Macbeth, Royal Shakespeare Company, directed by Wils Wilson (2023).
On Friday we saw Macbeth at the RSC (the Wils Wilson production with a completely Scottish cast). I liked some things about it and disliked others: it was a mixed bag, but an enjoyable evening overall. I should say that Duncan and Banquo were played by women (Therese Bradley and Anna Russell-Martin, respectively) and the original Thane of Cawdor, we were led to understand, was female. This problematised several things about Macbeth including his courage on the battlefield (and, as Mark Lawson has pointed out, in a world where women could seize power, why would Lady Macbeth need to push her husband towards kingship?)
These annoyances aside, the witches were gratifyingly disturbing (one actor was substituted and I don’t have her name but the other two were Amber Sylvia Edwards and Dylan Read). They emerged from what looked like boils that bubbled up on the stage. Atmospheric music: tubas, a trombone, sousaphone, bagpipes etc., combined with murmurings of Scottish Gaelic made for a disturbing soundscape. Curiously, the “Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow” speech was interrupted and Reuben Joseph had to start it again, though his glaring was so terrifying as to seem totally in character. I couldn’t quite see what happened, but the groundlings must have been misbehaving.
You might also enjoy: Kenneth Branagh’s King Lear | What is the source of Macbeth’s evil?
Left at the interval early last month. A medical emergency had necessitated am impromptu earlier interval with the scheduled one looming. We couldn’t face going back to yet another RSC display of incomprehensible spoken delivery.
Thanks Chris – yes, there has been some patchy stuff there of late. I don’t like them changing the text (“Yet who would have thought the old woman to have had so much blood in her?”) Ridiculous and spoils the metre, but this is an unfashionable opinion.
So you only understand women as gender and not as characters. In the original production would Lady MacBeth as played by a man mean that she wasn’t a female character?
I think that wilfully misunderstands what I am saying. But if they are serious about the gender politics, why not have Macbeth played by a woman and Lady Macbeth played by a man? Why only change the minor characters?
Apparently you misunderstand quite a bit.
Shakespeare’s text refers to Lady Macbeth as “Lady”; and throughout she is referred to as “hostess” , “Queen” etc, and she refers to herself as a woman.
In Shakespeare’s original production, one of the boy players would have played her dresses as a woman.
Nowhere in Annette’s comment is she making a distinction between gender and character; just that some of the male characters have been switched to female characters so that female actresses can play them as females.
Which involves taking a liberty with the text that upsets the meter, and apparently, you, should someone deign to suggest that it doesn’t work
My comment above was in response to Kato’s, in case that wasn’t clear…
Thanks for your comment Joe.