Pages

Sunday, September 28, 2008

CLASH OF THE ARCHETYPES


Race for President Builds Characters

Once again, we're treated to not just a campaign but a collision of myths.

By Todd Gitlin
September 28, 2008, Los Angeles Times

This election campaign is about more than its issues, slogans, proposals, strategies, tactics, attacks or counterattacks. Like most presidential elections, it represents a collision of myths. Every four years, various versions of America wrestle with one another, and through this combat, the nation inspects itself, turns itself over and over, striving to choose not only how it wants to be led but what it wants to affirm, how it wants to be known -- really, what it wants to be.

Americans, of course, aren't always focused on these grand stakes; day to day, they see a more down-to-earth campaign -- the stump speeches, the barbs and one-liners, the attack ads. Pettiness consumes the attention of journalists and the prurient interest of the jaded. Sometimes the combat rises to the level of issues and policies. Sometimes it even approximates a rational contest as the candidates try to explain what they think is wrong and what they propose to do about it. Petty or substantive, all these are elements of the surface campaign, which may, in the end, determine who wins and loses but also obscures what is really at stake.

The true campaign is the deep campaign, the subsurface campaign, which concerns not just what the candidates say but who they are and what they represent -- what they symbolize.

In July, Barack Obama took some criticism for saying that "the crowds, the enthusiasm, 200,000 people in Berlin, is not about me at all. It's about America. I have just become a symbol." Some people thought that sounded a bit arrogant, but he was right. It was not a boast, it was a fact. People look at the candidates and project onto them something they value.

The candidates become, in a sense, walking archetypes. To warm to a candidate is to align not just with a person but with a myth, an ideal. Sometimes we say that people prefer the candidate they "feel more comfortable with" or the one they "would like to have a beer with," but to put it that way is to trivialize the deeper truth.

Part of what makes this year's race so volatile -- and so absorbing -- is the range of archetypes it has mobilized. Sen. John McCain is relatively familiar. He is the leathery man of the West, of exactly the sort who has entranced the Republican Party for almost half a century now. It is the role that Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush played before him.

McCain himself invokes Theodore Roosevelt, the Rough Rider who, despite his New York origins, ranched in South Dakota and hunted throughout the West. Those who admire McCain tend to believe that it was men of this sort -- rugged individualists, plain-spoken, straight-talking, self-sufficient men at home in nature (not in our effete cities) -- who settled the West on their own. The myth discounts the immense role of the federal government in conquering the natives, seeing that the railroads were built, adjudicating disputes, arranging for water. No matter: Print the legend. In this image of the Old West, history belongs to the man who takes charge, the warrior in command who knows how to shoot and how to lead others to shoot as well.

To McCain's incarnation of this powerful archetype has been added the sidekick Sarah Palin. Palin mobilizes a powerful and unusual -- powerful partly because it is unusual -- supplementary combination of myths. She is Annie Oakley, the sharpshooter who foolhardy men underestimate at their peril even if she has a penchant for tall tales. But Palin is also Wonder Woman, the super-heroine whose exploits and attractions appeal to both sexes. And she is Aimee Semple McPherson, the onetime revivalist and moralist of the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel. In the imagination of her followers, Palin is some combination of Glamour, Outdoor Life, Playboy and DC Comics.

If the Republican ticket harmonizes with deep mythic currents, the Democrats this year are pioneering, and a bit scrambled, in their mythic significance. Obama is the quintessential outsider -- a "sojourner," the New York Times' David Brooks has called him. He hails from exotic Hawaii, alien Indonesia, elegant Harvard and down-and-dirty Chicago, all at the same time. To his devotees, he is part city-slicker, part man of the world; to his enemies, precisely this combination makes him suspect. Like the Lone Ranger, he rides into town to serve a community in need, but in a surprising twist, this Lone Ranger is closer to the color of Tonto.

Mythically, therefore, Obama is elusive, Protean, a shape-shifter who, when not beloved, arouses suspicion. Perhaps he is that object of envy and derision, a "celebrity," as the McCain campaign suggested, but he's also an egghead. He's the professor -- but one who can sink the shot from beyond the three-point circle. He too has a sidekick, but, if you judge by their resumes, it is as if Robin has chosen Batman. One thing is clear: He is not a man of the ranch. Personifying a welter of archetypes, he thrills some, confounds others and jams circuits. Some people ask, "Who is this guy?"

