On February 26th at the Olivier Theatre in London, National Theatre opened their production of Macbeth. Directed by Rufus Norris this reimagining of the Shakespeare classic had a approximate runtime of two hours and 30 minutes with an intermission. The lead roles of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth would be played by Rory Kinnear and Anne-Marie Duff respectively. This run would not just be a standard run of theatre as the National Theatre went out of their way to make sure all audiences could attend and enjoy this production. Select performances designated as “Audio-described performances” would have live audio descriptions of the productions available via headphones for the blind and visually impaired. Prior to these special performances a “Touch Tour” would be given to the visually impaired patrons so they could get an idea of what the set felt like and consisted of prior to the performance. Along with these the National Theatre would also provide captioned performances for the deaf and hearing impaired. Where they would display screens at the front of the theatre, showing captions so the patrons could read along as the play progressed. This would not be this specific production of Macbeth’s only venue as it is set to tour the UK and Ireland starting September 2018.
On a barren and wild heath in Scotland, the three Weird Sisters meet in thunder and lightning, and await Macbeth. At a battle camp, King Duncan of Scotland and his son Malcolm learn that Macbeth‘s and Banquo’s heroic fighting against the rebels was successful. The Thane of Cawdor, who led the rebels, will be executed, and his title given to Macbeth. Returning from battle, Macbeth and Banquo come upon the Weird Sisters. The witches address Macbeth as the Thane of Cawdor and the future king; they tell Banquo that it will be his heirs who will rule Scotland. Then they disappear. And so on and so forth, we have all heard the story. One can only imagine how daunting it must be to contemplate adapting the “Scottish play” for stage and then wonder how in the world could anyone have anything more to add to the mountain of interpretations that have been done since Macbeth was written. It’s a limited thing, there’s only so much one can do. The proverbial cow has been milked on this one. But then agin Shakespeare’s work is filled with all kinds of themes that lend themselves to up-to-date social commentary. And with an expired copyright, It lets directors interpret the text in ANY way they see fit. In particular, any play dealing with leaders and the corruption of power and ambition is always going to draw a crowd now-a-days. Politicians will never live down the cynical nature of playwrights in the arts community. As easy as it is to take Macbeth and interpret it into a new and different era, as director Rufus Norris has done here, and making a commentary on the present day is all well and good, it isn’t enough to simply capture the surface elements of looming disaster as a backdrop for the power and wailing that we’re all familiar with. The audience needs to believe that kind of bastardry could arise from the society and political environment depicted. In this adaptation Norris washes the old and neglected setting in black, borders it with curtains of black plastic and a large curving bridge across the stage upon which the actors would enter and exit. The bridge is a dynamic and interesting structure that, kind of, disappears into the darkness. And it one of the better aspects of this production. However, Norris seems to compromise the story and acting with atmosphere. The witches come out wearing mutilated babies and the show opens with a gory beheading by Macbeth himself. With all of these aesthetic details, it felt like Norris lost sight of some key elements of the original setting and handicaps Macbeth’s character progression. This sadly also has sort of like a domino effect of leaving many of the characters meaningless to the audience, as when the protagonist is not believable it follows that the decisions of those around him or her might lack conviction as well. In a society with no laws, where even the most successful of the few remaining people are only survivors getting by on scraps and armor that is seemingly taped together, what could Macbeth possibly see as being the benefit of killing the king with such brutality? Critics have said:
“In this production Macbeth is not an ambitious man corrupted but a deluded psychopath indulged — one who needs little invitation to ruin the lives of many to raise his own standing within the doomsday survivor community.” (Michael Billington)
Rory Kinnear is committed in the lead role and does his best with the language. He portrays Macbeth’s quick ascent and sharp decline effectively, and is supported by Anne-Marie Duff as Lady Macbeth. The actors in the production were not the driving force in its not so warm reception. Another critic states:
“But the problems with Macbeth start at the base where Norris has tried a little too hard to frame it for the modern audience. It’s admirable, but it ultimately doesn’t quite pay off.” (Dominic Cavendish)
“Unfortunately, this production didn’t really hit the spot for me. First there were the elements that were omitted. For example, “Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.” which is not only an iconic scene but, it acts as a warning to both the audience and Macbeth that there is major trouble ahead. The other issue is that all of the comedy seems to have disappeared. Yes, Macbeth is a tragedy but there were various comedic elements – such as when the Porter opens the castle gate to Lennox and Macduff – which just seemed to have lost their humor.” (Fergus Morgan)
“The staging of the play seems fascinating and very complex with black being the predominant color in Rae Smith’s set, dominated by a steeply sloped ramp that looked like a health and safety nightmare as actors came running down .. Moritz Junge’s costumes feel as if they have been pretty much lifted from a Mad Max movie and the whole effect is one of grunge and paramilitary simplicity rather than the beauty of the highlands and Macbeth’s castle being a homely place in which to rest. Director Rufus Norris really keeps his cast moving. There is a lot of running around the vast stage area, and there are some nice touches. It’s not often an audience gets to see a beheading performed on stage. This aspect of the play was well conceived and consistent.” (Holly Williams)
Drama is a living art. It is be performed live before a group of people who form an audience and experience it together. This tradition of performance and observance, of drama as communication, is a historically rich and complex one that reaches far back in time. Impersonation and imitation have been used not only ritualistically but also as a means of expression and communication, a way to impart the knowledge of the community. It is this long and varied tradition of community engagement and communication through drama that Shakespeare and the Renaissance playwrights inherited, from which they would both borrow and imagine new possibilities. Drama not only depicts human communication, it is human communication. But in the theater, unlike television or film, a two-way communication occurs between the actors and their audience. When you experience theatrical storytelling, you are not simply on the receiving end of this communicative process: the audience, as a community, is also a participant. We are quite used to thinking about the actors’ roles in a play, but may find it strange to imagine ourselves, the audience, playing an important role in this living art. Because theater is art that lives, each performance is guaranteed to be different, depending in part upon an audience’s response. A live performance depends upon its audience. In the theater, the audience hears and sees the actors, just as the actors hear and see the audience. When the actors experience a responsive, interested audience, their work is at its best—full of animation and energy. With all of this History and truthfully a simple definition, Directors of the twenty first century have this trend of over directing their pieces so much that the original meaning, or any meaning rather is completely lost. Which is shown tenfold in this production of Macbeth at the National Theatre.
Works Cited
- Billington, Michael. “Macbeth Review – Rufus Norris’s Brutal Take Misses the Poetry.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Mar. 2018, www.theguardian.com/stage/2018/mar/07/macbeth-review-national-theatre-rufus-norris-rory-kinnear-anne-marie-duff.
- Cavendish, Dominic. “Is This a Dud Which I See before Me? Macbeth, National Theatre, Review.” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 27 June 2018, www.telegraph.co.uk/theatre/what-to-see/dud-see-macbeth-national-theatre-review/amp/.
- “National Theatre.” A Potted History of Improvisation | National Theatre, www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/shows/macbeth.
- Tripney, Natasha, et al. “Macbeth at National Theatre – Review Round-Up.” The Stage, 8 Mar. 2018, www.thestage.co.uk/opinion/2018/macbeth-national-theatre-london-review-round/.
- Williams, Holly. “Macbeth, Review: Rory Kinnear and Anne-Marie Duff Are No Dream Pairing.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 10 Mar. 2018, www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/reviews/macbeth-national-theatre-review-rory-kinnear-annemarie-duff-a8244476.html