I haven't been blogging much - I haven't really known what to do with this blog since the rebrand of Beyond Shakespeare and I'm effectively in isolation. Everyone will soon be in isolation. And that's fine, I don't get out much. But all I've got now is to edit things for the podcast. Next to no new recordings will be coming in - or not till I get my head together and organise some remote recording from other people who are in isolation.
So... prose. Stories. Single narrator text. That's the thing to keep me sane. And produce more for the future of the podcast. And keep me sane.
After the live show was cancelled on Friday, and every other job I had lined up over the course of the year also got cancelled, I was a bit manic. Like, I have all this time now, what do I do with it? And then I saw a post from Professor Tracey Hill on twitter, mentioning The Wonderful Year by Thomas Dekker, and I thought, looks interesting. So I hunted around, had a look and thought.
Well, I'm not doing anything on Sunday.
So, Sunday comes and I record the whole thing. I was thinking of editing the whole thing, but I ran out of steam. There are lots of pick ups and questions of how to finish it as audio, but it's basically in the can.
At this time of general plague, doing a reading of a pamphlet about another plague - there's a fuck ton of death in it - would be very bad for my mental health. It wasn't. It might be bad for YOUR mental health, if you listen to it, but it was very therapeutic.
Which is odd, because recording audio books is the most tedious of recording jobs. It is exhausting and oddly painful in surprising parts of the body. But that was a good day. I determined to work through the first session in the morning, and see if I could finish it by the end of the week for the podcast.
And then, this morning, I thought... why not keep going? Why not just keep doing the prose, the poetry, the non dramatic stuff? Not every day, not perfectly - but as part of the day? Because it was good for me to get out of the edit, out of my head, and just say words.
But I know what my motivation is like, I'll get bored - so, I decided to try doing it live. Again, I'm not going to be doing anything live for a while, so why not. Even if only one person is listening, it's part of the practice.
I put out a feeler on twitter, hunted for a platform (so much has changed since I last live streamed anything) and did a test with a short poem The Rising to the Crown of Richard III, which came to my attention, along with other pieces I've been developing, thanks to Dr. Jitka Štollová who I met at the Changing History conference the other year. It's not as good a quality as a proper recording, but it was good enough and it got a few listens - so I'll be going on with it for a while. So, tomorrow (16th March 2020) at 12.30pm GMT, for between 30 minutes and an hour I will be performing a text - probably the same text over the course of the week. Not because anyone is clamouring for it, but because it's good for me. And it basically makes public the kind of initial work I do with any text that comes my way. An initial fun read through. And then I'll get it recorded properly.
Come and join me. https://www.podbean.com/lsw/beyondshakespeare/s-3OlgtMoSJx
From the earliest drama in English, to the closing of the theatres in 1642, there was a hell of a lot of drama produced - and a lot of it wasn't by Shakespeare. Apart from a few noble exceptions these plays are often passed over, ignored or simply unknown. This is a blog about what exists beyond Shakespeare, about the plays, fragmentary and extant, that shaped the theatrical world that shaped our dramatic history.
Monday, 16 March 2020
Saturday, 2 March 2019
The (Vaguely) Complete Playes of Christopher Marlowe
NB: We've got a website! www.beyondshakespeare.org - that doesn't mean we're abandoning this blog, but it does mean that the main action is starting to shift elsewhere.
Latest News - Reserve Your Seat Now!
The Beyond Shakespeare Podcast Presents...
The (Vaguely) Complete Workes of Christopher Marlowe (Abridged... by a sharp pointy thing in the eye)
Recording live as a radio show in the atmospheric and historic location of the Farmers Club in Bury St Edmunds, it's an evening (and afternoon) of drama, comedy, satire, history and the satanic ritual*.
Go Beyond Shakespeare and enjoy some Kit.
*No creatures of darkness will be harmed during this event.
Strictly Limited Numbers - Book Now!
Bury St Edmunds - Saturday 13th April at 2.30pm & 7.30pm
Performing in the Bury St Edmunds Farmers Club Lower Lounge on Saturday 13th April 2019Tickets: £15 - Contact 01284 750 969 or email FrontofHouse@BSEFC.co.uk - or go to their website.
