Is a Shakespearean actor better than another actor? We do
tend to elevate Shakespearean actors, put them on a pedestal. When Patrick
Stewart was cast as jean Luc Picard on Star Trek The Next generation the
announcement was always prefaced: “ . . . Shakespearean actor, Patrick Stewart
. . . “ You often hear of certain actors referred to that way and we are
supposed to be impressed. But should we be? Is being a Shakespearean actor make
you a better actor that anybody else?
Shakespeare was a great writer. He wrote wonderful lines of
dialogue. Maybe actors just sound better, smarter, cleverer when his word come
out of their mouths. Perhaps, but isn’t there a technique to Shakespearean
acting? Don’t you have to know about iambic pentameter and all that? You don’t
just spew the words forth and expect to sound brilliant. True, it is a little
different when acting in a Shakespearean play. Actors have to recognize a
rhythm to the speech. There are some tips and tricks to be learned, but overall,
it is still acting. The fundamentals of acting apply to Shakespearean acting.
Consider the following very partial list of characters
played by actors who had early Shakespearean roles:
Gandalf (Ian McKlellan)
Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart)
Professor Snape (Alan Rickman)
Darth Vader (James Earl Jones)
Ash in Alien (Ian Holm)
Captain Von Trapp (Christopher Plummer)
Special Agent Cooper (Kyle MacLaghlin)
The Queen (Helen Mirren)
Dr. Who (William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Tom Baker, Paul
McGann, David Tennant, Jodie Whittaker)
Ghandi (Ben Kingsley)
M (Judi Dench)
Loki (Tom Hiddleston)
Looking at this diverse list, some people would say, “see, so
a Shakespearean actor can do anything.” I would say, no. A good
Shakespearean actor can do anything. A mediocre Shakespearean actor is a
mediocre actor in whatever part s/he plays.
I am a fan of Shakespeare and I love when I get the
opportunity to put on a Shakespearean role, but that does not make me special. I
am only as good (or bad) a Shakespeare actor as I am an actor. Acting is
acting. Playing a part is playing a part.
I have seen actors making mistakes doing Shakespeare. It may well be because they are not a very strong actor to begin with. But it may also be due to lack of preparation. It is important to learn what all those words you are saying actually mean. Ignoring the natural cadence and rhythm of the speech can be a mistake too. You don’t want to be a slave to the rhythm, but you do need to recognize it is there. A good actor will put in the work. Mediocre actors tend to get weeded out of Shakespeare plays because they don’t put in the necessary work, so in that sense you could say the Shakespearean actor tends to be better. It is like natural selection, survival of the fittest, or in this case, survival of those willing to do the preparation (that's not to say that an actor who has never played Shakespeare can't be a great actor).
So perhaps a Shakespearean actor tends to be a better actor
by choice. In any event, watching a good Shakespearean actor inhabiting a juicy
part is a thing of beauty.
Comments
Post a Comment