Titus Andronicus And Its Challenges

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

In this essay, it will access the ways of the original staging conditions of ‘William Shakespeare’s play, ‘Titus Andronicus’. It will also demonstrate the challenges it has had from presents to a modern producer. By doing this, I shall present an analysis of the history of the play and how modern producers have contributed to it.

‘Titus Andronicus’ is a tragedy play written and staged by well-known playwright, William Shakespeare. It is the most least often produced performances of all productions written by Shakespeare to have ever been presented as the reviewers’ criticism has provoked its crucial history including the popularity of the weak viewed Shakespearean performances. It’s no secret that most of Shakespeare’s plays were performed during the time of Elizabeth the 1st where theatre traditions differentiated from modern theatre. ‘Titus Andronicus’ was among them who performed in Elizabethan theatres such as ‘The Rose’, ‘The Swan’ and ‘The Globe’ (Wells and Dobson, 2001: p.396). Elizabethan theatres were commonly open-air where it was more or less classified as outdoors as there were no roofs above the stage. They traditionally performed in modern dress and the set designs were different as there was no scenery and had very minimal props. Furthermore, modern lighting, stage effects and sound were not used and ‘Titus Andronicus’ is one example. The production had no lighting and sound at that period and it is one of the two performances that had formulated certain clear violent requirements for its substantial staging than any performances Shakespeare has wrote in regards to his future works (Ichikawa and Gurr, 2000: p.46). The production had challenged the extreme amount of the secured means the open-air stages had and they contains a stage trap. They also had a balcony area that is proficient of maintaining some performers and below the balcony; they had an opening wide enough to let a bed to be pushed out onto the stage. Furthermore, they had two set entrance doors on the side edges of the stage (Ichikawa and Gurr, 2000: p.46). According to sketch evidences, it can be anticipated that the production that were held at ‘The Rose’ looks like the production that was held at ‘The Swan’ while modern audiences have no particular understanding of Elizabethan Theatres. The production that was held at ‘The Swan’ had two entrances in the tiring-house wall at the back of the stretched stage under a pendulous balcony that may be employed as a performing area when action upstairs was required (Helbig and Brusberg-Kiermeier, 1992: p.12). There would nonetheless be one entrance on the ground which may be in the middle and just seconds after the rear wall. They also had one considerable formation to characterize ‘The Tomb of the Andronici’ that could be organized in opposition to the middle of the tiring-house wall for the first Act and separated sooner or throughout the second scene of the second Act (Waith and Shakespeare, 2008: p.83).

‘Titus Andronicus’ was only popular during Shakespeare’s time and its original popular reputation lasted era during the Elizabethan period from the year 1594 to the year 1620. The production started from the year 1594 and had expanded in the duration of four hundred years (Wells and Dobson, 2001: p.478). One of the reasons as to why it is less popular is because reviewers and researchers have opinionated that the performance is repulsive to contemporary audience. Even newspaper companies such as ‘The Era’ and ‘The Sunday Times’ critics thought that the initial production was unsuitable for performance and should have never been credited to Shakespeare (Waith and Shakespeare, 2008: p.49). Nevertheless, ‘The Sunday Times’ found that the performance was written actively (Waith and Shakespeare, 2008: p.49). Visionary objective and intense enactments of ‘Titus Andronicus’ have been constantly provocative while there have been extremely extensive eras when it was not staged (Waith and Shakespeare, 2008: p.58). However, during the second half of the twentieth century, there have been numerous productions of ‘Titus Andronicus’ and they have endured from clear inconsistencies sequences in the content that have frequently aggravated unsuitable enjoyment from audiences although they have viewed the performance experienced reappraisal and it was commonly believed to explain better virtue on stage rather than written works creation. When it got to the late twentieth century, thematic disapproval had aroused apprehensions of the production as it has affected topics variety such as the sacrament, style, rape, revenge and brutality involving the performance reputation as William Shakespeare’s first performance set in Rome (Dessen, 1992: p.117). Critics have rejected the play’s obvious need of basic accord and they did not like the inappropriate themes that were being presented to the audience.