Any general enquiries call 07946 652 196, or email admin@beyondshakespeare.org
 |
| Picture - from our Discover John Heywood night, 2018 |
Performed by the Beyond Shakespeare Enterluders - including Heydn McCabe & Rob Myson. Produced by Robert Crighton
The Beyond Shakespeare Podcast can be found online via itunes or your favourite podcast provider. Follow us on Twitter @BeyondShakesThe ‘Beyond Shakespeare’ Podcast – A (Sort of) Mission Statement
From the earliest drama in English, to the closing of the theatres in 1642, there was a hell of a lot of drama produced - and a lot of it wasn't by Shakespeare.
Apart from a few noble exceptions these plays are often passed over, ignored or simply unknown. This podcast presents full audio productions of the plays, fragmentary and extant, that shaped the theatrical world that shaped our dramatic history.
We're going to produce EVERYTHING. In full, in part, in different ways, live, in studio, in rehearsal, in production - help support us by pledging on our patreon account, and get a vote as to what we do next. www.patreon.com/beyondshakespeare
Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes, Spotify, Google, Stitcher or just listen here.
Sunday, 11 November 2018
Discover John Heywood!
NB: We've got a website! www.beyondshakespeare.org - that doesn't mean we're abandoning this blog, but it does mean that the main action is starting to shift elsewhere.
Latest News - Discover John Heywood Tickets Now On Sale!
The Beyond Shakespeare Company Presents...
DISCOVER John Heywood:
Entertainer to the King (and the Queen, another King, and another Queen – he lived a long time...)
Live Recording of a Podcast for the Beyond Shakespeare Company
Beginning his career as a musician and all round entertainer in the court of Henry the Eighth, John Heywood became a writer of some of the best plays of his age. The Beyond Shakespeare Company has been producing a complete works of John Heywood throughout 2018, playing his comedies and dramas for audiences online.As a special fundraiser and launch for the newly created company, we present a selection box of Heywood's best work to entertain and edify. Recording live as a radio show in atmospheric and historic locations in East Anglia, Discover John Heywood will be an evening of comedy, debate, satire, history and the odd fart joke.
Go Beyond Shakespeare and discover the greatest theatre maker of his age.
Strictly Limited Numbers - Book Now!
Bury St Edmunds - Saturday 1st December from 7pm
Performing at the Bury St Edmunds Farmers Club - with buffet option.Pre-show Buffet Option – Hosted by the Artistic Director of the company, Robert Crighton, who will talk about the show and introduce John Heywood to you.
Buffet, Introduction & Show (7pm onwards) – £30 for buffet and show
Tickets for just the Show (8pm onwards) – £15
Performing in the Bury St Edmunds Farmers Club Lower Lounge on Saturday 1st December
Tickets: Contact 01284 750 969 or email FrontofHouse@BSEFC.co.uk - or go to their website.
Any enquiries call 07946 652 196, or email admin@beyondshakespeare.org
Directed by Robert Crighton and performed by the Beyond Shakespeare Enterluders - including Heydn McCabe, Rob Myson, and Geir Madland.
The Beyond Shakespeare Podcast can be found online via itunes or your favourite podcast provider. Follow us on Twitter @BeyondShakes
The ‘Beyond Shakespeare’ Podcast – A (Sort of) Mission Statement
From the earliest drama in English, to the closing of the theatres in 1642, there was a hell of a lot of drama produced - and a lot of it wasn't by Shakespeare.
Apart from a few noble exceptions these plays are often passed over, ignored or simply unknown. This podcast presents full audio productions of the plays, fragmentary and extant, that shaped the theatrical world that shaped our dramatic history.
We're going to produce EVERYTHING. In full, in part, in different ways, live, in studio, in rehearsal, in production - help support us by pledging on our patreon account, and get a vote as to what we do next. www.patreon.com/beyondshakespeare
Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes, Spotify, Google, Stitcher or just listen here.
Monday, 7 May 2018
The Pardoner and the Friar by John Heywood
Written around 1529, printed in 1533.
