APRIL 1998 ----------------------------In this issue------------------------------------------ The Play's the Thing Caprice Woosley examines Hamlet through 9 monologues Enter Laughing Once More into the Breach, Dear Friends. Wayne Disher looks at the lighter side of the performing arts From the Mailbag Reader-Letters Voices in Contemporary Theatre Gaining Respect: A Golden Rule CyberTheatre Monthly Explore a new theatre-related websites each month Ths month: Undiscovered Musicals, Peekaboo Festivals, TheatreWorld UK E-zine Rubin's Corner Spring Blooms on Broadway TRE Trivia Androgeny & Cross-Dressing ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Play's the Thing Analyzing a Play in a Different Way Hamlet's Dilemma: Charted in Nine Monologues This month I thought I would share with you an interesting analysis I was challenged to try by my professor and mentor in college. He suggested that I look at Hamlet from the viewpoint of nine specific monologues and see what conclusions I could draw. He then suggested the nine monologues but gave no indication of what direction I should let them take me. After reading the monologues over and over again, and fascination with the fact that Hamlet, like the father of the Reformation Martin Luther, studied in Wittenberg, I began looking for the religious implications of the actions of the play on a young man who probably studied Christian Humanism which on the rise in Wittenberg at the time of Shakespeare’s writing of the play. By no means am I suggesting that I have stumbled upon some uncovered ancient wisdom regarding Hamlet, but this type of analysis led me to discover that there are many ways to read and interpret Shakespeare’s plays. Think of the wonderful monolugues in King Lear, Macbeth, and Henry V. Now imagine gathering several of those monologues together and making new discoveries about those beloved plays. Suddenly these plays, so many times read and re-read, spring off the page with new freshness and deeper understanding than before. I hope you enjoy this alternative reading of the meanings of Hamlet. Writing it was a pleasure for me. Hamlet's Dilemma: Reason versus Will Hamlet’s world was one of logic and reason. All was right in the world so long as logical order was in place. That world collapsed with the death (later to be discovered as a murder) of his father. Hamlet returns to a court out of order. His uncle, Claudius, has assumed the kingship which, in all likelihood, should have passed to Hamlet. His mother, the grieving widow, has married his uncle just a few months after the death of her husband. Not only is this against the canons of the Church, but in Hamlet’s eyes, this is a slap in the face of his late father. Spies, more domestic than foreign, fill the court. Suspicion has replaced reason. At Elsinore the dignity of the individual has been replaced by the bestial nature of man. Hamlet, the model of the Christian humanist thinker, begins to question the very nature of man, himself and his faith in reason. Over the course of nine monologues taken from the play, Hamlet’s crisis of faith and war over his inability to act on revenge takes shape. In each speech part of Hamlet’s dilemma is presented and expounded on. He fluctuates between the humanist view of reason that reveals the potentiality of man and the moral virtue that guides man, and the reformationist view of the base nature of man in which passion distorts reason and will. The first selection, from Act I, scene v, "O all you hosts of heaven," reveals a very determined Hamlet. He has just finished talking to the ghost of his father, discovering that Claudius murdered the sleeping king and that, "If thou hast nature in thee, bear it not," (line 81). He is prompted to act as the avenger. After the ghost leaves, Hamlet summons up all of his strength to act on behalf of his father. He swears three times to remember his father: for as long as his lives; free of internal or external obstacles that will block his path; and as a sworn allegiance. His promise to be free of internal or external obstacles reflects Hamlet’s feeling of the elevated stature of man. He states, "And thy commandment all alone shall live/Within the book and volume of my brain/Unmix’d with baser matter," and implies that the "baser matter" is what would hold him back from the rational course he must take. For Hamlet, this is not a time of acting like the bestial demeanor he has seen at court. It is a time for clear reasoning and rational response. In the second monologue, Hamlet is talking to his friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who have been summoned to the court by Claudius and Gertrude to discover why Hamlet is troubled. This speech to them is one of the first indications of the internal obstacles that have begun to creep into his resolve to revenge his father. He takes quite a different position regarding the nobility of man. He first tells them that heaven itself, "this most excellent canopy," and "this majestical roof-fretted with golden fire," now "appears no other thing to me than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours," (II. ii, 308-311). Observing a shift in his view of heaven, it follows that a shift in his view of man would also occur. He talks in a very sarcastic way about the noble nature of man as godlike, angelic, divine, uplifted, but