The deaths in ‘Titus Andronicus’ productions have been produced in Elizabethan traditions as the character of ‘Lavinia’s arms and tongue were theatrically severed onstage and was implicated in some type of soaked blood stage characteristic. Other Elizabethan features that were being used are fake heads and animal blood. The ‘Titus Andronicus’ productions also does not stage rapid and fast demises and it remains on the demise performance as cruel and relaxed as brutality is part of Shakespeare’s realm. It starts with numerous demises performances which appeared as an outcome if confrontations involve Barbarous Goths and Roman Conquerors. Each ensuing brutality and demise arises as a commemoration result and the demises in the performance always reveal the uneconomical legislation and sovereign power instead of its precision and knowledge (Smith, 1996: p.315). The demises in the performance are not a ruler supremacy representative but its insincerity’s explanation. Demetrius and Chiron’s killings could probably be the best innovative Shakespeare’s demises which uses the suspended corpse performance whereas ‘Alarbus’s demise and dismemberment could be looked to introduce this critique’s worth in a variation of styles and it realistically clarifies every successive demises characteristics in the production as concealed revenge performances that was being directed and it lacks the lawful and royal consent (Maguire, 2004: p.211), (Gurnham, 2009: p.44).

Although ‘Titus Andronicus’ was popular during the Elizabethan times and has achieved some attraction in the modern era, there were unenthusiastic reactions from audiences in both eras because the script utilizes cruelty and revulsion to the argument that contemporary stagings have frequently need medical amenities to control violent responses in the audience to the anthropophagy, rape and dismemberments themes in the script (Dessen, 1992: p.25). It can be argued that Shakespeare was only attempting to exceed modern dramatic extremes. As the production got to the modern world, ‘Titus Andronicus’ has reached over throughout eras from the mid 20th Century to the 21st Century. The production has then gone through stage adaptations as well as film adaptations everywhere in the world. Modern producers would have to confront numerous challenges for the performance and one of those things involves from shifting features from what were employed throughout Elizabethan Theatre to improvised features that could be employed that would seem convincing to the audiences. For example, animal blood may not be needed for modern performance as there are other alternatives they could work on. They must furthermore recognized that cruelty is focal to the production and by doing that, they would have to outlined the engagement such as placing ribbons instead of blood. They also require pursuing practicality and it is frequently with a stress on blood, cruelty, dismemberment, mutilation and chopped off heads. In addition to that, they would require concentration over the strange performance structure if it is to choose the revulsions in the Grand Guignol belief or to handle the script as a spoof (Dessen, 1992: p.24). The producer should furthermore resolve if they must perform the hallucination for its complete importance or save the audience’s impressions by evading excessive abundant practicality. All of these options modern producers choose would accompany those choices which completely influence the style the audience concern the production. Peter Brook’s production of ‘Titus Andronicus’ in 1955 have begun the revitalization (Dessen, 1992: p.50). The production was much formalized and Brook’s technique involved representing an injury using a scarlet red ribbon for the ‘Lavinia’ character. The scarlet red ribbons became a characteristic for ‘Lavinia’ as they onslaught from her injuries as she returns, dismembered, raped and led by her culprit, Demetrius and Chiron. Brook also used music to additionally formalize the production particularly scenes including ‘Lavinia’ (White, 1998: p.184). Its formalized of ‘Titus Andronicus’ style has succeeded although certain critics found error using the authorizations occupied as Brook wanted to formalize the brutality while nobody challenges that audiences had radical responses to the performances (White, 1998: p.184). Some critics think it reduces the plot’s actuality. Nevertheless, modern producers had to make certain vital changes to the production. However, Deborah Warner’s production of ‘Titus Andronicus’ in 1987 is one of the several to do the production in its whole (Dessen, 1992: p.51). The style was sensitive as it was not formalized and not very gruesome. Warner’s staging recognized the circumstance’s actuality to continue for the audience but furthermore approved the communication to support the scene revulsion (Dessen, 1992: p.71). The desolated ‘Lavinia’ staging is just one of numerous brutal scenes of the production and the amputation of ‘Titus’ hand as well as the staging of ‘Titus’s sons’ head are also instants where producers have to make important results because according to Shakespeare’s stage directions, the hand and heads must show on stage. Formalized and practical ways are not the single approaches to direct the horrific scenes and other modern producers preferred to hide the blood and violence. Certain modern producers may also want to let the audience to additionally occupy and trusts the creativity of what could likely be concealing the revulsion realism. The production, ‘Titus Andronicus’ involves and amuses people but also continues to recap them that the violence on stage is just a reflection to the revulsions perpetrated in actuality.