Cast of Four:
The FRIAR
The PARDONER
The PARSON
Neighbour PRAT
Perfect for student or fringe production, running at approximately 30 minutes without a break.
Our Production: Full cast audio adaptation - with Rob Myson as the Friar and Heydn McCabe as the Pardoner. Also featuring Robert Crighton as the Parson and Simon Nader as Neighbour Prat. Additional voices by Michael Fouldes and Andy Piper. We're also looking at doing the play live, because that is the natural home for it.
If you'd like to read the text of the play there's a facsimile of the original printing here and a modern spelling edition of the play here. NB: there are a few errors and oddities in this edition, but it's close enough for mustard.
As per usual, our production text was cross referenced between various editions, which are reasonably plentiful for this play. That said, we don't think there are currently any easier to use modern spelling editions to work from - if you're interested in staging the play, we're happy to share our rehearsal script, if it is of use.
The cast is all male, but there is no particular reason why the genders should not be changed for modern productions - the only character with a name is Prat and his pronoun is a nicely generic neighbour, so play about.
Setting: A church before the Reformation. The play is a satire of certain practices of the church, the abuse of power, the selling of relics, the competition between different orders. That said, the play would survive a more modern staging - it is inherently playful, not strictly realistic.
Plot and Character: The Friar enters and appeals for alms, then gets on his knees to pray - presumably with his donation receptacle before him. His act of piety also a ploy to get money. This is interrupted by the arrival of the Pardoner who stands on a stool and starts flogging access to his holy relics - pretty mangy ones at that - for which act he claims he has a Papal dispensation to do. The Friar then stands and begins his patter again, but the Pardoner speaks over him. The two continue to talk to the crowd over each other, occasionally stopping to argue with each other, getting increasingly annoyed. Eventually they come to blows, the Parson and neighbour Prat coming in to break them up and expel them from the church. In the end the Pardoner and the Friar join forces to beat them up instead and leave together. The play is deceptively simple, but brilliantly structured, the overlapping arguments fitting together perfectly, allowing for play and give and take between the two protagonists.
Perfect for student or fringe production, running at approximately 30 minutes without a break.
Our Production: Full cast audio adaptation - with Rob Myson as the Friar and Heydn McCabe as the Pardoner. Also featuring Robert Crighton as the Parson and Simon Nader as Neighbour Prat. Additional voices by Michael Fouldes and Andy Piper. We're also looking at doing the play live, because that is the natural home for it.
As per usual, our production text was cross referenced between various editions, which are reasonably plentiful for this play. That said, we don't think there are currently any easier to use modern spelling editions to work from - if you're interested in staging the play, we're happy to share our rehearsal script, if it is of use.
The cast is all male, but there is no particular reason why the genders should not be changed for modern productions - the only character with a name is Prat and his pronoun is a nicely generic neighbour, so play about.
Setting: A church before the Reformation. The play is a satire of certain practices of the church, the abuse of power, the selling of relics, the competition between different orders. That said, the play would survive a more modern staging - it is inherently playful, not strictly realistic.
Plot and Character: The Friar enters and appeals for alms, then gets on his knees to pray - presumably with his donation receptacle before him. His act of piety also a ploy to get money. This is interrupted by the arrival of the Pardoner who stands on a stool and starts flogging access to his holy relics - pretty mangy ones at that - for which act he claims he has a Papal dispensation to do. The Friar then stands and begins his patter again, but the Pardoner speaks over him. The two continue to talk to the crowd over each other, occasionally stopping to argue with each other, getting increasingly annoyed. Eventually they come to blows, the Parson and neighbour Prat coming in to break them up and expel them from the church. In the end the Pardoner and the Friar join forces to beat them up instead and leave together. The play is deceptively simple, but brilliantly structured, the overlapping arguments fitting together perfectly, allowing for play and give and take between the two protagonists.
Modern Staging Suggestions: Site specific would be an obvious way to go, but otherwise this play can be performed anywhere. An actual church, with difficult acoustics, might work against the play, so a deader space might be preferable. Unlike Heywood's debate plays this has a clear setting which can be indicted through action and dialogue, though with some set if desired.