he concludes with, "to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me," (316-317). His belief in the beauty of the heavens, the world and in man has dissolved and tainted his world of rational order. The reformist thinking of man as a beast needing grace is emerging from the rational humanist who elevates man to the place of the gods. In the third passage, Hamlet now points the finger at himself as a "rogue and peasant slave," as his own luster has tarnished due to inactivity. He calls into question everything about himself that should lead him to action but does not. He states, "Is it not monstrous," that his own rational emotions have kept him from acting. He lacks the passion to avenge. In recounting the tale of Hecuba’s lover who wept for her, Hamlet says he had more resolve of purpose, "Had he the motive and the cue for passion/That I have? He would drown the stage with tears," (II. ii, 569 - 572). Yet Hamlet sees himself as "A dull and muddy-mettled rascal, peak/Like John-a-dreams, unpregnant of my cause/And can say nothing; no, not for a king," (578-580). He evens asks himself, "Am I a coward?" (582). He lacks the natural desire to "make oppression bitter" and deliver vengeance for his father’s murder. Hamlet is not the noble, self-sufficient man that the Christian humanist portrays. He tries to push aside reason and let will determine his course. He searches for a divine providence to reach out, setting aside the thinking man, and spurning on the doing man. Even though he is not sure whether the ghost was sent from heaven or hell, he is afraid that if a devil, "Out of my weakness and my melancholy/As he is very potent with such spirits/Abuses me to damn me: I’ll have grounds/More relative than this," (610 - 616). The logic or reason appears to have overcome the will. The speech ends with Hamlet concocting the plan to use a play to "catch the conscience of the king" (617). In another speech filled with ideas of reformation thinking warring in the rational mind of Hamlet, he lashes out at Ophelia, one of the few innocents of the play. "Get thee to a nunnery. why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners?" he tells her (III. i, lines 121-122). The notion of sin being imparted at birth is engrained in reformation theology. Man is evil from birth and therefore needs redemptive grace as a way of salvation. He finds himself trapped between both camps of thought and tells her, "What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves all; believe none of us," (128 - 129). The earth represents the land of the beast, give to appetite and passion and heaven is the rational, ordered society. By saying "we," he includes himself among the number of the beasts. Ophelia reflects the war waging inside of Hamlet in the speech that followed his command to get to a nunnery. "O, what a noble mind is here o’erthrown!" she laments (III. i, 153). She recounts how Hamlet, the "expectancy and rose of the fair state" and the "observed of all observers, quite, quite down!" has fallen from the position of a Christian humanist, the glory of mankind (155, 157). It is as though Hamlet represented the very hope and success of Denmark and he is now lost. Ophelia notes that Hamlet’s rationality, which was his nobility, has turned to madness when she remarks, "Now see that noble and sovereign reason/Like sweet bells jangled, out of tune and harsh/That unmatch’d form and feature of blown youth/Blasted with ecstacy," (160 - 164). This speech, more than any other, presents the two-sided war that Hamlet is fighting. When looking at the Player’s Speech, delivered by Hamlet to the actors hired to "catch the conscience of the king," from the standpoint of the war between rational reason and will, some interesting points offer up a double meaning. Yes, Hamlet is talking about those who overact, but as Jaques says in As You Like It, "All the world's a stage/And all the men and women merely players:/They have their exits and their entrances;/And one man in his time plays many parts," (II. vii, lines 139 - 142). Hamlet could be looking at Denmark, and the court at Elsinore, including himself, as those self-same actors on the stage. He describes the duality of presentations delivered on stage. He could also be describing the difference between the rational or will-driven individual. He tells the player, "for in the very torrent, tempest, and as I may say, the whirlwind of passion, you must acquire and beget a temperance that may give it smoothness," (III. ii, lines 6 - 8). Hamlet could be reminding himself that the passion and appetite for revenge must be balanced by rational decisions. He continues his speech, saying, "O, it offends me to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters," (8 - 10). He has not forgotten the sweet sound of reason which is preferred to the clanking sound of base beastlike behavior. In a scene with his mother, after he has killed Polonius standing behind the curtain, Hamlet gives a speech much like that to the player. He advises Gertrude to play a part by denying Claudius her bed. The sense of divinity taking over the course of his life is seen when he tells her, "For this same lord/I do repent; but heaven hath pleased it so/To punish me with this and this with me/That I must be their scourge and minister," (III. iv, lines 173 - 176). There is