Searching for Ophelia
May. 5th, 2009 08:05 pmAfter a ridiculously busy few weeks, I've just completed my second essay. I've consulted six different editions of Hamlet (including three separate texts) and four of The Taming of the Shrew. Getting too close to Shakespearian textual studies is a sure way of making your head explode. My brief was to avoid getting bogged down in the arguments about authenticity and choose two plays, then comment on the way that multiple texts affects the staging decisions available to directors. In the process I was quite surprised to find out how often the plays we see on stage are a conflation of two or more texts, and nobody really knows how authentic they are. Shakespeare might well not have cared anyway, since it was part of his job to rewrite according to the demands of different productions.
I think the best possible preparation for all this stuff was reading "The Writer's Tale." That gave me such an insight into the reality of a writer's life in the fast-moving world of popular entertainment. Okay, it's telly rather than the theatre, but the demands of resources and deadlines don't really change all that much. Reading RTD has blown any ivory-tower concept of a literary Bard out of the window for me. I've learned how frequently adjustments have to be made, how often there's a gap between the writer's ideal and what makes it onto screen or stage.
In fact, I'm surprised how welll my fandom activity prepared me for this MA in general. I have learned to look very carefully at evidence when I'm writing my meta, to base an argument on what's there in the text rather than some biographical fantasy. I've developed a keen sense of exactly how much you can say in 3,000 words. I've found out about factions and arguments and how their fierceness can seem to develop in inverse proportion to the importance of the subject matter to the world at large. And I've learnt about what David Baddiel describes as the "aftergasm" - that's the emotional response you get after encountering a piece of writing that you know is manipulating your emotions but does it so brilliantly you don't care. In fact, you revel in it. Doomsday, anyone?
( My last weekend in Stratford... )
I think the best possible preparation for all this stuff was reading "The Writer's Tale." That gave me such an insight into the reality of a writer's life in the fast-moving world of popular entertainment. Okay, it's telly rather than the theatre, but the demands of resources and deadlines don't really change all that much. Reading RTD has blown any ivory-tower concept of a literary Bard out of the window for me. I've learned how frequently adjustments have to be made, how often there's a gap between the writer's ideal and what makes it onto screen or stage.
In fact, I'm surprised how welll my fandom activity prepared me for this MA in general. I have learned to look very carefully at evidence when I'm writing my meta, to base an argument on what's there in the text rather than some biographical fantasy. I've developed a keen sense of exactly how much you can say in 3,000 words. I've found out about factions and arguments and how their fierceness can seem to develop in inverse proportion to the importance of the subject matter to the world at large. And I've learnt about what David Baddiel describes as the "aftergasm" - that's the emotional response you get after encountering a piece of writing that you know is manipulating your emotions but does it so brilliantly you don't care. In fact, you revel in it. Doomsday, anyone?
( My last weekend in Stratford... )