Podcasts

  • S2 E1: With... Jenny Mitchell - Welcome back to Behind the Glass with this early-release first episode of series 2 ! Sam and new co-host Connie talk to prize-winning poet Jenny Mitchell...
    2 months ago

Sunday, June 03, 2007

Sunday, June 03, 2007 4:50 pm by Cristina in , , , ,    2 comments
The livejournal community Marshall Lancaster treats us to a lengthy review of the current stage production of Wuthering Heights in York, which runs until June 23.
The story it’s self [sic] is clever adaptation of the novel. The character of Mr. Lockwood (the narrator) has been completely removed and instead the actors would often pause, while one of them would act as a narrator to move the story on. This worked very well as it meant that things could be explained in a few words rather than having to waste time acting them out. Also, it helped to move the chronology on, as there were times when a few years would past, before the actors would take on their characters again to pick the story up.
The play included some music, of which the lyrics which I was pleased to discover were from Emily Bronte’s poems. The programme describes their use best by saying it gives Emily Bronte "a voice on stage". And yes, we do get to hear Marshall sing at various points in the play. He has a fair singing voice, but mostly he sang in duets or in a group with the other actors.
There were only five actors in the whole play and so this meant that most of them, except Joel Fry who played Heathcliffe [sic], had to switch characters at various points during the play. They were aided when doing this by slight changes of costumes. The costumes themselves were very simple browns and neutral colours that would have fitted into the time period, for example Marshall wore simple shirt and a waistcoat over his trousers. When they changed characters they then could simply add an apron or a little jacket over the top and become someone else. (clarey_h)
And topic of the reading habits of men has returned with a vengeance. Yesterday, as you'll remember, it was featured in The New York Times. Today the subject is brought up in The Telegraph. Apparently men don't read books written by women, although this blog serves as witness that this is not always the case.
Proof of this comes from various surveys. Over the last couple of years, for instance, academics Lisa Jardine and Annie Watkins have been asking men and women to name their "watershed" books, the works that changed the way they felt about life.
The women's list includes plenty of titles by men: Lord of the Rings, Catcher in the Rye and Catch-22 all get a name check, alongside "female" titles such as Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights and Pride and Prejudice.
Contrast this with the male list: as with women, men like Tolkien and Salinger; men also like Camus and Orwell. What men don't like are books written by people who wear skirts: only one book by a woman made it into the male list, Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird. And some have suggested Lee's book only found itself on the roster because the men believed, thanks to her ambiguous name, that Lee was a chap. (Sean Thomas)
Ambaz looks at some of the men who have played Rochester on screen. Her favourite? Toby Stephens.

Salomes Bücher reviews Jane Eyre in German. And the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia reviews a book in Catalan called L'alè del búfal a l'hivern by Neus Canyelles. The main character, Gwen Rees, is based on Jean Rhys.

Categories: , , , ,

2 comments:

  1. I thought this comment by the author of the NY Times piece was interesting:

    "But if my son’s experience held true, perhaps it was merely a case of my being too young to appreciate Hardy’s genius when first exposed to it."

    Perhaps, especially with boys, these works are being forced fed at too young at age. It takes some life experience to appreciate reading these works and to have empathy with the characters. I started to read authors like the Brontes and the other Victorians when I was in my early 20s during graduate school. My motivation was to expand my horizons and I had a liking for the 19th century. I am not sure what would have happened if I was forced say to read Jane Eyre in high school. The whole academic exercise of finding symbolism and other types of literary analysis might have turned me off. At such a young age, I would have not appreciated the beautiful prose Charlotte uses to describe the scenery as Jane goes for her walk where she meets Mr. Rochester for the first time. But when I did read it I was a little older and as part of the maturation process I started to appreciate the beauty of the twilight in winter and those words hit right at my soul. I was saying to myself Jane's feelings are on par with what I feel in a similar environment.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I know what you mean in a way. Imposing reads is not my favourite plan either, and it often ends up the wrong way, scaring children away from books.

    I do think, however, that part of the key lies in how they are approached by the teachers AND parents. Perhaps they're not exactly suitable for certain ages, but there comes a point when you have to take the leap and read something that is not so easy, something that requires some effort on your part.

    I don't think anyone expects teenagers to grasp the layers or to fully appreciate Charlotte's prose. This is just a first approach to books that are milestones, not just of literature, but of storytelling.

    Perhaps they will rediscover them years afterwards, as we constantly see people doing.

    ReplyDelete