Comparison with other Heywood Plays: This was the second play we recorded with our Heywood company, though the third we've produced. It was immediately embraced by the cast who found it a joy to perform, especially following the tougher text of Witty and Witless. It feels like a natural cousin to John John, with firm place and action, as well as clear comic thrust - they would make a good double bill as a one act show - running together at around 70 minutes. Whilst it covers similar ground as The Four Pp (yet to be recorded, so this assessment is perhaps premature) it is a more theatrical event.
Issues: Presenting this play as audio was difficult as it's inherently theatrical. The audiences attention is vied for by the two principle performers. That said, we were also glad that we didn't need to learn the play - it's incredibly difficult to get right. If you're staging it, make sure you get the text to your actors early so that they can be comfortable (i.e. know it) before they start to rehearse. They'll be taking their cues from each other as well as saying their lines - at the same time. It is only to be attempted by actors who are good with lines. About-right-it'll-do acting will not suffice unless you're playing Prat.
History: We know that this play has a modern performance history, but haven't come across many references to shows. If you know of any performances, past/present/future, do let us know. And if you're thinking of having a go at the play - please get in touch. We'd love to know about your take, and to help archive it if we can. We don't want to see just one production of any play, we want multiple takes out there.
His Previous Play: On Gentleness and Nobility - which is in production now.
His Next Play: The Four PP - which we'll get to later in the year.
Tuesday, 1 May 2018
Witty and Witless by John Heywood
by John Heywood (c1497-1578)
Written around 1525, surviving in a single manuscript.
Cast of Three:
JOHN
JAMES
JEROME
Perfect for student or fringe production, running at approximately 45 minutes without a break.
Our Production: Full cast audio adaptation - with Rob Myson as John, Heydn McCabe as James, and Robert Crighton as Jerome. The announcer is Simon Nader.
If you'd like to read the text of the play the original text (handwritten) can be viewed here or there's a modern spelling edition of the play here. NB: there are a few errors and oddities in this edition, but it's close enough for mustard.
 |
| Can you spot the difference? |
The cast is all male, but there is no particular reason why the genders should not be changed for modern productions - their names are never mentioned in the text, and even pronouns are used fairly sparsely. (Sir twice, he a few times - though usually to describe a hypothetical generic 'he' rather than the other speakers - it's very changeable.)
Setting: some event at the court of Henry VIII or one associated with it. The only two explicit indicators in the text to the world around are references to the king's fool, Will Summer, and to the kind of tat you might buy from Walsingham Abbey - a pseudo relic, a Walsingham ring, being the sort of thing sold to the credulous. The play doesn't really have a specific setting outside of that original performance context - it is a play about two people having an argument in a room populated with other people (an audience) from which a third person appears (from the audience most probably) to join the debate. That makes the play sound dry, but it has some interesting dynamics. For our studio recording we set the play in a pub, a definite setting rather than a performative one, where an argument can be both private and overheard; where you can argue with someone, but play the argument out to the rest of the room, or in our case, to the barman.
Plot and Character: The play is a debate, or perhaps more a battle of wills - or wits even. We're not going to go into detail about how the debate is structured - we're more interested in the way it flows between the characters - much of the thrust of the play is in the personalities at work. James, who argues that it is better to be witless than witty, constantly battles away at the less skillful arguer of John, who consistently concedes his own position. In brief - James believes that the witless, those who are less intelligent or educated, are happier than people who are witty, those who are more intellectual. John disagrees and the two argue it out. John's method of argument is mostly responsive, when he does make a point he repeats it in lists of examples, and then, conceding his opponents position, tries to change the terms of reference. Yes, you're right about X, but the important issue is really Y. He doesn't land a blow on James but dances around to another position.
 |
| Our working script also features some crossing out... |
We decided that James was the more skilled debater, and that he may have chosen to debate with John because he knows he can beat him - despite winning the argument, you don't get the impression that James is really a brilliant debater, merely a dilettante who chooses his battles well. Of course, this is merely our own interpretation.
James speaks almost without the use of a full stop. The original text isn't punctuated, but however you work it, it's a text of never ending thoughts, one flowing into another. Again, the question is, is this because James is so clever he can link together thought after thought, or is it an attempt by James to appear cleverer by bamboozling his opponent with never ending words? We went for the latter, though in live performance there's play between them both.