So that's the clash. McCain, the known quantity, the maverick turned lawman, fiery when called on to fight, an icon of the old known American story of standing tall, holding firm, protecting God's country against the stealthy foe. Obama is the new kid on the block, the immigrant's child, the recruit, fervent but still preternaturally calm, embodying some complicated future that we haven't yet mapped, let alone experienced. He is impure -- the walking, talking melting pot in person. In his person, the next America is still taking shape.

The warrior turned lawman confronts the community organizer turned law professor. The sheriff (who married the heiress) wrestles with the outsider who rode into town and made a place for himself. No wonder this race is thrilling and tense. America is struggling to fasten a name on its soul.

Todd Gitlin, a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, is the author, most recently, of "The Bulldozer and the Big Tent: Blind Republicans, Lame Democrats, and the Recovery of American Ideals."


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

ON WORKING WITH ACTORS - THE SPINE



I posted this video before on the blog as part of a long tribute to Sidney Pollack. Now, as you prepare to work with actors, with Sidney using the terms we've been using for the past 4 weeks, I thought it might mean more.

Also, and surprisingly it offers an example of the teacher/student "in role" method of learning that I use on occasion and that can be a bit disconcerting, just as it was to me, at that time.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Saturday, September 20, 2008

SODERBERGH :: CHE :: IFC


IFC picks up rights to Steven Soderbergh's Che

Back to the drawing board, Soderbergh worked out the kinks in the film and shortened both parts. And, after a more favorable screening at the Toronto Film Festival this week, the film sold its U.S. distribution rights to IFC Films (not Magnolia, as was expected). Che, which stars Benicio Del Toro, will also be screened at the upcoming New York Film Festival.

Jonathan Shering of IFC talked to Variety about the film, saying "Che is nothing less than the film event of the year. By giving us the rise and fall of one of the great icons of history, Steven Soderbergh and Benicio Del Toro...have humanized him and given audiences around the world something that will be discussed for years to come."

IFC plans to release the two-part movie for an awards week run in December and then wide in January. The biopic will be available in theaters and on IFC's video-on-demand as well as through IFC's exclusive rental deal with Blockbuster.

Che Bought By IFC in Toronto

Karina Longworth By Karina Longworth

The other night, someone with knowledge of these things approached me at a party and said, “Have you heard that Magnolia’s bought Che? I’ve never heard a more premature rumor in my life.” Any suspicion in my mind that this party chat was mere misdirection has just been proved unfounded with IFC’s announcement that they’ve bought Steven Soderbergh’s epic for U.S. release.

In not specifying that IFC will release the two halves of the film separately, the press release implies that Che’s “two stand-alone parts” will be shown in theaters back-to-back. But this is the only specific language regarding their distribution plan:

Che will be released for one week awards qualifying run in New York and Los Angeles in December. The company will then re-open the film in January through IFC In Theaters, its day-and-date distribution platform which makes independent films available to a national audience in theaters and on-demand, simultaneously. It will also be included in the company’s exclusive video rental deal with Blockbuster Video.

I’ve pasted the full release after the jump. More when we get it.

UPDATE: Anne Thompson clarifies the “one movie, or two?” issue: “IFC will open the full four-hour movie with an intermission for one-week Oscar-qualifying runs in New York and Los Angeles before opening CheThe Argentine) in 15 to 25 key markets in January; Part Two (The Guerilla) will follow the Oscar nominations announcement.” Part One (

IFC FILMS ACQUIRES NORTH AMERICAN RIGHTS TO

STEVEN SODERBERGH’S CHE

Toronto, Ontario – September 10, 2008 – IFC Films has acquired all North American rights to Steven Soderbergh’s epic “Che” starring Benicio Del Toro, produced by Laura Bickford and Benicio Del Toro and written by Peter Buchman. The film had its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival where Benicio Del Toro won the Best Actor Prize. It is currently screening at the Toronto International Film Festival and will be screening next at the New York Film Festival.

