Did you mention productions in King Lear? (1 Viewer)

[vas y molo]

I don't even remember now if I did.
I didn't really understand the question, hahaha. My lear essay was more an argument on how the text was way ahead of it's time and I basically deconstructed the whole play and talked about how each segment was still relevent now and in the future

 

[x_meow_x]

I've forgotten exactly what the question was, but I mentioned productions, saying that the themes etc. of King Lear can be reinvented, interpreted, adapted to serve current audiences

 

[darkroomgirl]

The issues and themes that I discussed were about the struggle between power and powerlessness (which connected to Lear's irrationality as both king and father) and the balance of male and female/patriarchy and feminism.

For the power/powerlessness one, I discussed just the text, with heaps of references and quotes (plus reference to original Shakesperean context and the whole belief in 'natural order'). Then I think I said that it obviously still applies today, with many current political/power issues reflecting the struggle in Lear.

With the balance of male and female, however, it was pretty obvious that I had to use some productions... so I used the Eyre and Brook versions (and I think also Elliott) to demonstrate that you could really adapt those issues to today... I might've also referred again to the original context, saying that the text has powerful women in it and that recent productions obviously mirror and emphasise that.

I think I did alright then... hmmm...

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Didn't ask for productions eh...?
Good luck with a thorough examination of different contexts, without referring to any productions.

Reception in different contexts =! Productions.

Productions are only ONE way of looking at how a text has been received in different contexts.

 

[nataalia]

?

i didnt :S
i kno we need back up and things. i just used critics.. theyre a form of an interpretation of KL too ??
uh oh.

 

[Husayn]

captain gay - Productions are the BEST way...

 

[Meads]

I do agree with Mr Ghay, reception in different contexts does not mean you have to use a production. Stating that the intepretation is marxist or whatever would do the trick...

HOWEVER! I do think that 'backing up' an interpretation is neccessary, and the only way I can think of that this can be done, is by using a production.

So yeh...crazy.

 

[_dhj_]

Actually.. the best way to "back up" an interpretation is to show the parts of the text that lend themselves to such an interpretation. e.g. "As flies to wanton boys.. etc" lends it to nihilistic interpretation.

 

[ameradrian]

Gee, it must suck to be the three people who didn't cite any productions.

 

[Meads]

Actually.. the best way to "back up" an interpretation is to show the parts of the text that lend themselves to such an interpretation. e.g. "As flies to wanton boys.. etc" lends it to nihilistic interpretation.

This is not backing up the interpretation at all, that is just stating where it is coming from. The least you got to do is explain what the different interpretation is, and HOW the different interpretation is conveyed, and that HOW is in different productions.

 

[_dhj_]

I'm not quite sure what you mean? For an interpretation or reading, you talk about context of reception, as well as refer to some textual evidence that shows how it can possibly be interpreted in such a way. Then you would probably go on to quote a couple of critics etc.. A production isn't compulsory (even though I did 3 productions in mine). "reception" means reading IMO, not necessarily production. Anyway.. "reception" in the syllabus implies the action performed by the "respondent" rather than the "composer".. i thought - so it's not compulsory to show how it is "conveyed", since to convey, you'd have to compose.

 

[Husayn]

Actually.. the best way to "back up" an interpretation is to show the parts of the text that lend themselves to such an interpretation. e.g. "As flies to wanton boys.. etc" lends it to nihilistic interpretation.

hahahahahaha, you almost had me there.

Nice try.