an air of acceptance on his part that God, not Hamlet’s noble, rational mind, is in control of his course and that he is ready to accept that fate. More and more the humanist disappears and the reformationist takes hold. Hamlet does step back slightly when he sees Fortenbras’ army gathered on the shore. His thinking has gotten in the way of his action too many times. "How all occasions do inform against me/And spur my dull revenge!" he cries, knowing that if he does not take advantage of the situations laid before him, he will fail (IV. iv, lines 32 - 33) . He denounces man again as a low creature, "What is a man/If his chief good and market of his time/Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more," (33 - 35). In the following section, he ponders whether he has been thinking too much on the problem which caused his inaction. He states that God does not give reason to be unused, either by a man of base nature (the beast quality assigned by the reformationists) or by the rational but too thoughtful individual (the qualities of the humanist). He cannot even understand why he cannot act: Sure, he that made us with such large discourses Looking before and after, gave us not That capability and god-like reason To fust in us unused. Now, whether is be Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple Of thinking too precisely on the event A thought which, quarter’d, hath but one part wisdom and ever three parts coward, I do not know Why yet I live to say ‘This thing’s to do;’ Sith I have cause and will and strength and means To do’t. (lines 36 - 46) For Hamlet, the site of Fortenbras and his army spurn him to recognize his own lack of action. He sees men willing to, "go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot" while he stands by idle. He gives over to the base nature that cannot use reason to decide and says, "O, from this time forth, my thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!" (65-66). As the play nears the end, Hamlet has given himself over the divine will of God, setting aside the rational thinking man. "Rashly," he says, "(And praised be rashness for it) let us know/Our indiscretion sometimes serves us well/When our deep plots do pall," (V. ii. 6 - 9). Hamlet acknowledges that the rashness to act served him better because his own attempt to rationalize the solution only distracted his purpose. At the end of the speech Hamlet decides, "There’s a divinity that shapes our ends," and thus his path is set (10). There will be no more thinking, only doing. Through the course of these nine monologues, Hamlet has been seen as a man who, although desirous to revenge his father, must wage a battle of his own sense of moral virtue. If he follows his training, he thinks on the deed too much and blunts his own sword. If he gives over to the base nature, letting God use him to serve as the divine avenger, he must set aside all that he believes. The man that Hamlet reveres in the beginning becomes the man who must be lowered in order to be elevated. The self-sufficient humanist must give way to the man in need of grace and divine will. Hamlet makes the long journey to discover that God, not himself, is the keeper of the will and defender of the faithful. --- Caprice Woosley is currently pursuing her BFA in theater (directing and playwriting), after 25 years working in and around the theater. She is a produced playwright, actress, and amateur dramaturg who enjoys researching plays. She is a host in the Writing Forum where she co-hosts a Writing Discussion Group. She also hosted "Shakespeare Unplugged" and "Murder and Mayhem" in the Theatre Forum. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From the Mailbag From the Mailbag I am a blind opera fan, just finished a brush up of blind skills one of which was attending an opera in the Bednam Center in Pittsburgh. And a sighted person would describe what was going on. Fortunately I have some vision but not enough to see the costumes. This person would describe what was going on in a low voice just loud enough for me or the person next to me could hear. I saw three operas through the eyes of other people, Carmen, Norma, And the about the sad clown and the one that goes with the clown story. I am really happy to share my experience with people whom are not blind. --Eric Rhoads, on Stage Describers for the Blind Personally, I think intelligence is color-blind, gender-blind, class-blind, wealth-blind, disability-blind. It can happen anywhere at any time, sometimes regardless of the educational background of one's parents. I think intelligence is created by varying mixtures of ambition, effort, persistence, education, environment and genes, with no one, two or three factors being all important. We've all known plodders/tortoises who overcame brilliant hares who frittered away their time and talent. --jsheadixon, on Shakespeare Authorship True story: I was stage managing a production of "Death of a Salesman" in which Bif was blocked sitting on a porch at the end of Act I. For the first 7 of nine performances, I took a ten count blackout before bringing house and preset up to let him get offstage. At the 7th performance, I took the same count, but when house and preset established, he was still onstage. When I went backstage during intermission, found the actor and asked "Sam, why didn't you get