“Che” will be released for one week awards qualifying run in New York and Los Angeles in December. The company will then re-open the film in January through IFC In Theaters, its day-and-date distribution platform which makes independent films available to a national audience in theaters and on-demand, simultaneously. It will also be included in the company’s exclusive video rental deal with Blockbuster Video.

Jonathan Sehring, President of IFC Films commented, “Steven’s been involved with IFC as a member of the advisory board of both the IFC Network and the IFC Center since we formed them. We also financed “Gray’s Anatomy, ” and we have always considered him one of the most visionary American directors at work. “Che” is nothing less than the film event of the year. By giving us the rise and fall of one of the great icons of history, Steven Soderbergh and Benicio Del Toro, who gives an incredible soulful performance, have humanized him and given audiences around the world something that will be discussed for years to come. We are uniquely positioned through our day-and-date program and our Blockbuster deal to get this film to the widest possible audience, and we are thrilled.”

Keith Leopard, Director of Content for Blockbuster, said, “We are extremely excited to partner with IFC Films and present this stunning and thought provoking film to our customers.”

The deal was negotiated by IFC President Jonathan Sehring, VP of Acquisitions and Production Arianna Bocco and Senior Counsel Betsy Rodgers with Wild Bunch’s Vincent Maraval, Agnes Mentre, Laurent Baudens and Pierre Selinger.

“This project is so important to us and we wanted to partner with someone sharing our same idea of distribution,” said Maraval. “This is a unique distribution challenge and we needed someone with creative passion and marketing skill to work with. IFC Films came with the same ambition and energy that we had during the whole process of that exceptional adventure. We are pleased and relieved to give them our dearest baby to take care of.”

Producer Laura Bickford said, “IFC Films is a great place for “Che” and we are thrilled at their enthusiasm for the film and the unique model they offer us.”

“Che” is comprised of two stand alone parts that are the result of 7 years of intense research: “The Argentine” and “Guerrilla.” In “The Argentine,” Ernesto Che Guevara, an Argentine doctor, is one of 80 rebels under Fidel Castro on a mission to overthrow the corrupt government of Fulgencio Batista. Che is quickly embraced by his comrades and the Cuban people through his grasp of guerilla warfare and as a fighter. The film tracks his rise in the Cuban revolution from doctor to commander to revolutionary hero.

In “Guerrilla”, Che is at the height of his powers after the Cuban Revolution and has reemerged in Bolivia. Che has organized a group of Cubans and Bolivians to start the great Latin American revolution which will ultimately bring him to his death. Through this story, we come to understand how Che remains a symbol of idealism and heroism that lives in the hearts of people around the world.

IFC Films has been a major presence at the Toronto Film Festival with 7 films screening at the festival including Arnaud Desplechin’s A CHRISTMAS TALE, Ole Christian Madsen’s “Flame and Citron”, Matteo Garrone’s “Gomorrah,” Kim Jee-Woon’s “The Good, The Bad, The Weird”, Steve McQueen’s “Hunger”, Barry Jenkins’ “Medicine for Melancholy” and Olivier Assayas’ “Summer Hours”. The company just announced the acquisition of Jan Troell’s “Everlasting Moments” which was one of the standout hits of the Telluride Film Festival and is currently also screening in Toronto.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Monday, September 15, 2008

THE FUNNY

Today someone asked me:
When a character is playing a kind of wild/crazy character (Such as Will Ferrell in his movies or some of the characters from "There's something about Mary") how would you suggest directing them in order to give them the freedom to play/perform but also achieve the objective of the scene?
Paul Sills taught me how the "freedom to play" came directly out of the commitment to the ACTION of the scene, to accomplishing one's "OBJECTIVE". And though, Paul called it "the Point of Concentration" or "the Point of Focus."

Paul also taught me to work with young people. Working with young people taught me to understand people. What I learned from Paul and Young People is that if one can put one's attention on what happens in the space between people, with an emphasis on mutuality . . . staying together with the other person, that joy is the effortless result. A, Youand approach, if you will.

Paul's teachings are in everything I do with other people.



June 4, 2008

Paul Sills, a founder of the Second City theater company and the godfather of modern improvisational sketch comedy, died on Monday in Sturgeon Bay, Wis. He was 80.

The cause was complications of pneumonia, said his wife, Carol Sills.

