Researching classical plays - Shakespeare's; Midsummer Night Dream

Brief History Link to Globe History - http://www.shakespearesglobe.com 
The Globe theatre exists today to serve as a popular, historical and traditional home to the performances of Shakespeare's literature. This all came about during the start of the Elizabethan Era where English actors and playwrights would form companies and perform in inns, yards, college halls and the private houses of the wealthy upper class.

In 1576 an actor and manager called James Burbage built the first purpose built theatre (playhouse) in Shoreditch, Shakespeare and other actors grouped together to form the company; the Chamberlains, later known as the Kings Men which went on to create perform for 20 years.
After James Burbage passed, the lease for the theatre was under heavy dispute. As a drastic action, the theatre company rented out some land across the other side of the river, knocked down the old theatre and used the materials to build the Globe. In order for the costs to be covered, shares were sold off to some members of the company such as William Shakespeare. For 14 years, Shakespeare used this company to perform many of his works. In 1613, whilst performing the play Henry vii, a stage cannon set alight to the thatched roof burning down the theatre. A replacement theatre was built with a tilled roof but was closed down and demolished during Oliver Cromwell's puritan reign of which theatre was banned.
An American actor and director called Sam Wanamaker spent many years fundraising, founding the Shakespeare Globe Trust dedicated to rebuilding a new Globe theatre as close to the original as possible. This Globe theatre is used today by the Globe Theatre Company who perform many of Shakespeare's plays.
Old and the New Construction

The original Globe was made from Oak timbers which were strong and easily craft-able yet much cheaper than building from stone. The walls were made of lime plaster and coated in lime wash becoming white. The modern Globe was built with the same materials to be as original as possible which includes using wooden pegs to keep everything together and the techniques used by the carpenters. The only modern aspects to todays Globe are the machines used to construct everything on site and the health and safety requirements such as fire alarms, fire escapes and fire proofing.

Seating and Standing
The globe theatre's consists of three levels. Level one houses the yard, a large area right in front and to the sides of the stage where people stand and  the lower gallery. Level two consists of the middle gallery and gentlemen's rooms and level three has the upper gallery. There are also the balconies which the original theatre would have used but are now used for actors or musicians. The seats are all benches with the gentlemen's rooms being more comfortable.
- video of a news report during the building of the globe - link - https://youtu.be/N_QjrZN5vrM 


'A Midsummer Night's Dream' - Link to information - https://www.rsc.org.uk/shakespeares-life-and-times/performing-shakespeare-in-the-17th-century
A Midsummer Night's Dream would have first came about by William Shakespeare discussing the idea for the plot to the theatre company. Then the leaders of the company would decide if they liked it and offer a down payment so Shakespeare can complete it. This allowed the playwrights to write the play and create characters with actors in mind which meant if Shakespeare has a character with a long monologue he could chose an actor best suited to remembering the lines or if there is a particular accent he wanted his character to have, he new which actor would be able to do it best. An example of this character-actor basing is when Shakespeare chose the leading man of the company, Richard Burbage to play Richard the iii as he had the best memory. This differs to today's form of playwriting and casting because there is a playwright that writes a full script with characters that are created without the actors in mind. Once the play is finished, the playwright has to advertise their play and find people willing to invest in the production and a location of production. Once these foundations are laid, people with the right skills accordingly have to be hired such as directors, technicians and managers through casting websites and connections. Then the company needs to open auditions top find actors for the play. Where Shakespeare and other Elizabethan playwrights would base their characters on the abilities around a particular actor in their company, a casting director is hired for the specific purpose of choosing the best actors (in their opinion) for the role. Then the actors are handed a full copy of the play where they are expected to read it all and fully understand the plot and their characters. This is very different to a Shakespearian actor as they would only be handed a script with their lines to prevent copyrighting the playwrights play and taking it for themselves and selling it off. The Shakespearian actors; to characterise, would have to formulate an idea from their lines but also take direction from Shakespeare himself. They would not know any of the other characters in the play yet nor how to react to them until rehearsals where they could experiment with movement and expressions and reactions of other actors on stage.
I believe that the process of finding the actor to play the character was a lot simpler and easier back in Shakespeare's time because the playwright already knew which actors were playing which character whereas todays process is much more complex for the playwright as they must go through a long, challenging process of auditions to find the right actor to play their character. I think that the process's are so different as nowadays there are so many actors trained in many different ways, that are adaptable, experienced and dedicated to their industry that means the playwright just cannot limit themselves to the people they know if they want perfection when it comes to the actor suiting the character.
Evidence for this point is that their were an estimated 4,000,000 people populated England in the 1600's - http://www.localhistories.org/population.html, whereas now the total UK population is estimated at 65,000,000 people - http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/uk-population/. I believe this extremely large population difference between then and now, with the added factor of international actors performing in the UK, shows how the process has become much harder and why play writing and casting has changed so much from Shakespeare's era.