offstage during the end of act blackout?" The response: "What's my motivation?" --Anonymous ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Voices in Contemporary Theatre Gaining Respect: A Golden Rule This column began as a guide for the little theatre with big dreams - 10 Steps to Gaining Respect, Being taken Seriously, Going Professional. After some considerable verbage, I found it all all boil down to a marvelously simple principle: Grow Up. That's not sarcasm. It's not even a jibe at the backstage mini-dramas & interoffice politics that resemble nothing so much as recess at Tennessee Williams Junior High. The essence of becoming an adult is shifting from a mindset where *I am the focal point of the universe* to *I share this planet with fellow human beings who have lives and thoughts and feelings beyond being my supporting cast.* Believe me, both audiences and the people you work with can tell if you're there for us or for yourself. The former gives us a good show we get caught up in and leave the theatre feeling richer for having experienced. The other doesn't - we may not know what's missing, what was off-balance or the reason why, but the play never becomes an organic living thing we can interact with. Having had front-row seats for a few of the backstage dramas, one can speculate: An insecure director who is casting actors of moderate rather than superior ability to avoid feeling threatened A director that's currently starring in a rumor of off-stage romance with a certain actress who's undercut the emphasis on her role to avoid charges of favoritism A PM rewarding actors who, regardless of ability, respect her audition bureaucracy, making her job easier and puffing her ego Last month a designer called a rival's concept for another show "too simplistic" so now he has to prove his point by grossly overdesigning the current project Important as they may seem to the participants, they don't matter a hoot to us in the audience. We saw a bad show. It's your fault. Goodbye. And please don't waste a stamp on me next time you're raising funds. It's the same backstage: An SM who sees the actors as fellow human beings doing a job that requires intelligence and creativity and wants to help them do that job better, will spontaneously think to make sure everyone has a rehearsal prop for the dance rehearsal, or has change for the parking meter, or gets a map to the costume shop if the fittings are off-site. It's the self-important ones who hear us telling these stories about good SMs who decide they'll star in similar stories by doing the same things - and because the action is not appropriate to the circumstances, because it's motivated by self-interest and not a true impulse to support the actors, it comes off as "Thank you for shopping at K-Mart, Have a Nice Day" I don't care how often you can use the word Professional in a sentence or how many asterisks designating AEA, SAG, SSDC, IATSE, MOUSE affiliations appear throughout your program. If you maintain a selfish lack of considerations for the feelings of others it will manifest itself - in fact, it will pop up at the most inconvenient moment and bite you in the ass. I don't get around all that much, but I have personally witnessed.... the SM at a company that thought they were making a big bid for professional status at a local fringe outside the theatre socializing with (or trying to pick up) women in the box office line - in front of press, adjudicators, and the GM of the largest Regional in the state a Community Theatre with a 5-star gimmick and a shot at some high profile national press get caught without enough seats opening night. The director asked the representative of that press opportunity to move to another row, The SM asked him to move elsewhere - and when he politely said he'd been told to sit where he was, said SM turned and barked at him that there was "no need to be rude" a playwright throw a hissy-fit in front of a prospective producer who determined the fellow would be too tempermental to work with in a full-production situation None of these people are aware of how close they came to the elusive big break, and that their own or their colleagues childish self-indulgence lost it. Scary isn't it. THIS MONTH'S QUOTES "Good writing is good writing; one genre is not in itself more or less favorable to creativity than any other; it's how you approach it. If you approach the work with "clean hands and composure," as Balzac said, and try to do the best, most workmanlike job you can with the tools you have, and to tell the best story you can, any genre can be made malleable enough to tell interesting tales.... Which is why, at the end of the day, you can never let the complaints (or, for that matter, the praise) tilt you one way or another. The only thing you can do is follow the small, still voice at the back of your head that tells the stories, and write for yourself. If you write well, enough people will stay around to keep you on the air...if you don't, they won't. That's always struck me as the fairest bargain around." --J. Michael Straczynski IF THEATER is the elusive art contrived by wily, mischievous talents to transport our minds to a different time and place for several hours, while leaving the rest of us in our seats - then the current Roundabout production of "Cabaret" is the epitome of art. This thrilling, ingenious re-invention of the 31-year-old John Kander & Fred Ebb musical is vivid proof that theater must be a collaborative venture to succeed. . --Liz Smith's column ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enter Laughing Once more into the breach my friends! We’ve reached a whole new state of complacency in the theatre these days. Personally, I’m alarmed. Not because I’m concerned with the moral and ethical fiber of this great country (although I’m not so sure such a thing exists!). No! On the contrary. I miss the good ole days when people would ban together and protest outside the theatre against the filth of Oh Calcutta; and the opposing group across the street vowing that they’d decide for themselves what was decent. Now THAT was fun! Where’s the protest and upheaval these days? Point of example: I sat with a large group of friends recently when one of them, a parent, told us that her son’s high school was doing the musical Hair. I watched with some amazement at the total lack of reaction! Not even a raised eyebrow. My friends offered their usual support: "Wow, that’s great Cynthia! I love that musical!". "What part will your son play?!". Some of them broke out into a chorus of "Aquarius". Hoping to incite some controversy, I chimed in, "Gee, Cyn, doesn’t that show have some…[I paused for dramatic effect and whispered] nudity?". "Oh, I don’t know, she replied. I think so. Hey, that could explain why Johnny’s been in the gym every day for the past two weeks!". I’ve been trying to think about the last time a play or musical generated some real good juicy public outrage. It hasn’t been an easy task. I seem to remember a spark of protest at Jonathan Price playing the part of the Engineer in Miss Saigon. And didn’t some newspapers cover a small but polite picketing of Disney show? But that wasn’t at the result of the show, but more as a result of some questionable Disney corporate policies. The state of affairs has reached a new low. A recent Entertainment Weekly magazine article found no other controversy in New York’s theatrical scene than the fact that Alec Baldwin plays Macbeth with a five o’clock shadow. Oh the horror! I will not let this pass unnoticed, dear friends. I have made it my mission to enrage and spur you once more into the breach! Let’s look at some current Broadway shows and unmask their "true story", thereby showing Americans why they need to hit the streets in alarm and riot: The Lion King A poor, innocent lion cub is brutalized by an evil uncle, molested by hyenas, and nearly trampled by buffaloes. Could fur trappers be far behind? Are you listening PETA? Jekyll and Hyde A young doctor decides to play God and experiments with drugs. He overdoses on one particularly nasty drug, and kills a pathetic prostitute while suffering from hallucinogenic sexual fantasies. It’s swell material for a musical, but surely the American Psychological Association can find some matter here with which to disagree. Cabaret Girl meets boy. Boy meets another boy. Girl looses boy to another boy. Sexual deviance and pub life in Nazi Germany. There never existed a show with so much potential for controversy and outrage. It’ll sell a million tickets! Phantom of the Opera A horribly disfigured man torments and harasses a beautiful young woman. He kidnaps her and imprisons her against her will. No, not the latest Clinton scandal, but one of the most successful musicals of our time. In every law book I picked up, this kind of treatment is grounds for criminal prosecution. The National Organization of Woman dropped the book on this one! 1776 All those men deciding the course of our nation! Not a single woman amongst them! Apparently the only thing women were good for, according to this show, was to provide an outlet for the sexual frustration of our forefathers. The only thing missing was a serving wench in this Congress. A case for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission? Now that you’ve heard my call to arms, "Once more into the breach". I only hope you’ll call your neighbors and head to New York to picket these shows….If I’m not there, start without me. And pay no attention to the person that looks like me in line buying tickets. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rubin's Corner Spring Blooms on Broadway With the temperature hitting a record 82 degrees during the last few days of March, the Spring Theatre Rush is on. The first play to hit the boards was the Lincoln Center Production of Ah, Wilderness. Daniel Sullivan directed the Eugene O’Neill comedy, which stars of all people, Debra Monk and Craig T. Nelson. The production will have a limited run at the Vivian Beaumont Theatre at Lincoln Center. If you want to attend the O’Neill Festival you can then attend the Irish Repertory Production of Long Days Journey Into Night. This Off-Broadway Company has attracted Frances Sternhagen, Brian Murray, Paul McGrane and Rosemary Fine to star in this fine family drama. It is rare that two O’Neill are produced at the same time only a few blocks apart. The London hit, Art, has taken up residence at the small Royale Theatre on West 45th Street. This short play stars Alan Alda, Victor Garber, and Alfred Molina in Yasmina Reza’s new play, adopted from Christopher Hampton story of three men whose friendships are altered when one of them buys