As a founder and resident director of a series of small theater companies that began in bars, former bakeries and Chinese restaurants in Chicago, Mr. Sills taught an approach to theater that would later feed directly into the creation of Saturday Night Live and influence a range of artists including David Mamet and Richard Foreman. Under Mr. Sills’s direction, performances were based on games, audience suggestions and bare-bones scenarios, the basic building blocks of improv comedy.

Many of these techniques Mr. Sills learned from his mother, Viola Spolin, who had used them as a drama teacher with the federal Works Progress Administration from 1939 to 1941 and later codified them in her influential book “Improvisation for the Theater.”

But while Ms. Spolin, who worked closely with her son throughout his career, might have developed and refined the theater-game approach, it was Mr. Sills who spread the gospel, starting the careers of comedy giants like Mike Nichols, Elaine May, Barbara Harris, Alan Arkin and Paul Sand. While his influence spread, Mr. Sills continued to stick with the basics, moving on to his next opportunity as a teacher and director and remaining mostly obscure.

In 1968, Mr. Sills created the story theater form, in which actors on a bare stage narrate, mime, sing, dance and create plays based on existing stories from the Brothers Grimm, Ovid and others. In 1970, “Paul Sills’ Story Theater” appeared on Broadway; Clive Barnes, writing about it in The New York Times, said it brought back “magic and innocence to Broadway.”

In Jeffrey Sweet’s book “Something Wonderful Right Away: An Oral History of the Second City and The Compass Players,” Mr. Sills explained his approach this way: “Theater is concerned with reality. Reality is shared. And reality of the moment can occur only with spontaneity.”

Paul Silverberg was born in Chicago on Nov. 18, 1927. His parents separated when he was young, and he moved with his mother to a rented mansion on Lake Michigan, where she and her friends lived communally. They relocated to California in 1943, but Mr. Sills returned to Chicago to finish high school. After graduating, he was in both the merchant marine and the Army and then enrolled in the University of Chicago.

During and after college, Mr. Sills began developing his directorial skills in theaters like the Playwrights Theater Club, which he helped to create and where he staged plays by Bertolt Brecht, who strongly influenced him and whom he later met. But in 1955 he and a friend he met at the University of Chicago, David Shepherd, created the Compass Players, an improvisational cabaret theater, where they put on revues based more closely on the Spolin approach.

At the Compass, actors would speak in gibberish, perform sketches in languages they could not speak and generally create plays from scratch while an audience was watching. In 1959, after the Compass had dissolved, Mr. Sills, along with Howard Alk and Bernard Sahlins, created Second City, at which they were joined by many of the actors from the Compass.

Second City, which turns 50 next year, would go on to become a comedy mecca, performing a revue on Broadway under Mr. Sills’s direction, setting up satellite theaters in Toronto and Detroit and grooming alumni including Dan Aykroyd, John Belushi, Bill Murray, Mike Myers, Gilda Radner and Tina Fey.

But before Second City became ensconced in the comedy establishment, Mr. Sills had moved on, starting theater companies and teaching workshops using theater games. In 1988, Mr. Sills, Mr. Nichols and George Morrison created the New Actors Workshop in New York, where for the next 15 years Mr. Sills taught and directed productions based on the idea of story theater.

Mr. Sills spent more and more of his time in Baileys Harbor, Wis., where he lived with his wife. His survivors also include a son, David Michael; four daughters, Rachel, Polly, Aretha Amelia and Neva; four grandchildren; two great-grandchildren; and a brother, William.

In Wisconsin, Mr. Sills put on plays with a community theater group, rehearsing in a large barn and performing at local theaters and town halls. His approach to his career was not unlike his approach to theater in general.

“He always wandered away well before opening night,” Mr. Nichols said in an interview, “because he had no interest at all in results, only process.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Sunday, September 14, 2008

WORKING W/ACTORS: 90 PERCENT PREPERATION

Message

Working with Actors (on the set) can be seen as 10 percent perspiration and 90 preparation; which is to say, that to do it well and get the results you want takes tremendous insight about human nature and human relations; as Drama in the end, is about "Relationships". One might sum the whole purpose of dramatic fiction, its "SPINE" as: TO SHOW THE CHANGE IN RELATIONSHIP.