When John speaks at length it is to make a list - and again there is a lot of play with how 'boring' these lists should be. The actor can play with the pauses between lines, tempting James to try and interrupt, before saying another example. It's a fun game, and one of the hallmarks of Heywood's work is the playfulness of his texts. They are supremely theatrical, (difficult for us doing audio!) and allow the actor lots of room to play with timing and pace, which keeps what could be a very dry play from being too serious.
John eventually gives in to James, but then Jerome appears (probably from the audience) to argue John's point for him - that the witty, the intelligent, are happier. James almost immediately leaves - perhaps sensing that he cannot beat this opponent, and Jerome has to argue John back to his original point. John is something of a tennis ball between two people who are much better at arguing than he.
Modern Staging Suggestions: It's a difficult play to get across outside of the original context - just putting it on a modern stage might be a bit dry, though we're willing to be convinced otherwise. We believe this would make a great site specific show, performed either as part of some kind of reenactment event, or in modern dress, following our audio staging, in an actual pub or bar. With a cast of only three and no actual props required, it is perfect for fringe theatre or student productions, perhaps in a double bill with one of Heywood's other plays.
Comparison with other Heywood Plays: This was the first play we started working on with our core company for the Heywood plays, and it was the hardest to wrangle with. It was noticeably easier to rehearse both The Pardoner and the Friar and Gentleness and Nobility. Pardoner isn't perhaps a fair comparison, as it isn't a play that demonstrates much in the way of argument, or at least not one the audience has to follow in detail. Gentleness and Nobility is quite similar in that the play is a debate, except that there are three speakers arguing in the same space for much of the play, rather than two sets of two. The argument for Gentleness is easier to follow - the cast almost audibly sighed with relief at the end of part one when they realised that they didn't need a chart to follow the twists and turns of the debate, that there were shorter, self contained sentences and fewer never ending hanging clauses.
Issues: Presenting a debate is easier on stage than on audio. We put our hands up and say we've probably failed to present the argument in a way that the audience will automatically follow in as clear a way as with a visual element. A stage production can give visual clues as to the debate in play, creating visual reference points to key in what is being said.
Our cast pointed out that, in comparison with other Heywood plays, they didn't really know who John, James and Jerome were - they were just people having a debate. We made decisions about them, but there really aren't many sign posts in the text to guide the actor, and our choices can easily be ignored by future producers.
History: We don't know if anyone has staged Witty and Witless before. The script survived in manuscript, publication came much later and we haven't come across any modern productions - but knowing how patchy people can be documenting productions, we assume it's been done somewhere, just no one shouted about it. If you know of any performances, past/present/future, do let us know. And if you're thinking of having a go at the play - please get in touch. We'd love to know about your take, and to help archive it if we can. We don't want to see just one production of any play, we want multiple takes out there.
His Next Play: John John by John Heywood - where this young playwright adapts a French farce.
Tuesday, 6 March 2018
A few changes are afoot...
If you've been here before you may be a tad confused - why the name change? What's going on?
Well, we're having a bit of a rebrand and new things are afoot. Hell, it's a positive leg worth of material a coming.
But that's a little way off - you'll have to be patient.
More soon!
Tuesday, 30 August 2016
Finally, a bit of Heywood
After a few years of pootling along, we're finally getting around to attacking the work of John Heywood, an early Tudor playwright who created a selection of delightful interludes. Using the opportunity of doing a completely separate live streamed comedy show (Live from the Get In), I'm recording Johan Johan - or A mery play between John Johan the husbande, Tyb his wyfe, and Syr Johan the preest (which is a bit of a mouthful and a bugger to tweet) - in front of a live studio audience.
Here's how it works - the final show will be edited and adapted for audio (the physical comedy doesn't come across well for obvious reasons) but I've been recording all the read through/rehearsals so that there are several recordings of these - including one of the full text, plus actor discussion and general thoughts on performance. All this material will appear on the blog in the next few months.
We've had two full rehearsals so far, with another run to go - and so we've gone into this short interlude in some detail - for the moment here were some of our first impressions.