a work of modern art. Speaking of London hits, another London hit comes to New York for a limited run, The Chairs. Geraldine McEwan and Richard Briers play Eugene Ionesco’s elderly couple entertaining a house full of imaginary guests in this Theatre de Complicite/Royal Court Theatre production. Simon McBurney directs this production, which will run for only 84 performances at the Golden Theatre on 45th Street. A couple of interesting dramas will make it to Broadway this month. The Deep Blue Sea returns with Blythe Danner and Edward Hermann in this Terence Ratigan drama. This play concerns a woman’s illicit passion for a young man. Mark Lamos directs this Roundabout Theatre production at their Stage Right. Jane Alexander returns to Broadway in Joanne Murray-Smith’s play called Honour. Gerald Gutierrez directs this story of the wife of a writer, whose family is thrown into turmoil by the appearance of a journalist writing a profile. This production goes into the Belasco Theatre on 44th Street. Down the block two more limited engagement make their debut after very successful runs on the other side of the pond. The Herbal Bed is Peter Whelan’s new play based on an actual court case in which William Shakespeare’s daughter, Susanna Hall, was slandered and accused of infidelity. The original cast of Laila Robins, Simon Jones, Amelia Campbell, and Herb Foster bring this one to the Eugene O’Neill. Later in the month, The Judas Kiss with Liam Neeson makes its American debut. Our friends in London did not give this David Hare’s play very high marks. It still comes to the Broadhurst Theatre for a limited run starting on April 22nd. These tickets come with a warning about full frontal nudity in the second act. The most awaited musical of the season opens in late May. High Society staring Melissa Errico, Daniel McDonald, Stephen Bogardus, and John McMartin will be at the St. James Theatre. This new musical by Arthur Kopot based on the 1956 MGM musical and Phil Barry’s 1939 stage comedy, The Philadelphia Story uses songs by Cole Porter. Christopher Rensaw directs the production with choreography by Lar Lubovitch. Two blocks away Quentin Tarantino and Stephen Lang are the villains in a new production of Wait Until Dark. Marisa Tomei is the blind women in this production directed by Leonard Fogila. Finally, Off-Broadway is hoping to send three new hits to Broadway, if they can find a theatre. Jerry Zaks is directing The Cripple of Inishmann which looks like it will go into the Kerr Theatre after a sold out run at the Joseph Papp Public Theatre. The Beauty Queen of Leenanne, which is now at the Atlantic Theatre Company, is looking for a Broadway spot after its, sold out Off-Broadway run. My favorite to move to Broadway is Hedwig and the Angry Inch, as performed by it author John Cameron Michael and his band Cheater. This production tells the story of a transsexual who has had the operation of his dreams botched by his doctors. The story is outrageous, but the music and the lyrics are brilliant and make for an exciting evening of theatre. Spring has definitely brought us a variety of productions to Broadway. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CyberTheatre Monthly Undiscovered Musicals Has become a favorite among forum insiders. Have a look, and sometimes a listen, at oddball little musicals that aren't perhaps commercial enough to make a surefire Broadway powerhouse (yet), and wear their uniqueness like a badge of honour: Currently profiled: Julius Caesar vs. the Martians, Crusade, The Ancient Staff of Wisdom and the Scarlet Letter. Peekaboo A network of information on select music and theatre festivals. TheatreWorld UK E-zine News and reviews of London's West End, off West End, Fringe Venues, North & South England, Oxford, Scotland - and International reports from Holland and some U.S. cities. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TRE Trivia TRE Trivia Androgeny & Female/Male Impersonation Highlight the white blanked areas to reveal the answers. ________: an androgynous intermediary with the supernatural in certain American Indian ceremonies ________ Victorian actress who played Romeo to her sister's Juliett ________: Female lead played by a male actor in Kabuki ________________: according to legend, originated the role of Lady MacBeth _________________ productions of all-male Harvard Club founded in 1844 in which members played mens & women's roles alike _______________ Most famous Victorian Actress to play Hamlet ___________ attacked as "sodomitical" the Elizabethan convention of casting male actors and boys in women's roles __________ Deconstructionist retelling of Puccini's Madama Butterfly which imagines a male Chio Chio San dying for a transvestite Pinkerton _________: Granted special patents for new playhouses during the Restoration on the condition they only let women play female roles Answers to last month's TRE Trivia Who played the original Maria in the Broadway Sound of Music ? Mary Martin Speaking of Maria's - who played the original Maria in West Side Story? Carol Lawrence Speaking of the Sound of Music, what was Julie Andrews Broadway debut ? The Boyfriend Karl Malden made his Broadway debut in what Tennessee Williams classic? Streetcar Named Desire ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Copyright 1998, Mersinger Theatrical Services