E-grāmata: Embracing Disruption: Clowning, Improvisation, and the Unscripted in Early Shakespearean Performance [Taylor & Francis e-book]

This volume celebrates the centrality of clowning in Shakespeares conception of theatre and explores how he purposefully invites the clowns anarchic energy into the heart of his dramaturgy.

Clowning was a potent but divisive force in the theater of Shakespeares time, challenging the emerging tyranny of decorum and the developing notion of the authorial voice. As such, the figure of the clown is key to understanding the pervasive tension between existing and emergent forms of Elizabethan theater, and unlocks forgotten levels of meaning in Shakespeares plays, meanings that were only fully experienced in performance rather than on the page. The great clown Dick Tarleton dominated the London theater of the 1580s and deeply informed Shakespeares understanding of the anarchic power of performance.. By the 1590s, however, the clowns voice was increasingly silenced by emerging theater practice intent on authorial control and Elizabethan codes of decorum. Against the dominant critical tide, Shakespeare continued to embrace clowning and worked closely with Will Kemp Tarletons successor as the greatest clown of his agespecifically and deliberately placing him alongside his leading man, Richard Burbage, the originator of the roles of Romeo, Hal, Hamlet and many others. Through an analysis of key scenes in Romeo and Juliet and Henry IV, Embracing Disruption illustrates the enormously generative, unstable, and compelling relationship between these two actors, Burbage and Kempthe hero and the clownand how their extraordinary dynamic was experienced on the stage rather than on the page. This hero-clown dynamic continues even after Kemps departure from Shakespeares company: Hamlet features the ghosts of Tarleton and Kemp, two clowns deeply informing Burbages performance as the hero. Then a similar dynamic emerges between Kemps replacement, a very different clown in Robert Armin playing the Fool opposite Burbage in King Lear. In each instance, the presence of the clown crucially informs the audiences understanding of the hero. Moreover, Shakespeares increasingly sophisticated deployment of clowning comments on and resists the transformation and gentrification of the theater that defined the Elizabethan era.

This study will be of great interest to students and scholars in Performance studies and Shakespeare studies.