1. It's pretty rude. I knew the play was about cuckolding, but I'd not appreciated the full weight of the innuendo present of hard phallic objects being vigorously worked in the corner of the room. It's, sadly, something that will be lost in the audio recording, but the live audience will get it.
2. The opening speech has become very difficult to pull off. There's nothing like a long speech to open a play, where the protagonist goes into a lengthy debate as to whether to beat his wife or not, to endear that character to the audience. The joke is that he's obviously never going to actually do it, being too afraid of her, and that he keeps swapping between whether he should or not, what the neighbours will say, would it work etc. In the Tudor world, where the chastising of a wife would be acceptable behaviour, this was probably very funny - to the modern audience, this is, to say the least, problematic. We could argue that because he's never going to do it, there's no harm done - but that doesn't really hold much water and it will be interesting to see how the opening will read to the audience. I couldn't let the audience come in cold to this, so to give the play some context I've got a narrator to set the scene, and have cut the speech down so that the appeal for wife beating doesn't go on too long.
3. Pie making is a complicated business. I'd not appreciated how complicated the business of the pie in the story was. In the play, John John is cheated out of eating supper (a pie) by doing a pointless household chore. But the story of the pie runs through the whole play - from arriving in the house at the start, to the back story of the commissioning and making of said pie prior. The backstory of the making of the pie is used by Sir John the priest to get admittance to John John's house and the eating thereof. I hope we'll make this clear to the audience.
4. Having two characters called John is a bit odd and not very helpful - though not actually a problem.
5. The play is, barring the opening (see above), really rather fun and we expect it to prove genuine laughter.
Assuming that the show I'm yoking this recording session to continues, I'm hoping to follow up the play with more from Heywood, recording versions of all his interludes - with the possible exception of The Play of the Weather, which is a bit too big for me at the moment, and which has been looked at in some detail elsewhere.
Here's how it works - the final show will be edited and adapted for audio (the physical comedy doesn't come across well for obvious reasons) but I've been recording all the read through/rehearsals so that there are several recordings of these - including one of the full text, plus actor discussion and general thoughts on performance. All this material will appear on the blog in the next few months.
We've had two full rehearsals so far, with another run to go - and so we've gone into this short interlude in some detail - for the moment here were some of our first impressions.
1. It's pretty rude. I knew the play was about cuckolding, but I'd not appreciated the full weight of the innuendo present of hard phallic objects being vigorously worked in the corner of the room. It's, sadly, something that will be lost in the audio recording, but the live audience will get it.
2. The opening speech has become very difficult to pull off. There's nothing like a long speech to open a play, where the protagonist goes into a lengthy debate as to whether to beat his wife or not, to endear that character to the audience. The joke is that he's obviously never going to actually do it, being too afraid of her, and that he keeps swapping between whether he should or not, what the neighbours will say, would it work etc. In the Tudor world, where the chastising of a wife would be acceptable behaviour, this was probably very funny - to the modern audience, this is, to say the least, problematic. We could argue that because he's never going to do it, there's no harm done - but that doesn't really hold much water and it will be interesting to see how the opening will read to the audience. I couldn't let the audience come in cold to this, so to give the play some context I've got a narrator to set the scene, and have cut the speech down so that the appeal for wife beating doesn't go on too long.
3. Pie making is a complicated business. I'd not appreciated how complicated the business of the pie in the story was. In the play, John John is cheated out of eating supper (a pie) by doing a pointless household chore. But the story of the pie runs through the whole play - from arriving in the house at the start, to the back story of the commissioning and making of said pie prior. The backstory of the making of the pie is used by Sir John the priest to get admittance to John John's house and the eating thereof. I hope we'll make this clear to the audience.
4. Having two characters called John is a bit odd and not very helpful - though not actually a problem.
5. The play is, barring the opening (see above), really rather fun and we expect it to prove genuine laughter.
Assuming that the show I'm yoking this recording session to continues, I'm hoping to follow up the play with more from Heywood, recording versions of all his interludes - with the possible exception of The Play of the Weather, which is a bit too big for me at the moment, and which has been looked at in some detail elsewhere.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)