SHAKESPEARIAN TEXT

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 66, 14 September 1929, Page 19

SHAKESPEARIAN TEXT

TO BE; OR NOT TO BE^

A tie light ful. little speech was madu recently by Sir Johnston' Forbes Kobcvlscm, who presided at a semi-serious debate at the London School of Economics, between Mr. Ashley Dukes and Mi: Leslie Ifabeion "Shall. we/Rewrite Shakespeare?'' Mr. Dukes, had pleaded ingeniously for modernising- the. teifc of Shakespeare in harmony /with changes in the language, and Mr. Faber had stoutly and effectively opposed (says the "Manchester Guardian ). -..-,.■ .. i .

Sir Johnston Forbes Robertson said ho S?P c •, -: time would never come' when Hamlet".;is rewritten as "The Strange Adventure at Elsinore." He gave examples of how actors used to "rewrite" Shakespeare. Once, when he was playing the closet, scene m "Hamlet," the "Polouius was an understudy. He had done ■faivly well when: Hamlet .said-'.'How now!' A If sP ea,d> for '.'a-, ducat," and .stabbed turough the arras .-expecting to hear a I moan and words "Oh,- I am slain," he lieard instead Polonius say in a vorv matter oi tact voice. "Oh! God, I am kilicd. lorhaps- Shakespeare might have rewritten on these lines. "In my young days," ho went on, "I liave known actors who in playing Sliakespeanv were, anxious to do 'two things— to introduce new business and above all to introduce new-readings. I remember my father told me that he heard an nctov \tl he P^^ge.-'PeiJiaps but of my weakow and -Mly ™eIi""=l>oly Cas he is very potent with such spirits),' abuses me to uamn me, say; instead of the last words, lie.abuses me too, damn him.' A MAN OF FAITH. <. t 'i' ljfi V ra|y believe," Sir. Johnston added, that in spite, of-the. fact that language does-change, we: shall, thanks to the actor go-on.speaking.these-wonderful lines, that gorgeq, lS poetry, fifty, a hundred, live himdied.years hence, as we do now. It is the duty of the actor, the interpreter, tot°irifvP P r° , m' ltcll!GSs Poet and his inlegiitj tnghsh- people sometimes forget that we are proved possessors" of-the gicatcst poet in the history of the world." i J Y<fr hl? J'- D"Ues tlefeu(led U!« i-ew'rit-Ji g cjt bhakespeare from the example o£ uliiikespeare, who was himself an expert u'wL lui"le", cd- '^writer of other men's Plots , and „l ays , Thal . sin]p] meiint t |, tlt hii.ikespeare , was a man of the theatre ?£? aq i--a ' Beholnr, or a "literary" dramawritin^ T °Ut" was a form of le" so wa6 every new 'iitroke.'on the fIJ mad°.to enhance the dramatic efnoinf- nf "if. had not yet reached the e-.rV wrltln 8 the text we might be P ;V IV Th<=, people who believed in the text w™ Wr ? • t(S X- t ' and n°. thi "S but the text were dimmishing every day? OBSOLETE AS CHAUCER. Mr. Duke's chief point was that the time H,f approached when Shakespeare's anl wh P Wl'-l b°-n as Obsolete as Chaucer's, h?m Tf i'• Wlll be necessary to rewrite w h , - Is to be understood by any nrnft; f llV hakeSpeal'c lri New Y°l'k was Ini TJ| a P-e'-'m-niance in a foreign lanHv b,',f Tl 6 dlfs cllli-y was not the Sbscurtj but.tlie_archaism of Shakespeare, and or Lr a fl lnT' in tbe theatve s°mwl»o, Id n • c pioWfm o£ translating him the tim S°- ,? c therefore thought, that would Z 0U ?; «?"»■ when Shakespeare would be, rfiwnt t en . by . a dramatic et - - Shakespeare is a poet," said Mr. Faber.

istnp him of ;his .poetry, and where docs | Jie stand." bhakospeare suffered from his i interpreters. Let us reform the interprpta- B -tion, but leave the text alone |

..'/.Shakespeare; docs-not need to be ivwnttcn, lie needs-to .be acted." The evil to be combated' on the stage, lie suggested was the invasion of what lie ualled "quick shek American backchat,"and even if wq liad_ to tound an.academy and wear green unnorms to do-it,:- we must wage war against this "tinned cacophony from HolJywood.