The script of ‘Titus Andronicus’ suggests strong influences. The script of the play is very long and the reason for that is because Shakespeare wanted to create a vision in the audience’s mind. It also proposes a diplomatic script because the performance manifests the common diplomatic brutality increase (Dessen, 1992: p.115). During the 20th Century, most producers of the production have also seen the script modifying the mantras and descriptions that arouses the World War 2 actions referencing to Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini whereas additional producers have envisioned across the performance as they did in majority of Shakespeare’s performances (Vienne-Guerrin and Hatchuel, 2009: p.168). Nevertheless, ‘Titus Andronicus’ has presented a helpful script for modern producers to reveal to their audience. It is believed what people have learned from the script is that audience could be driven to see the production for the exact explanation they are driven to see any brutality style happening and it establishes an exceptional relation with the brutality and it is not easy regarding the consequences. By reading the script, it is supposable that audience will develop involvement in traditions that affect them to have tremendous substantial and emotional responses. The script is also complicated as Shakespeare normally lets the audience to get to know his characters and start to comprehend their agony additionally challenges the predicament contemporary audience feel the cruelty in the production and employ brutality as performance (Burton, 1958: p.31), (Brown, 1999: p.167). It could additionally be clarified when the cruelty viewed in revenge performances is dreadful and that is why it compels people in the contemporary age to not simply believe the revenge productions part but the brutality as well. According to editor ‘J.C. Maxwell’, the stagings of the production are not complex and it is not a production that will be broadly understood but actors finds it difficult as they have to direct the complex stagings, adaptation, plot and the script with style (Dickson, 2009: p.370). They are not accepted by the complication and alternatively, they unavoidably provide its hinted existence and career to its ending. The violence staging is constantly questionable because it is dangerous and it entrusts into tragedy (Richmond, 2002: p.462). The plot is also extremely complicated as the verse holds an insufficient similarity to future plays successes.

Titus Andronicus has also had its own film versions. Jane Howell’s version is respectful to an error and it avoids any odd content influence and explanations. Its best creative styles are to rearrange two scenes direction that is not mainly basic as the variation creates broad logic. The production design highlights death throughout but it is arguably deeply critical of the content. The production limit is formalized and relaxed and the performance is normally tedious. The style is also evidently articulated.

By now I believe I have discussed the original staging conditions of ‘Titus Andronicus’ and the challenges modern producers have met. I believe that despite how the play has turned out, it has some impact in the modern world. Modern producers would have to work around the idea of the production as opposed to how it was done historically. Things have changed as technology and new ideas developed. I also believe that the stagings in the Elizabethan times have had some influence on modern producers.

Brown, John Russell. New Sites for Shakespeare Theatre, the Audience, and Asia. London: Routledge, 1999. Print.

Brusberg-Kiermeier, Stefani, and Jörg Helbig. Shakespeare in the Media: From the Globe Theatre to the World Wide Web. Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang, 1992. Print.

Burton, H. M., and Richard G. Robinson. Shakespeare and His Plays. New York: Roy, 1958. Print.

Dessen, Alan C. Titus Andronicus. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1992. Print.

Dickson, Andrew. The Rough Guide to Shakespeare. London: Rough Guides, 2009. Print.

Dobson, Michael, and Stanley Wells. The Oxford Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. Print.

Gurr, Andrew, and Mariko Ichikawa. Staging in Shakespeare's Theatres. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.

Gurnham, David. Memory, Imagination, Justice: Intersections of Law and Literature. Farnham, England: Ashgate Pub., 2009. Print.

Hatchuel, Sarah, and Nathalie Vienne-Guerrin. Shakespeare on Screen the Roman Plays. Mont-Saint-Aignan: Publications Des Universités De Rouen Et Du Havre, 2009. Print.

Maguire, Laurie E. Studying Shakespeare: A Guide to the Plays. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print.

Richmond, Hugh M. Shakespeare's Theatre: A Dictionary of His Stage Context. London: Continuum, 2002. Print.

Shakespeare, William, and Stanley Wells. The Oxford Shakespeare. Oxford: Clarendon, 2008. Print.

Smith, Molly Easo. Spectacles of Torment in Titus Andronicus. N.p.: n.p., 1996. Print.

White, Martin. Reissance Drama in Action: An Introduction to Aspects of Theatre Practice and Performance. N.p.: n.p., 1998. Print.