Thanks to long-time reader Angela for the link! The Royal Shakespeare Company today announces its plans to reopen the Royal Shakespeare and Swan Theatres on time and on budget in November 2010, following a four year redevelopment as part of the £112.8 million Transformation project designed to bring actors and audiences closer together. The Company will reopen its doors to the Royal Shakespeare and Swan Theatres from 24 November 2010, inviting people in to rediscover and explore the building, which will have a brand new 1,000 seat thrust stage auditorium, 36 metre high Tower, new exhibition spaces, new places to eat and drink, including Rooftop Restaurant and Riverside Café and terrace, restored 1930s features and improved public areas including the new Weston Square. Visitors will be able to take part in a series of preview events and activities which will help test the spaces, while throughout the opening period Matilda, A Musical plays at The Courtyard Theatre. Read more: http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/RSC_to_Reopen_Royal_Shakespeare_Theatre_1124_20100901#ixzz0yID8GnB3

Life is what happens when you’re busy making blog posts.

Hi Geeks, I like to do one of these every few months (though I’ve never called it this) just to play catch up a bit when it seems like I’m falling behind.  I’m pleased to see the amount of conversation that’s going on in some of the latest posts, and saddened that I’m not able to be a part of that conversation as much as I’d like. My book is coming along nicely, first of all.  It’s content-complete and has now been to the editor twice.  Next comes formatting for publication, and going through everything that goes with that (cover design, registering copyright, getting an ISBN, getting into Amazon, all that good stuff).  Of course I’m learning this stuff on my own as I go, so it’s hard to tell from day to day when I’m going to glide over the latest obstacles and when I’m going to meet insurmountable ones.  But this thing will get done, I promise that. Part of that release will also involve a new web site, which is at least something I do know a little bit about :).  It will not in any way replace Shakespeare Geek.  The new site will just be one of those what we call “microsites” for the whole purpose of giving the marketing traffic a place to land.  But it still needs to be functional and look pretty, and that takes time. As that draws to a close I’m looking to ramp up on another project I’ve had on the backburner for awhile, something that requires more of my programming skills. I’ve been building up my own Shakespeare knowledge base that I plan to unleash on the world Real Soon Now. I know exactly how I want it to work, I’ve just got to plug in the social aspects.  The idea is to be a question answering site, and I want to experts who spend their time answering questions to get some recognition for their contribution, build up some cred. I’ve also got two books on my shelf waiting to be reviewed, with a third on the way.  There’s also something supposed to be coming, not really a book, more of a toy, that I’m told I’ll actually get to giveaway.  But I have no idea when that’s going to show up. Then of course there’s the day job.  It’s new and it’s work from home, which makes it difficult to properly judge time.  I need to make sure that I’m spending the right amount of time doing my “real” work, which tends to make the Shakespeare stuff suffer since every time I work on the Shakespeare I have to ask myself, “Did I work enough on my day job stuff?” and often the answer is, “Wellll……no, I suppose I could do more.” Of course it doesn’t help (me, at least) that the Shakespeare blogging world seems to have taken off a bit, and for every post I make I could probably find a dozen to link from the various other blogs that have crept up on me.  Not only do I not have the cycles to properly do that justice (I don’t like to just link without having at least some comment, which implies reading and appreciating what I’m linking), but it is a bit of a downer for me to sometimes feel a bit left in the dust if I don’t keep the pace up. Meanwhile I’ve noticed that the conversation has often been drifting into that dreaded TL;DR zone that JM loves so much :).  Mark and Ren, I know that you’re relatively new here and no offense is intended when I say this, but half the time I don’t understand at all what you’re talking about.  I’m pleased to provide the forum for you to have these discussions, because I know there are others who want to have them.  But don’t be offended when I can’t join.  I’m not a student of this stuff.  By nature of this medium I find myself more in the literary school than the theatrical one (i.e. I write about it far more than I’ll ever speak or hear about it).  So when you compare notes about directors and performance choices, I don’t have much to offer.  Don’t let that stop you, though. School starts up over the next couple weeks, which may make the days a little bit more structured and peaceful, so perhaps things will change a bit.  Until then, think of me as the Coffee Talk lady from Saturday Night Live (assuming people still understand what the heck that reference means, see YouTube video):

I’ll give you a topic. Catcher in the Rye neither caught anything, nor was he particularly wry.  Discuss.

That was a joke, by the way.  We’ve already discussed. All right, that’s it for me for now.  Thanks for listening and buying stuff,  keep reading and posting, and stay tuned for a couple of exciting new projects coming soon!   – Duane

We’ve asked the question here before about when you “got” Shakespeare.  Liz at Blogging Shakespeare puts a more specific spin on the question when she asks what production did you see that made you “get” it?  With examples from Hamlet, Much Ado and Julius Caesar, Liz cites from her own experience.  Bonus points for acknowledging that she’s not yet seen her defining Lear, and until then, “King Lear is a story about a stupid old man who makes a stupid mistake and gets his comeuppance.” I’m not sure I have my own story to add, however. I think that this is one of those lines that divides the world of Shakespeare fandom a bit.  Some people, particularly those that are in the business, will have the desire and opportunity to seek out many productions.  More casual theatre goers, like myself, will see far less.  My wife came with me to see King Lear once.  It wasn’t a good production.  But if King Lear came around every year, it’s not like I could drag her to it every time.  But unless somebody’s paying for the privilege I can’t go off on my own and see every production that comes to town, either. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen my share.  Seen a number of Midsummers’, Tempests and Hamlets in particular.  But for the most part I switch over to movies, which I have a better shot at watching in my down time, carrying around Richard Burton or Ian McKellan on my ipod.  For those live productions that I have seen?  I can’t say that any are really “get it” moments.  I leave that for the text.  I try to learn something new from every production I see, certainly.  But I don’t think I’ve yet seen one that I’d call defining in any way.

Following up on the Perspective thread, a slightly different spin :

What “high school classic”, that you never read in high school, did you finally get around to reading, only to not see what the big deal was?

I don’t want to talk about what you loved, or how every book you pick up you grok from the first word.  I want to hear about something that modern culture tells you should have meant something to you, and just… didn’t.

We’re a bit of a strange group, we Shakespeare geeks.  We voluntarily seek out and read things that, were we teenagers, our teachers would have had to force us to read, giving us quizzes at every breaking point and asking us all about themes and symbolism.
So having just read Catcher in the Rye 25 odd years after I should have, with no teachers to tell me what it’s about, I find that my perspective has changed. I didn’t love it.  I think it’s a good book, and I can see that it’s trying to tell me … something.  But I’m not sure I fully grasp what.  And, 25 years after the fact, I’m not sure that I can.
Does that make sense?  We’ve often talked about approaches to teaching Shakespeare, and the difference between getting the kids to love it versus telling them to just shut up and do it. But I think there’s a big gap in between those two that isn’t served by that sort of black and white approach. Namely, do you understand it? Do you have questions, do you need help? Most importantly, what does the material mean to you?
As a 40yr old father of 3, Catcher in the Rye to me is an unrealistic, dated story about an annoying 12yr old who has some pretty hefty psych issues, very likely depression and possibly some form of attention deficit disorder.  I didn’t bond with the title character in any way.   I didn’t sympathize with him.  I didn’t get him.
I wonder which is more at fault, the fact that it’s no longer as relevant to me? Or the fact that I didn’t have somebody spoonfeeding it to me?
re: the Shakespeare connection, by the way, we’ll do another post on that one.  I’m not willing to accept that Hamlet gets credit for every angst-ridden teenager with parent issues, unless we want to go all Bloomy and just say that Shakespeare invented the human.