as foolish and lovable, reacting to Bottom’s ego in order to make the audience laugh. This production does to some extent allow Quince to be overpowered by the largeness of Bottom’s character. But does, ultimately, play Quince off as wholesome and an important element to the comedic relief of the entire scene. Quince’s foolishness adds to his character and makes him more likeable than in Bennett’s production.-
It can be easy, sometimes, to read plays as less exciting than the performances because when we read, sometimes we get lost in the words. When you lose the picture of what’s happening, you lose the action. When you’re watching a play, it’s literally impossible.
When we read Shakespeare, his lack of stage directions works in the same way. Both the Quince’s you saw said the same words, but they acted them differently. Their interpretations add to the words in a way that when you read, your mind has to.
I’m intrigued by some of the points you bring up about gender. In Bennett’s version, Flute is also a woman. I recall her interest in Bottom more than I recall Quince’s (but you more recently watched the movie!). In the case of Flute, something is lost, I think in the gender switch. One of Flute’s lines is to complain about playing a woman because he’s just started to grow a beard and it lampoons the real-life practice of men playing women in Elizabethan drama. But Quince has never struck me as problematic. Interesting.
-
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
