Ran (1 Viewer)

[aud]

Is anyone else doing Ran as a study of interpretation for King Lear? Or is it just me, and my teacher just likes it cause his wife is Japanese and he spent two years there?

 

[elizabethy]

:rofl:

 

[aud]

Is that a yes? Or a mocking no?

 

[iambored]

lol i can't remember if this was the one which was criticised in the marking comments from the 2002 hsc. you should have a look at the king lear part in that document.

The King Lear responses provided a full range of marks. Many candidates focused on a number of productions which responded to the play differently. Some candidates however referred to a number
of appropriations such as A Thousand Acres or Ran often without reference to the issue of textual
integrity. Some candidates treated productions as a list to be worked through and this often made
their responses superficial rather than critical. Better responses referred to the text in detail using
appropriate quotations while weaker candidates often limited their responses to detailed
descriptions of productions.

i have heard a thousand acres is not good to do as it changes the story

 

[aud]

Ran changes it too, very much so... three sons, no subplot, new characters, wild wives, war, war, war... oh - and 3.5 hours of subtitles~!! What fun~!! :mad1:

 

[iambored]

yeah be careful. i can't remember if that one was also not recommended, or if it was just a thousand acres. and i can;t remember where my teacher got the info to tell us that from!

 

[anti]

Changing the story is an element of appropriation... you just need to say how and why. Context of production, context of story, culture etc