Shakespeare in the Theatre — Key Ideas to Explore

(0 User reviews)   175
Poel, William, 1852-1934 Project Gutenberg 2011 Not confirmed
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 -- Stage history; Theater -- England Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 71,722
Reading time 312 min
Text sections 8

The source record for Shakespeare in the Theatre — Key Ideas to Explore measures this digital text at 71,722 words, 5 hr 12 min estimated reading time, and 8 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 26.6 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 -- Stage history,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

William Poel argues that Shakespeare's plays are best understood through the Elizabethan stage for which they were written, critiquing modern editorial and acting conventions with specific examples from The Merchant of Venice and Romeo and Juliet.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.7/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

Shakespeare was thinking of Burbage's unusual ability when he wrote the following lines:

"The eyes of men After a well-grac'd actor leaves the stage Are idly bent on him that enters next, Thinking his prattle to be tedious."

Dick Robinson was an actor of women's parts. Ben Jonson has left on record that he could dress better than forty women, and, in the disguise of a lawyer's wife, he could convulse a supper party with merriment. Acting so realistic as his stirred the resentment of the Puritans. Stephen Gosson writes: "Which way, I beseech you, shall they be excused that put on, not the apparel only, but the gate, the gestures, the voice, the passions of a woman." Nathan Field was the son of a minister, who was one of the earliest as well as one of the bitterest enemies of theatrical performances. While one of the Royal Chapel boys, Field distinguished himself in Ben Jonson's comedy, "Cynthia's Revels," acted entirely by children. Afterwards Field became a member of Shakespeare's company, and, like him, an author. When Burbage died, Field was his successor in the part of the Moor. It is said that as he was naturally of a jealous disposition, the character suited him, and his impersonation of it became famed as "the true Othello of the poet." Many particulars have come down to us of the clown, Kemp. His popularity with his audiences cannot be disputed. "Clowns," writes a dramatic author in 1597, "have been thrust into plays by the head and shoulders ever since Kemp could make a scurvy face.... If thou canst but draw thy mouth awry, lay thy leg over thy staff, saw a piece of cheese asunder with thy dagger, lap up drink on the earth, I warrant thee they'll all laugh mightily." It was by tricks such as these that Kemp won the good opinion "of the understanding gentlemen of the ground"; but Shakespeare was not in favour of fooling. Kemp, moreover, loved to extemporize, and Shakespeare wished to abolish a custom fatal to dramatic unity. He preferred to write the clown's part himself, and desired that no more should be spoken than was set down by the author. The interference with the clown's privilege, openly advocated by Shakespeare in a well-known passage of "Hamlet," probably led to Kemp's temporary retirement from the company. Kemp loved notoriety and money. His morris dance to Norwich and journeys to France and Italy were but gambling speculations, he undertaking to be back in a certain time, and laying wagers with large odds in his favour to that effect.

The prosperity of the actor caused many to adopt the calling. His vocation, we are told, was the most excellent one in the world for money, and therefore players grew as plentifully "as spawn of frogs in March." It was open to the actor to buy shares in his theatre, and he could, by becoming a shareholder, attain the position of owner, and would, in Shakespeare's theatre, as one of the King's players, be provided from the royal wardrobe "with a cloak of bastard-scarlet and crimson velvet for the cape." He could also term himself "gentleman," a rank he was allowed to assume, and which he was very glad to adopt in defiance of the enemies of theatrical performances, who constantly taunted him, in the words of the old statute, with being "a rogue and a vagabond." The popularity of the stage as a profession excited the envy of scholars and lawyers. They taunted the actor with his vanity in believing that his fame would descend to posterity. They blamed the public for affording these "glorious vagabonds" means to ride through the "gazing streets" in satin clothes attended by their pages, and for enabling those who had done no more than "mouth words that better wits had framed" to purchase lands and possess country houses. The actor retaliated by deriding the scholar's poverty and ridiculing the lawyer's use of bad Latin. They contended that it was better "to make a fool of the world than to be fooled of the world as you scholars are." There is an anecdote related of Nathan Field which shows that actors did not underrate their own importance.

