Uploader Comments (stratfordfestival)
All Comments (11)
-
@titusact4scene2 Interesting point
-
This show was a masterpiece. Never has a show made me want to cry, laugh and vomit at the same time. One of the best shows of the season!
-
(2) This "lashing back" business,this" I'm just a poor moor trying to make it in a Roman world" interior dialogue is just wrong and unnecessary.Recognition of his intelligence/self-worth was a given,not a source of internal conflict.Shakespeare gives you his interior dialogue via the asides.This was a superior man brought down by fate, not Roman "oppression".He gambled and lost ( caught by a Goth). This is how Shakespeare structured the narrative.
-
(1)Shakespeare was more psychologically astute than the producers of this play.Your interior dialogue for Aaron was something from a stock ghetto character from "LAW and ORDER", not the Bard.Aaron isn't a Roman Bigger Thomas.No man who fucks a Queen,dominates her and her vicious sons,tricks a Roman general into severing his hand,murder's the Queen's nurse on the fly and gives an almost Zarathustrian defiant speech on the gallows, does these things through feelings of inferiority and self-pity!
(1)"slasher flick".."Tarantino" come on! These are regurgitated buzz words from some students of a Prof. Jonathan Bate(University of Liverpool) referred to in an Alan A Stone review of Julie Taymor's TITUS.Is this your idea of "research"?Damn!Look there is nothing in TA to suggest that Aaron was some kind of "handy man" to Tamora.If any thing their relationship was more like the that between Margaret and The Earl of Suffolk(Henry the 6th).
titusact4scene2 6 months ago
@titusact4scene2 If there is nothing in TA to suggest Aaron was Tamora's "handy man" how would you explain him setting up the fall of Titus' sons and eventual rape of Lavinia? It is the handy work of Aaron to get revenge on those that have done wrong to his lover.
When introducing a play that rarely performed and generally unknown to many you need to use words that give a general idea of the show. So Tarantino and slasher flick were used and are great ways to describe the show.
stratfordfestival 6 months ago
I can tell just by the interview that this production of Titus Andronicus will suck.This guy has got Aaron the Moor all wrong! Aaron wasn't a fucking victim,trying to "stick it to the man".Aaron was the MAN.He is what Nietzsche called The Great Blond Beast. Dion Johnstone seems to be parroting the opinions of those who would marginalize this masterpiece(yeah I said it,MASTERPIECE!).Johnstone is problably too dumb to play a believable Aaron.
titusact4scene2 6 months ago
@titusact4scene2 that's too bad that you have decided to make a rash judgment on Titus Andronicus based on this interview and your personal opinion on the show. We are all welcome to have our own interpretation of a character. This production has been praised by critics as well as everyone else that has left us feedback on the show.
I agree that Titus is a masterpiece. The actors in this cast, take their parts seriously and do a great deal of research on their character and the time period.
stratfordfestival 6 months ago
@stratfordfestival (2) Aaron is the force of Titus Andronicus,not some rouge helper.Your use of the iconographic prostrated black man in chain kinda signals your vision of the play.This is more than just interpretation.This is political/social orthodoxy.Well,like they say "art is propaganda".Congratulations Dion Johnstone sure is well spoken.
titusact4scene2 6 months ago
@titusact4scene2 it's not propaganda or political/social orthodoxy it's the way things were during the period of the show. This would be one example of research helping to inform a production.
stratfordfestival 6 months ago