The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

King Lear as a Bad-Tempered Old Man: Anthony Hopkins and David Hare Tackle Shakespeare


Article # : 12444 

Section : THE ARTS
Issue Date : 7 / 1987  2,556 Words
Author : Herb Greer
Herb Greer is an American writer and playwright who lives in Britain and on the Continent.

       Every midwinter, like the recurring solstice, London's biggest public theaters rise and treat the British public to a strange and noisy freak show. The main, indeed the only, attraction is a vociferous two-headed monster, which looks like Oliver Twist grafted onto the prophet Jeremiah in full cry. The burden of this creature's lamentation is the stinginess of the government and the Arts Council. It rends the air with auguries of gloom, doom, and the cultural demise of British theater - because the multimillion-pound grants to the Royal Shakespeare Company and the National Theatre may not be increased.
       
        The RSC has done well with this circus, but the National has had to weather some harsh treatment from the press. Last year its director, Sir Peter Hall, did the Oliver Jeremiah number literally standing on a tabletop, and used rhetoric that was fierce even by the harsh standards of such protest. The wide coverage of this scenery-chewing performance became an embarrassment later in the year, when London's Sunday Times broke a scandalous story about Sir Peter. It asserted that he had used the grant money of previous years, plus the facilities of the National Theatre, to mount shows that later blossomed in the private sector of London's West End and on Broadway. Such transfers are normal enough; but Sir Peter was said to have arranged it so that he, as director of the shows, made more personal profit than the National Theatre. Since the National (and the taxpayers) had taken the financial risks, this did not seem quite right. The same report said that Sir Peter would soon be announcing his resignation. Angrily he denied it all - the profits, the resignation, everything. A few weeks later, he announced that he would indeed be ... (1898 of 14066 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy