On the Directors Cut

The adaptation provided a lot of insight into the analysis of the play. I had previously thought there was a clear preference of the country over the city but the adaptation reminded me that there was more duality in the play. I wasn’t aware how much analysis is required of adaptations, before but now it makes sense that there would be because you have to give justice to Shakespeare’s play whilst putting your own interpretation into it. Hearing performers and directors discuss the play made me consider the audiences role more. Plays I think require more attention to pleasing the audience than literature, because you have to cater to a wider audience and they’re geared more for entertainment than books. The audience also has to sit through a play where as a book can be picked up or put down when ever.

I thought Naomi Frederick made some interesting comments about how her role as Rosalind influenced the perception of Orlando. She said that if she wasn’t a believable boy then Orlando would come off as stupid for believing it. This just shows a lot about the interconnectedness of actors, if one can’t deliver and make the audience believe that character then everyone they interact with wont look believable. This goes to show how difficult it is to cast a play well. I thought Naomi Frederick helped expand on some the theme of the relationship between gender and identity. Naomi Frederick described her change in gender as “seductive” but it was also the hardest part of the role. I think this related to Rosalind a lot. Because Rosalind was free to explore other aspects of her own identity as well as teach Orlando about love, but she often struggled to maintain a masculine identity. Her comments about the globe it self shows the significance of the audience and its interaction with the play. The audience changes the entire feeling of the play and makes it become more alive. The globe theater reflects how Shakespeare likes to acknowledge the audience in the play.