It takes great preparation in our daily lives to see, experience, and to share our insights about human nature with others. And also, it takes a great deal of preparation to see, and experience the dramatic elements of our stories so as to help an actor see, experience and
then together with the actor to share our story with an audience.

With no disrespect intended to those who work this way, but to be under the impression that working with actors has mostly to do with what you say to an actor on the set, is like the thought that the craft of acting has mostly to do with the memorization and mouthing of text.

Many fine directors say very little to actors on the set. They do however know their "given circumstances" inside-out/backwards and forwards, just as an actor must know their lines, as well as those same "given circumstances."

- José Angel Santana

Response by Director Jay Anania:

"My view is exactly the same as yours. It's much more important that the actor and the director share an understanding, as deep and comprehensive as possible, as to WHO the character is. This is accomplished differently with different actors. With some it's long conversations about the character. With others it's 'read this book', and what do you think of this character?' and then leave them to simply think on that character in the book - the thinking about it is a lot of the work.

When that is done, the joint understanding achieved, the directing of the actor is almost entirely done. The only thing that happens on set is the reinforcement of this already-gotten understanding. Just a nudge here and there. Having discussed the character extensively with the actor, the character as a whole being, even outside the story, I find that all I have to say is things like: "Would you really be that indifferent to this news?" or "I wonder if she likes him that much, or if she would want him to know that she does". And leave it entirely at that.

The only other thing that a director must do on set is make sure that all the actors are in the same film - so it's a matter of monitoring pitch or attack or energy, so they all fit together."


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Saturday, September 13, 2008

STANISLAVSKI DOC: UNITS, OBJECTIVES, AND SUPER-OBJECTIVE (THE SPINE).




Units, Objectives and Super-Objectives.


Stanislavski’s system does not exist in a vacuum. It exists in order to prepare actors for real roles within actual plays. The system requires that the actors undertake close analysis of the playtext before and during the rehearsal process.


Units :


When approaching a scene, the actor must examine the spoken words and actions of a character, and divide them into ‘units’. Large units of action may then be reduced :


“...to medium size, then to small, and then to fine.” (115)


Units enable the actor to chart her or his character’s continuous progress through a scene. The division of a scene into units means that no element of the playtext is overlooked when researching a role. However, Stanislavski did not want actors to ignore the bigger picture when dividing a scene into units, and suggested that :


“...an actor must proceed, not by a multitude of details, but by those important units which, like signals, mark his channel and keep him in the right creative line.” (114)


Ultimately, the examination of units of action represents only one stage within the process of creating a role. Stanislavski noted that :


“...the division [into units] is temporary. The part and the play must not remain in fragments. A broken statue, or a slashed canvas, is not a work of art. It is only in the preparation of a role that we use small units. During its actual creation they fuse into large units.” (115)


Objectives :


On its own, the division of a scene into units of action has only limited value to the actor. Without further analysis, units reveal little regarding the inner state of a character. Stanislavski notes that :


“The division of a play into units, to study its structure, has one purpose ... There is another, far more important, inner reason. At the heart of every unit lies a creative objective” (116)


The key to successfully establishing a character’s objective with regard to a unit is to be as elemental as possible.


“The most important question [is] : how to draw an objective from a unit of work. The method is simple. It consists of finding the most appropriate name for the unit, one which characterises its inner essence” (121)


Objectives are most useful to the actor when they can be expressed in the form of a single, active intention or desire. This is usually a simple sentence - for instance, “I want my students to do all the hard work for me”. Stanislavski suggests that objectives should be framed in such a way that they stimulate and excite the actor within the character development process :


“If you introduce something ... definitely active, state a question so that it requires an answer, it will push you to some fruitful activity to carry out that purpose ...Try sitting on this chair and wishing for power, in general. You must have something more concrete, real, nearer, more possible to do. As you see, not any verb will do, not any word can give an impetus to full action” (124).