The performing of this play originally would have been very different to todays version that we went to see. Firstly, the actors of that era would have been lower class men that were looked down upon in society for being common and rough. They would have been very skilled in acting and some being trained to only master certain character types. Also, there were no women actors so men were specifically trained to mastery of performing as a female, usually the young men who would sometimes be injected with feminine hormones so they could keep their high voices. This differs from today as being an actor is seen as a dream job and actors can have a very high standing in society with people becoming famous celebrities in the eyes of the media. This would not have happened in Shakespeare's era and if actors were to open about their career they would be shunned. Something actors would never do after a performance is walk around in costume or as character as this would have been an absurd by the public which contrasts with today as we find it entertaining when our favourite actors are in character maybe on the Graham Norton show for example. Another contrasting factor is that women are now in the industry. Some of the best actors in the world are women which shows how equal rights back in the 1600's was not at all as prominent as it should have been.

The music was a prominent factor in the modern interpretation of the 'Dream'. Shakespeare did use certain woodwind and string instruments and also had lots of singing and dancing in the play which I believe would make the audience receive the play better, say if some of the audience did not understand the language or like the characters, then Shakespeare knew that having music, dancing and singing would be a way to make the audience understand easier but also for the audience to join in and have fun. This was very similar to the one we watched as their were times were I was having great fun when the music was playing and the actors were dancing in silly ways and reacting to audience members and pulling faces.

Something different about the modern version is that it was very sexualised. There were many scenes and characters that were sexualised but one character in particular was Puck.

'Ill put a girdle around the Earth in forty minutes'

In the modern adaptation, Puck's arms flowed with flamboyancy, her eyes became locked onto a single audience member enticing them into a harsh gaze and shew would chose somebody from the audience to latch onto and touch or arouse. As she said this quote she ran off stage but with interactions that can only be described as cheeky, devious and lustful.
Now, in the original performance characters such as Puck would have never been as sexualised as  they are today. One reason being that all actors were men and it was not accepted in society to be homosexual and therefore would not have been welcomed for the character Puck to touch up audience members. I think that the modern adaptation of Puck could still have been played by a man but have been just as sexualised as the female Puck due to the homosexuality being accepted in our society.

Links:

http://homosexualityinshakespeare.weebly.com/historical-background-of-homosexuality.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/gay_rights/ 

http://www.theatrehistory.com/british/bellinger001.html 

The original Globe audience would have been formed by just about all different types of classes in the city of London. This remains the same today but with the added international audience members from across the globe from increase migration. I think the amount of culture in the audience now has affected and increased the diversity of the story telling. The modern version has adapted to their audience by adding in cultured music like the sitar, has a multicultural cast and has identified that sexualised content is found humorous. This contrasts due to the African and Arabic slave trade which meant there were minimal to zero rights for non Europeans therefore no integration of multiple cultures in society for many years on. I think this would have made the original performance different as the play would lack the cultural influence of music and comedy and would have been much more subdued knowing that the audience would either not understand or dislike anything that wasn't what they understood or educated upon.

Links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/short_history_of_immigration.stm#1500 

http://anthro.palomar.edu/culture/culture_1.htm

Class. City of London. Elizabethan era. You have your monarchs, royalty, Lords and Lady's, business men, working class, peasants and the homeless. Something special that Shakespeare; situated right in the middle of the classes, was able to do was bring all of these different people together in one room, something that was a rare occurrence when the poor are shunned and avoided by the rich who want nothing to do with each other.


