Rome Not Redux
Wednesday, May 14th by scott malia
A new review of the “Roman Repertory” of Shakespeare’s plays (Julius Caesar and Antony & Cleopatra) used the “T” word again: traditional. The two productions are being presented as a kind of larger work, and this particular reviewer was relieved that the plays were presented in togas with relatively little overt theatricality or conceptual intrusion. In the process, said writer dropped a diss on the recent modern-dress Broadway production of Julius Caesar starring a certain Oscar-winning movie star.
So, it seems that old is the new new. To be fair, this reviewer was in no way a fuddy-duddy; he acknowledged that he’s loved Shakespearean productions both overtly conceptual and not. Still, there was a sense that he was relieved that someone let the plays do most of the talking. While the sets, costumes and other design elements were far from ordinary, they were clearly geared towards period representation.
In a way, I can see where the reviewer is coming from. It seems that the distinction he is making is the concept for the sake of concept is rarely successful. There are tons of Shakespeare productions and some clearly bear the mark of trying too hard to be different. What’s wrong with that is an inherent mistrust of the plays themselves. If a director and her team find something new in the play, great; however, they can do that whether they set the play in Ancient Rome or three thousand years in the future.