The Super-Objective :


The process of textual analysis is not completed through the establishment of a character’s objectives within a scene, however. Stanislavski suggests that without guiding principles which govern the direction of the play as a whole, a role’s units and objectives have no purpose. The research process, shared by all the actors, builds a collective understanding of the play’s meaning. Stanislavski notes that :


“...the main inner content of a play produces a state of inner grasp and power in which actors can develop all the intricacies and then come to a clear conclusion as to its underlying, fundamental purpose” (273)


This ‘underlying, fundamental purpose’ is the play’s ‘super-objective’. The process by which the super-objective is reached is lengthy and complex :


“In a play the whole stream of individual, minor objectives, all the imaginative thoughts, feelings and actions of an actor, should converge to carry out the super-objective of the plot. The common bond must be so strong that even the most insignificant detail, if it is not related to the super-objective, will stand out as superfluous or wrong.” (271)


Like individual units and objectives, the super-objective can be as simple as a single, active statement, expressed in the form of a sentence. The super-objective represents a collective statement of understanding from the actors, and offers the play-in-performance a sense of conceptual unity.


_______________________________


Super-Objective (The Spine): A statement (agreed by director and actors) which represents that guiding and active principle that governs the direction and meaning of the whole play.


Units (Of Action) : Sections of a scene which represent the individual actions of a character.


Objectives (What the Character wants): The motivation which propels a character through individual units of action.


(All quotes taken from Stanislavski’s ‘An Actor Prepares’, Methuen Drama 1988 paperback edition)


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

BEASTY BOY ENTERS THE WORLD OF INDEPENDENT FILM

Offstage, a Beastie Boy Enters the World of Independent Film

By MELENA RYZIK
Published: September 8, 2008

"Every day the Beastie Boy known as MCA, who spent years rapping about girls and parties and the five boroughs, goes to work in an office. Sure, it’s a cool one: the former headquarters of the Benjamin Moore paint company, it is a loftlike space filled with surfboards, skateboards, flea market paintings and his fellow Beastie Mike D.’s records; the attitude is dot-com casual. In this atmosphere of dudes, MCA has become the Boss

.
. . . Now, despite some formidable odds, he is pursuing his cinematic interests with a new division of his company, Oscilloscope, which acquires, produces and distributes independent movies." (read article)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Sunday, September 7, 2008

LOINS OF PUNJAB PRESENTS

OPENING SEPT 12, FRIDAY!

"A perfect weekend watch, Loins of Punjab Presents . . ." (review)




Quad Cinema
34 West 13 Street (btwn 5th & 6th Ave)
NYC / www.quadcinema.com / 212-255-8800
Showtimes: 1:00, 3:10, 5:20, 7:35, 9:50

The ImaginAsian
239 East 59 St. (btwn 2nd & 3rd Ave)
NYC / www.theimaginasian.com / 212-371-6682
Showtimes: 12:15, 2:30, 4:45, 7:00, 9:15

For a look at the trailer and the music video, visit http://www.loinsofpunjab.com/


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."

Saturday, September 6, 2008

ON THE SPINE: THE HULK - "THE HUMAN STORY OF BRUCE BANNER WHO IS DEALING WITH REJECTION FROM THE WORLD"



on THE SPINE

"To begin active direction a formulation in the simplest terms must be found to state what general action motivates the [screen]play, of what fundamental drama or conflict the script’s plot and people are the instruments. What behavioral struggle or effort is being represented? It is best, though perhaps not altogether essential, that the answer should be expressed as an active verb: for drama (and acting) are based on doing, on action. Do not tell the Actor “You are in love” but “You love,” that is, “You pay attention to” or “You take care of,” “You help,” etc.)

Richard Boleslavsky, . . . called the answer to the questions I've just put[,] the play's
SPINE . . . (the body's spine holds the vertebra in place, and these might be compared to all the small actions and dramatic divisions in the [screen] play. In An Actor Prepares Stanislavsky calls the “spine” that plays main or through action which leads to what he calls the “super-problem” -- the dramatist's basic motivation in writing the play.

Many things are contained in O'Neill's "Desire Under the Elms": passion, Oedipal impulses, confessions of unhappiness and hate, guilt feelings, paternal harshness, filial vindictiveness, retribution. But what holds all these ingredients together, what makes a complete meaning, a single specific drama of them all, is the play's
SPINE. . .

With this as both starting point and interpretive goal I [am] able to make a dramatic whole from the various strands of the script."

Harold Clurman in On Directing, pp. 28

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king."