Here be the existing Globe theatre as an example to demonstrate the class seating of the original theatre.                                                                                                                                   

The Yard and its Audience
The yard cost 1 penny to get into and there were no seats. The standing rabble were working called the groundlings or 'Pennystinkhards' as they were never cleaned or smelt like ale and garlic. The floor was thought to have been made up from sand and nut shells. Many members of society deemed the yard to filthy and would pay a little extra for an upgrade just to protect their moral standing.
There are 240 pennies in £1 and 1 loaf of bread cost 1 penny. If you compare this to todays ticket price for the yard; £5 which could buy you about 5 loaf's of bread, it's relatively dirt cheap. This is the reason why there were so many lower class people at the theatre so often as they could go after work to have a great time drinking and laughing. These crowds of people the theatre attracted were allowed to buy food and drink ale in the performance and were loud, drunken and usually under-educated which resulted in them not understanding the plot and throwing food at the actors. This is something that the actors had to overcome. They had to project much louder than today's performers due to this ignorant, rowdy noise so the people sitting higher up could here them. Also, they would have to be very clear with every movement, word and action they carried out as they are telling a story in a very different language that many audience members will not understand unless every action is carried out with meaning. Otherwise the crowd will boo and throw food and the play will be effected negatively. Also thieves were common in the crowd which caused fights. Today's audience in the stand are usually people that fancy a taste of what the lower class audiences would have experienced without the smells and rowdiness of it all. As a yard audience member, I feel like it has the most atmosphere as the actors walk past and interact. Also, I was closer to the stage which made me feel a connection with the characters making it very enjoyable during the comedy aspect which is exactly what Shakespeare wanted.

The Gallery and Beyond
The gallery cost 2 penny's and the audience members can sit down on a bench and watch the show with a roof over their heads next to slightly less 'common' co-audience making it much more comfortable. This 2 penny difference isn't much so I believe that the working class actually preferred standing and had a much more enjoyable time instead of wasting another penny to sit next to somebody that cares to much about their appearance to others or the rain. To upgrade for a cushioned seat it cost another penny. These seats were for the middle class but were still loud with people booing villains, cheering the special effects and laughing at the comedy. The boing and cheering aspect of the audience has changed today as audience members are a lot more respectful of the actors and conscious of other people and will be quiet during the play but will openly laugh at the comedy which I again believe was Shakespeare's ideology. This aspect of cheering and booing however has been transported out of classical plays and into pantomimes and contemporised for the younger generation. In my opinion, this aspect of booing and cheering would have made the modern version more entertaining as there was not much of this during the performance but at the end of the play there was suddenly a roar of cheers which projected the atmosphere and sent me travelling 400 years into the past.
The high class seating area was called the Gentlemen's stand and the balcony. These were two stands on either side of the stage and two areas just above the stage. These people were lords and lady's and wealthy advisories who paid a lot of money to sit facing the audience to literally show the audience members that they were wealthy and of high class. The people in the gentlemen's stands would still be able to watch the play. Today, the balconies are not used as seating areas and the gentlemen's stands are still the most expensive seats. I was looking around at different audience members during the running and noticed that certain people sitting in the gentlemen's stands were very well dressed up, had a glass of wine in their hand and were not as involved as the people in the yard with us. I also noticed that certain individuals would not laugh as much as say we were. I believe that this shows that the wealthy are still very obvious when watching theatre even though there is not as larger social divide as there was in Shakespeare's time, there is most definitely a certain obviousness with some people that like to invest their money in their appearance and seating whilst going to the theatre.

Themes

Love - https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/m/a-midsummer-nights-dream/critical-essays/major-themes
Love is part of every culture. It is a natural animal emotion that we have. But, love being one of the most powerful emotions can also be one of the most dangerous, blinding and difficult to understand. Shakespeare saw this difficulty with understanding love in society and wrote 'Midsummer Night's Dream' with this ideology. The play explores how people fall in love with someone who appears beautiful to them which creates an illusion of love at first sight. A quote in the play that shows this is;

'The more I hate, the more he follows me,
the more I Love, the more he hateth me.'

This scene between Helena who is love struck for Demetrius and Hermia who Demetrius is love struck over. All over beauty. I think Shakespeare has done this to show his audience how they easy it is to fall for someone without knowing them and to be 'in love' but blinded by the fact they hate you.

