Hi Doc, I think you're right about Coriolanus; he doesn't fit with Aristotle any more than he fits with Rome or his own family. And I think that makes him off-putting, to Romans as well as critics. We don't know what to do with him, any more than the Romans do. I think the impulse, understandably, has been to pressure the play to be a touch allegorical, which means that it is either conservative (deriding the fickle plebeians) or leftist (scorning the arrogant patricians). What I saw at Winedale that night was a performance that didn't pressure the play in either direction. And what emerged, for me, was a kind of emotional malice coming from figures like his mother, and the blond guy who was either Sicinius or Brutus; I'm not sure, but he did this wonderfully, and most dangerously from Aufidius, who seems to always dodge a fair and conclusive fight with his rival. In this landscape of emotional coldness, I read the (relatively) silent Virgilia and the irascible and profoundly unlikable Coriolanus to emerge as warm, because in the land of the emotionally dead, those with half a heart become sympathetic. For me this became particularly apparent when Coriolanus embraced Aufidius, putting his hand on the back of his neck. It was almost a moment of intimacy (which, very subtly, draws on what many critics read as a homoerotic undercurrent). And it was also tragically asymmetrical. Coriolanus thinks that the intimacy creates a permanent bond, but of course, for Aufidius it is only a provisional one. Michael Quoting James Ayres <jayres@cvctx.com>: > Well, Mike, Mike, and Jerald. Actually many scholars don't think > the play is at all interesting but in fact something of a puzzle > that every generation of directors, actors, and critics must > attempt to solve. Yes, for Eliot, it might have been a greater > "tragic" achievement than Hamlet. For the like of me, I could never > figure that out. Coriolanus does not measure up well with his > (well, not actually his, but borrowed) "objective correlative" > notion either. He did not like Hamlet, for sure. When I met him > in '57 in Gregory Gym, I should have asked why. > > I must confess that I really never liked the play. That is why my > graduate director, John Harold Wilson, demanded that I explore its > dramatic history in my dissertation. For me the play has problems. > I see nothing "heroic" or "tragic" in the central figure. The > text does not really give us too much of a chance to get inside > him. Yes, he is a war hero, swift with sword, and very proud > indeed. Like Hotspur, he is himself on the battlefield, but > comfortable nowhere else. I just do not see dimensions in the man, > tragic or otherwise. He is more talked about than talking. He > seems to me a subject, or perhaps a (threatening?) symbol, for > discussion, and I find myself waiting for him to rise above all of > that. But he does not. Scholars have listed, as they will, his > "tragic flaw" as "pride." In the play, he is described as "too > noble for the world," One critic commented that he was "more > sinned against than sinning," inviting an absurd comparison with > Lear. > > I was amused by the Times' notion that he relates poorly to his > country's commoners. "Poorly"? He despises them. They are stupid. > For that matter, he relates "poorly" to just about everyone he > encounters. And everyone seems to have difficulty communicating with > him. Even mom, who (almost alone?) carries the Roman values. His > wife is described as a "sweet silence"? Hmmmm. > > On one occasion, I told Professor Wilson that I thought that > Coriolanus was one of those Pirandello folks searching for an > author, or a play, or a life. > He shook his head and tried to smile. For me, he is a helpless, > solitary, figure whose only distinction is killing people. Aufidius > is the same. That is what they share. > > And yes, director's "notes" for performances seem to focus on the > "relevant political" interest in the play. While it is rather clear > that whoever wrote this play wanted us to hear the conflicting > voices of the patricians, tribunes, and commoners (scenes often > played for comedy, alas), I still wonder where it all ends up. > Coriolanus never really runs "for" office. In fact, he runs "from" > it. Granted, that like most candidates, he is not well-suited for > political office. And why should he be running for consul when > the country is beset by an intruding enemy which he can tackle more > handily on foot in the battlefield than in office? And as well, a > deteriorating internal class struggle. And then there's mom. > > I have always felt that mom was the strongest voice in the play, > should be. She is Rome. > > Going on too long, I know, but have to say finally that I think the > play is not tragedy but irony, presenting the audience with > characters struggling unsuccessfully for meaning, order, for > certainty. Certainly, Coriolanus' last, Posthumus-like, sequences, > illustrate that and as well the final moment which startles us with > an act of murder followed by an heroic burial. Sorry, but I cannot > find anyone valuable in this play. > > The Winedale performance I saw was the same one you attended, > Michael. You wrote that it was an "emotional" experience. I'd like > to hear the why and where of it in specific terms. Apparently, I > missed some things. I did see some very enthusiastic kids > struggling independently with the characterization, conflict, and > language with a tough assignment. Some really super great line > deliveries. But not an end. For me, alas, it is still the puzzle > I addressed in 1963. > > > Cheers, > > Doc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 2012, at 10:57 AM, saengerm@southwestern.edu wrote: > >> Oh, I think that's accurate. Most scholars would call the play >> interesting, but I haven't heard it heralded very much. That said, >> I think performance can make a strong case for looking at the play >> differently. From what I understand, past performances have >> tended to make the play read politically--the recent Fiennes >> version does this very strongly. What struck me as really >> interesting about the Winedale production is that it really didn't >> come off as a political play, for me, but more of an emotional >> one. That surprised me, in a good way, and not just because our >> world already has an excess of politically inflected discourse. I >> also think the play emerges really powerfully on emotional terms. >> >> Mike >> >> Quoting Mike Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.com>: >> >>> I'm astonished to see the New York Times declare that "Coriolanus" >>> is not a >>> heralded play. It's not a *popular* play, but this is hardly the >>> same thing. >>> >>> --Mike >>> >>> ik >>> >>> On Friday, August 3, 2012, wrote: >>> >>>> Just my humble opinion, but the performance of Coriolanus is >>>> really moving >>>> and wonderfully done. I had very high hopes, and I wasn't >>>> disappointed at >>>> all. >>>> >>>> This is a great play if you have the opportunity to see it. >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> Quoting Jerald Head <jlhead1952@gmail.com>: >>>> >>>> Nice blurb NYTimes today about upcoming show "Coriolanus" >>>>> >>>>> "The actors participating in the University of Texas?s Shakespeare at >>>>> Winedale summer workshop will perform ?Coriolanus? for the first time in >>>>> its 42-year history. Though it is not a heralded play, this >>>>> political drama >>>>> was adapted for the screen last year, with Ralph Fiennes and >>>>> Gerard Butler, >>>>> and T. S. Eliot called it a greater tragic achievement than ? Hamlet.? >>>>> >>>>> The story follows a mighty Roman warrior whose one obstacle to office is >>>>> how poorly he relates to his country?s commoners. In this election, no >>>>> matter whom you tag as Coriolanus, the same point comes across: no >>>>> candidate is perfect." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPad >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> Winedale-l mailing list >>>> Winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/winedale-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/winedale-l >>>> > >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Winedale-l mailing list >> Winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/winedale-l >> > > _______________________________________________ Winedale-l mailing list Winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/winedale-l