玩真实:模仿,媒体和恶作剧

IF 0.3 2区 艺术学 0 THEATER CONTEMPORARY THEATRE REVIEW Pub Date : 2021-10-02 DOI:10.1080/10486801.2021.1968588
Victoria Lowe
{"title":"玩真实:模仿,媒体和恶作剧","authors":"Victoria Lowe","doi":"10.1080/10486801.2021.1968588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"also highlight the persistent fragility of such exercises as ‘social connotations that are still commonly attached to [Standard Pronunciation; StP] and [Non-Standard English] accents, on and off the Shakespearean stage’ remain dominant. Massai also deftly charts the history and role of Original Pronunciation (OP) practices in diversifying Shakespearean performance style and acoustics, and finding new audiences for Shakespeare, before taking a further step back in time to explore David Garrick’s ‘Sonic Revolution’ of the eighteenth century. By combining a carefully constructed performance history with a socio-cultural study of the contemporaneous perception of accents, she thus exposes the cultural divides that existed between those who advocated for a StP Shakespeare (although just what counted as StP was highly controversial) versus those who desired a more ‘natural’ delivery, such as Garrick and the two John Palmers. As Massai explains, ‘elitist attitudes towards the ownership of Shakespeare and spoken drama in the nineteenth century’ would result in Received Pronunciation ‘reign[ing] supreme on the English stage’ for centuries to come (140). As ever, central to these discussions is a perennial concern with legitimacy, place and ‘acoustic correctness’ (140) that therefore ‘prevent[s] the urgent, acoustic emancipation or re-activation of both performer and spectator, voicer and listener’ (194). Whilst Massai acknowledges the methodological difficulties that are inherent to studying and reimagining accents from the early modern era, she convincingly argues that accents were used, if sparingly, for characterisation and sophisticated dramatic effect on the early modern stage by drawing on two central examples: the role of Evans and the Anglo-Welsh accent in The Merry Wives of Windsor, and Edgar’s deliberate use of a Southern accent whilst confronting Oswald in King Lear. As Massai powerfully concludes, ‘we tend to not only underestimate the versatility of English accents and dialects as they were deployed by Shakespeare and his contemporaries on the early modern stage but [also] the extent to which inflected voices carried social and cultural meanings’ (188). These meanings continue to be shaped and reformed as ‘politically charged acts of self-(re)fashioning’ (190). This accessibly written book is grounded in a thoroughly researched performance and sociolinguistic history of vital conversations that continue to shape current practices and approaches towards the intricate relationships and power dynamics between accents, theatre-making, and Shakespeare. It is an important read for students and scholars of Shakespearean performance, past and present, and the cultural and political history of sociolinguistics.","PeriodicalId":43835,"journal":{"name":"CONTEMPORARY THEATRE REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Playing Real: Mimesis, Media, and Mischief\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Lowe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10486801.2021.1968588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"also highlight the persistent fragility of such exercises as ‘social connotations that are still commonly attached to [Standard Pronunciation; StP] and [Non-Standard English] accents, on and off the Shakespearean stage’ remain dominant. Massai also deftly charts the history and role of Original Pronunciation (OP) practices in diversifying Shakespearean performance style and acoustics, and finding new audiences for Shakespeare, before taking a further step back in time to explore David Garrick’s ‘Sonic Revolution’ of the eighteenth century. By combining a carefully constructed performance history with a socio-cultural study of the contemporaneous perception of accents, she thus exposes the cultural divides that existed between those who advocated for a StP Shakespeare (although just what counted as StP was highly controversial) versus those who desired a more ‘natural’ delivery, such as Garrick and the two John Palmers. As Massai explains, ‘elitist attitudes towards the ownership of Shakespeare and spoken drama in the nineteenth century’ would result in Received Pronunciation ‘reign[ing] supreme on the English stage’ for centuries to come (140). As ever, central to these discussions is a perennial concern with legitimacy, place and ‘acoustic correctness’ (140) that therefore ‘prevent[s] the urgent, acoustic emancipation or re-activation of both performer and spectator, voicer and listener’ (194). Whilst Massai acknowledges the methodological difficulties that are inherent to studying and reimagining accents from the early modern era, she convincingly argues that accents were used, if sparingly, for characterisation and sophisticated dramatic effect on the early modern stage by drawing on two central examples: the role of Evans and the Anglo-Welsh accent in The Merry Wives of Windsor, and Edgar’s deliberate use of a Southern accent whilst confronting Oswald in King Lear. As Massai powerfully concludes, ‘we tend to not only underestimate the versatility of English accents and dialects as they were deployed by Shakespeare and his contemporaries on the early modern stage but [also] the extent to which inflected voices carried social and cultural meanings’ (188). These meanings continue to be shaped and reformed as ‘politically charged acts of self-(re)fashioning’ (190). This accessibly written book is grounded in a thoroughly researched performance and sociolinguistic history of vital conversations that continue to shape current practices and approaches towards the intricate relationships and power dynamics between accents, theatre-making, and Shakespeare. It is an important read for students and scholars of Shakespearean performance, past and present, and the cultural and political history of sociolinguistics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CONTEMPORARY THEATRE REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CONTEMPORARY THEATRE REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10486801.2021.1968588\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"THEATER\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CONTEMPORARY THEATRE REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10486801.2021.1968588","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"THEATER","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

也强调了这类练习的脆弱性,比如“社会内涵通常仍然与[标准发音;在莎士比亚的舞台上和舞台下,StP和[非标准英语]口音仍然占主导地位。马萨伊还巧妙地描绘了原创发音(OP)实践的历史和作用,使莎士比亚的表演风格和声学多样化,并为莎士比亚寻找新的观众,然后进一步回顾了18世纪大卫·加里克(David Garrick)的“声音革命”。通过将精心构建的表演历史与对当时口音感知的社会文化研究相结合,她揭示了那些主张StP莎士比亚的人(尽管StP的计算是高度争议的)与那些希望更“自然”的人之间存在的文化鸿沟,例如加里克和两位约翰帕尔默斯。正如马萨伊解释的那样,“19世纪对莎士比亚作品和口语戏剧的精英主义态度”将导致标准发音在接下来的几个世纪里“在英语舞台上占据至高无上的地位”(140页)。一如既往,这些讨论的核心是对合法性、地点和“声音正确性”的长期关注(140),因此“阻止了表演者和观众、发声者和听众的迫切的声音解放或重新激活”(194)。虽然马萨伊承认,从现代早期开始研究和重新想象口音在方法论上存在困难,但她令人信服地认为,在现代早期阶段,口音被用于人物塑造和复杂的戏剧效果,尽管使用得很少,她引用了两个主要例子:《温莎的风流妻子》中埃文斯和盎格鲁-威尔士口音的作用,以及《李尔王》中埃德加在面对奥斯瓦尔德时故意使用南方口音。正如马萨伊强有力地总结的那样,“我们不仅倾向于低估莎士比亚及其同时代人在早期现代舞台上使用的英语口音和方言的多样性,而且[也]低估了变调声音所承载的社会和文化意义的程度”(188)。这些意义继续被塑造和改造为“充满政治色彩的自我(再)塑造行为”(190)。这本通俗易懂的书是基于对重要对话的表演和社会语言学历史的深入研究,这些对话继续塑造着口音、戏剧制作和莎士比亚之间错综复杂的关系和权力动态的当前实践和方法。这是一个重要的阅读学生和学者的莎士比亚表演,过去和现在,以及社会语言学的文化和政治史。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Playing Real: Mimesis, Media, and Mischief
also highlight the persistent fragility of such exercises as ‘social connotations that are still commonly attached to [Standard Pronunciation; StP] and [Non-Standard English] accents, on and off the Shakespearean stage’ remain dominant. Massai also deftly charts the history and role of Original Pronunciation (OP) practices in diversifying Shakespearean performance style and acoustics, and finding new audiences for Shakespeare, before taking a further step back in time to explore David Garrick’s ‘Sonic Revolution’ of the eighteenth century. By combining a carefully constructed performance history with a socio-cultural study of the contemporaneous perception of accents, she thus exposes the cultural divides that existed between those who advocated for a StP Shakespeare (although just what counted as StP was highly controversial) versus those who desired a more ‘natural’ delivery, such as Garrick and the two John Palmers. As Massai explains, ‘elitist attitudes towards the ownership of Shakespeare and spoken drama in the nineteenth century’ would result in Received Pronunciation ‘reign[ing] supreme on the English stage’ for centuries to come (140). As ever, central to these discussions is a perennial concern with legitimacy, place and ‘acoustic correctness’ (140) that therefore ‘prevent[s] the urgent, acoustic emancipation or re-activation of both performer and spectator, voicer and listener’ (194). Whilst Massai acknowledges the methodological difficulties that are inherent to studying and reimagining accents from the early modern era, she convincingly argues that accents were used, if sparingly, for characterisation and sophisticated dramatic effect on the early modern stage by drawing on two central examples: the role of Evans and the Anglo-Welsh accent in The Merry Wives of Windsor, and Edgar’s deliberate use of a Southern accent whilst confronting Oswald in King Lear. As Massai powerfully concludes, ‘we tend to not only underestimate the versatility of English accents and dialects as they were deployed by Shakespeare and his contemporaries on the early modern stage but [also] the extent to which inflected voices carried social and cultural meanings’ (188). These meanings continue to be shaped and reformed as ‘politically charged acts of self-(re)fashioning’ (190). This accessibly written book is grounded in a thoroughly researched performance and sociolinguistic history of vital conversations that continue to shape current practices and approaches towards the intricate relationships and power dynamics between accents, theatre-making, and Shakespeare. It is an important read for students and scholars of Shakespearean performance, past and present, and the cultural and political history of sociolinguistics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Contemporary Theatre Review (CTR) analyses what is most passionate and vital in theatre today. It encompasses a wide variety of theatres, from new playwrights and devisors to theatres of movement, image and other forms of physical expression, from new acting methods to music theatre and multi-media production work. Recognising the plurality of contemporary performance practices, it encourages contributions on physical theatre, opera, dance, design and the increasingly blurred boundaries between the physical and the visual arts.
期刊最新文献
Decolonizing Site-Specific Performance Methodologies: Preliminary Steps Liberal Lives and Activist Repertoires: Political Performance and Victorian Social Reform Let it Burn: Smell, Participation, and Solidarity in Travis Alabanza’s Burgerz Rethinking Didactic Theatre for a Young Audience Translating Simon Stone’s Radical Rewritings into German
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1