I managed into a public lecture today given by Patrick Spottiswoode (director of Globe Education). His topic was concerned with Shakespeare's Globe and how the space/ shape influences performance and the actor -audience relationship. I confess I haven't seen it, but it is a space that has intrigued me for a number of years since church planting and being concerned about space and worship and congregational matters.
The theatre we were in was typically for a large lecture. He described it as a 'confrontational space in which we awaited knowledge to be imparted and given to us. It is a typical space and familiar in most buildings, but he turned it on its head and spoke of how the theatre Shakespeare knew at the Globe was more a place for seminar, where ideas were thrown out for the audience to consider. The round-ish (20 sided building) offered more of a 'hug' and an intimacy in ;'gathering round'.. as he said 'we do not gather square!' Here then you see the audience and talk to them as part of the drama on stage. It also has significant open air light. Today he somewhat lamented the modern theatre and its turning off lights. He caricatured this to going to be as a child and turning the lights out to go to sleep, or to quietening a parrot that is noisey, you cover it with a blanket. In a fashion this is what we have done to audiences. At the Globe, actors and audience share the same light, there is an interface that allows for opportunities of 'improvised' engagement in ways that bring the text to life. Indeed, he spoke of the energy that occurs between the two and how thre actors in turn are energised as the audience is engaged in the drama. It is a two-way interaction.He further shared how we often speak of 'going to SEE' a movie, a play eyc. In Shakespeare's Globe you paid to see, but most of all the HEARING places as the language and metre of the drama play around with the words/sounds.
He also made comment on the historical context. Theatre and actors were of low social status on the margins of society. They were margineli those small extra notes in the margins of some books which added some commentarytot the central text. However, he suggested that rather than such a simple reading it was more that the city was worried about the theatre as graffitti. Theatre was no wholly respectable and its commentary was forced to the marghins/suburbs among the brothels.
This is a brief summary of what was a very entertaining and engaging lecture. It was in itself 'rough theatre' and he is a very gifted communicator. Plenty food for thought.