William Poel opens this collection of essays by insisting that Shakespeare's dramatic art is inseparable from the physical theatre of his time. He dismisses the common assumption that the playwright found the Elizabethan playhouse inadequate, calling it a theory unsupported by serious inquiry. Instead, Poel contends that modern readers and critics, shaped by printed editions and picture-stage productions, have lost sight of how the original staging shaped the plays' meaning and effect.

The Elizabethan Stage as Dramatic Key

Poel's central claim is that the Elizabethan playhouse was not a limitation but a deliberate artistic framework. He notes that the interdependence of Shakespeare's dramatic art with the form of theatre for which he wrote is seldom emphasized. The ordinary reader and everyday critic lack historic knowledge of the playhouse, and bias against past methods bars serious inquiry. Poel observes that those who have attempted a conjoint study have approached it like a Chinese puzzle, reading modern editions and seeing plays on the picture-stage, then concluding the dramatist found his theatre inadequate. He counters with the extreme difficulty of proving that theory, suggesting instead that the plays were crafted for a specific performance environment that modern productions ignore.

Shylock's Exit: A Case for Vigour

In his analysis of The Merchant of Venice, Poel targets the traditional staging of Shylock's exit after the trial scene. He argues that the dramatist intended more vigour and earnestness from all characters, and more vehemence from Shylock. The conventional business of Shylock leaving with a martyr's air produces a tragic climax where none is wanted. Poel points to the Italian version of the story, where the Jew tears the bond in a great rage, and notes that Shylock's words—'Why, then the devil give him good of it! I'll stay no longer question'—are exactly suited to tearing up the bond. Only by Shylock rushing off in a rage can the audience be greatly pleased and ready for Portia's further doings. Poel also defends the often-omitted second scene of that act, arguing it shows how Nerissa gets Gratiano's ring and offers excellent business for her.

Sound and Silence in the Final Act

Poel observes that the last act of The Merchant of Venice is the shortest fifth act in the Globe edition. If deficient in action, Shakespeare gives it another interest through the wealth and music of its poetry, a device he used more than once to strengthen undramatic material. Poel highlights Shakespeare's knowledge of the value of sound in dramatic effect: Launcelot's halloas interrupt the whispering lovers and profane the stillness of the night, similar to the nurse's calls in the balcony scene of Romeo and Juliet. The music and the tucket sound also contribute, while the picture brought to the imagination by allusion to the light burning in Portia's hall gives reality to the scene.

From Brooke to Shakespeare: The Prologue's Craft

Poel juxtaposes the arguments of Arthur Brooke's poem and William Painter's prose version of the Romeo and Juliet story with Shakespeare's Prologue. Brooke's summary runs: 'Loue hath inflamed twayne by sodayn sight… They wed in shrift… Yong Romeus clymes fayre Iuliets bower by night… By Tybalts rage… He payeth death to Tybalt… A banisht man… New mariage is offred… She drinkes a drinke… They bury her… Her husband heares… He drinkes his bane. And she with Romeus knyfe… she sleath.' Painter's title similarly catalogues events. In contrast, Shakespeare's Prologue condenses the story into fourteen lines, focusing on the feud, the star-crossed lovers, and their misadventured overthrow. Poel's juxtaposition highlights how Shakespeare transformed a narrative summary into a dramatic frame, emphasizing fate and pity over mere plot.

Poel's essays are best read as a practitioner's challenge to received stage tradition. He does not offer a complete theory of Shakespearean performance, but his specific critiques—of Shylock's exit, of omitted scenes, of sound effects—invite readers to question how modern productions might obscure the playwright's original intentions. The excerpts suggest a methodical, evidence-based approach grounded in textual and historical detail.

The rain kept time with Poel’s insistence on the bare Elizabethan stage, stripping away our modern fuss. Somehow, that led me to a small, dog-eared copy of Little Dramas for Primary Grades — Story, Setting & Ideas later that afternoon. Its simple staging felt like a quiet echo of his argument, a gentle reminder that imagination fills the empty space best.

There are no reviews for this eBook.

0
0 out of 5 (0 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

Your personal reading reflection

Build a private reading journal entry for this title.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

Where are you in your reading?

2

Was reading this book enjoyable?

3

How likely are you to recommend this book?

4

What was the reading difficulty like?

Related eBooks