--by Claire Basney
Most people know the story of the star-crossed lovers who, in marrying, fly in the face of the legendary feud between their families, or at least that they all die in the end. Many may have gotten their first taste of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet from the modern film set, apparently in Mexico, where the rival families fight in gangs and burn gas stations.
If that was what they were expecting of the production of Romeo and Juliet performed by actors from the London stage this weekend, they were disappointed. I have rarely, if ever, seen a Romeo and Juliet where Shakespeare’s words made more of an impact or where a production made more creative use of the actors, the props, and the space it had. Stunning.
The five actors, Caroline Faber (Juliet), Damien Goodwin (Romeo), Tim Hardy (Lord Capulet, etc.), Paul McCleary (Lady Capulet, the Friar, etc.), and Eunice Roberts (the nurse, etc.) are members of a group called ACTER (A Center for Theatre Education and Research). Founded in part by Patrick Stewart, ACTER’s original purpose was to tour schools and present students the Shakespearean gift through workshops and lectures. Only later did they begin producing full-length productions, such as Romeo and Juliet, carrying the simple approach they gave to Shakespeare’s words from the classroom onto the stage.
The ACTER actors cooperated without a director to create their version of the play and placed a concept at the center of it. The danger of such a concept, or behind-the-scenes plan, is that it will can over. That is, it won’t allow the facets of the play written into the script to show. An example could be the latest Romeo and Juliet movie, in which the director tried to update so completely and yet remain true to the text that absurdities such as the prince of Verona becoming a cop in a helicopter labelled Prince took attention from the text of the play. In the case of the production on campus, however, the text was the concept; to quote Tim Hardy, the point was to send the words out!
The way they communicated with the audience was the antithesis of the recent film; they reduced props, set, and costumes to the point where the words create the necessary images in people’s minds. It is in people’s minds, as well as on the stage, where the story comes about. The place in the performance where this was seen the most clearly was in the fight scenes, where directors have traditionally taken the opportunity to strew the stage with bodies. In this production, not only were there no bodies remaining on the stage after the fights were over ( killed actors exited discreetly); there were no weapons. With the exception, perhaps, of Juliet and her nurse, most of the characters wore scarves, which bore the brunt of the play’s symbolism (green for Montague, red for Capulet). During the brawls, the scarves were used for swords and daggers, creating symbolic fights in which the tension was carried by a rhythmic clapping and stomping. In more than one scene, the scarf of the appropriate color remained on stage as a symbol of the dead body. Choreographed gestures ensured that the danger of the fights, and the deadly results, was never in doubt.
The play’s characteristics which supported the concept mingled fascinatingly with the characteristics which came with the challenge of having only five actors perform all the roles in a full-length play. Each actor had to play anywhere from three to five separate people, and no actor, not even Romeo, got away with roles solely of his or her gender. The factor of the performance’s being a travelling show reduced the set, props, and costumes as much as the show’s concept did; but while the typical exhibition in those areas was missing, creative solutions weren’t.
The standard costume was a white shirt and black pants; only Juliet wore a basic black dress instead , which wrapped around her waist when she played male roles. Character changes were effected primarily by the adding or removing of vests, shawls, and, of course, scarves. Perhaps the most surprising change was that of the woman playing Juliet’s nurse-- in that role, she unbuttoned her shirt to reveal a red satin halter top, leaving white blouse hanging from her waistlike an apron.
Just as the costumes were simple, the set was bare, through hand-held props and sound effects were generated by the actors. For the actors were never technically off-stage: when an actor’s character was not on the stage, he or she would go behind a strip of white tape which separated the playing area and sit down. Behind the tape were ten chairs, surrounded by props, costume accessories, and tall World Classic water bottles, in full view of the audience. From these chairs, the actors played an ear-splitting harmonica and shook eggs full of beads to create tension in the fight scenes, made the sounds of creaking gates and polishing dusty mirrors, and even whistled like larks. Far from being disturbed, I think the audience tended to watch even more carefully because of the visible offstage participation.
I think my favorite parts were elaborate and symbolic tableaus, not explicitly in the script, which showed Romeo and Juliet’s love. The four moments when such tableaus were used were at the Capulet’s party, where Romeo first meets Juliet, on the day of their marriage, on the wedding night, and at their deaths. Using the scarves or a piece of red cloth, these moments usually incorporated most of the actors freezing in place or offstage while Romeo and Juliet discovered facet after facet of their newborn love.
As the second half began, Juliet showed her eagerness for her wedding night by running onstage (literally, this time) and ripping the red cloth out of the hands of two of the other actors. The wedding night itself was implied with great delicacy as Romeo knelt before Juliet and stripped the red cloth from her, leaving her exposed in her black dress. The final tableau presented what the prince and company discovered in the Capulet tomb: the now-dead Romeo and Juliet, standing in the middle of the stage, holding hands around their scarf weapons. Though not in the script, I think the tableaus were a thread leading the audience into the world in which Romeo and Juliet lived, one that no one else could see or participate in for long. And the thread was not dropped even until the final curtain.
In actuality, no curtain was used, but as the lights went down for the last time, the house stood and applauded as if they could not get enough. Too bad actors don’t do encores. We need this group back again; the marvelous gift they gave us in the classroom and on stage has only whetted our appetites.