'For love I follow'd him; but he hath chid me hence, and threaten'd me to strike me...a foolish heart that I leave here behind'

Helena has realised here she only loved Demetrius for his beauty and due to his threats she her love has turned to unattraction and a repellent. Shakespeare has shown this to the audience to educate how falling for beauty can often feel like the most powerful form of love preventing you from seeing what the person is like on the inside.
The last factor of love Shakespeare writes about is real truthful love. Love that has formed from much more than just physical attraction. This is shown here;

'Come my queen, take hands with me, and rock the ground whereon these sleepers be. Thou now and I are new in amity.'

After all of the jealousy and spite Titania and Oberon have had for each-other, and through using the magic of the flower to alter the love that the characters feel for one another and seeing the effects of loving beauty, they both have finally learned how to overcome beauty and fall in true love with each-other.

Overall, I think Shakespeare has used love to make the audience ponder how irrational and mischievous love can be but how everyone can find true love if they were to stop looking and start feeling.

Gender - http://www.litcharts.com/lit/a-midsummer-nights-dream/themes/men-and-women
This theme is something Shakespeare has used to show the social side of men and women being in love, the cultural side of arranged marriages and political side of female oppression. The theme is about how the male characters are trying to control the female characters and the problems this causes and how the only way to fix these problems is to let everything form naturally without any pressures by society.

'With pomp, with triumph, and with revelling.'

Hippolyta is one over by Theseus by him beating her in battle. This shows that in the Elizabethan times men should always be manly and have to prove themselves to their women and fight in order to get them and that a man will always win over a female in which the female would be overcome with love and affection. This today would be seen as very sexist and I believe Shakespeare new this which is what he is expressing to his audience. This is quite the political tool I think in order to make women in the audience become slightly 'pissed' and take a fighting stance for equality.

Religious Influence
Shakespeare has been influenced by religion whilst writing this play to bring a deeper darker meaning behind his characters and the setting of the fairyland where he has used many biblical allegories. For example; Puck (aka Robin Goodfellow), are both names derived from catholysis meaning devil and Pyramus and Thisbe are medieval names for Jesus and the church and Peter Quince is actually St. Peter. Also, the wall symbolises a division between Earth and Heaven of which prevented Jesus from being with the church.

'I see a voice; now will I to the chink, to spy and I  can hear my Thisby's face. Thisby!
My love!'

This is a very comical part of the play were Pyramus who represents Jesus has found a hole in the wall; which symbolises the division between Earth and Heaven, and can hear and see Thisby who is his love representing the church. The fact that this scene is made hilarious and is about religion tells me that the play is a satire of religious beliefs which makes sense when we look at modern day comedy which can be seen as racist satires such as Mock the Week and the films Airplane! and The Dictator.( - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080339/ - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645170/ ) where many comedians use satire mock certain aspects of society. I believe Shakespeare is mocking the ideas of heaven by Jesus squeezing through a gap to get back to Earth and sleep with his lover. This sort of humour was first developed by the ancient Greeks. Therefore I think Shakespeare has referenced them in his play by having the character Hippolyta who was; in Greek mythology, the Queen of the Amazon possession a magical girdle given to her by her father, Ares, the god of war, which is a large belt which signified her authority over the Amazons. This girdle is actually mentioned by Puck;

'Ill put a girdle about the Earth in forty minutes'

by which she is talking about getting Oberon his flower in which he will have authority over the people in the woods and their love.

To conclude, I believe that Shakespeare's writing was influenced a lot by who his actors were, the different classes of audience that come to the theatre and how to tailor to each member of society so well that it brings everyone together to be entertained, how the emotion of love can be so blinding but so pure in the end, how genders are not equal because of oppression, the culture of forced marriages and the satirical comedic nature that religion and Ancient Greek mythology has. He writes for purpose, to educate and aggravate audiences to do something about the problems in society but also fabulously entertains audiences of all wealth and knowledge. I have also found the sexualisation, mixed gender and race casting, integration of cultured music and the way the audience acts today to be highly contrasting to that the original yet aspects such as the comedy, seating/standing and atmosphere I believe, have held the same historical value to that of which Shakespeare desired.