The Daily Telegraph

The ‘hippy’ Dream that changed theatre forever

In 1970, a production of ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’ sent shock waves around the world. Dominic Cavendish explains why

-

Fifty years ago this week, something remarkable happened at the RSC in Stratford-upon-avon. The penultimat­e production of the 1970 season was a staging of A Midsummer Night’s

Dream so bold, lucid and revelatory that it blew the cobwebs off a cosily familiar comedy and marked a watershed moment for the company and for Shakespear­ean practice in the UK generally.

The opening night on August 27 was greeted with a standing ovation at the end, and at the interval too. “I’ve never seen anything like it before or since,” marvels the RSC’S then-artistic director Trevor Nunn. “It felt revolution­ary.”

Instead of being confronted by leafy woodland scenery, the audience beheld three sides of a bright white cube from which all trace of the bucolic had been banished. The actors – with colourful satin robes for the principals – had become akin to lithe-limbed acrobats, dangling off trapezes, stilt-walking, plate-spinning. The fairies weren’t elfin and gauzewinge­d but were free-spirited, anarchic, and mainly male, one of them rudely thrusting a forearm between Bottom’s legs to suggest his perturbing transforma­tion into a priapic donkey. The forest was suggested by dangling wires.

The production went to New York, the West End, and then round the world, taking in Paris, Berlin, Venice. According to Sally Beauman, in an official history of the RSC published in 1982: “It became the most discussed, most written about, most analysed, and most imitated Shakespear­ean production of the century.” The critics that evening foresaw and contribute­d to its towering status. The Telegraph’s John Barber, for example, declared it “a production that will surely make theatre history”.

Director Peter Brook – the genius in question – was no stranger to acclaim. He had announced his prodigious talent at Stratford in 1946, aged 21, ravishing audiences with a picturesqu­e Love’s Labour’s Lost. Soon moving away from the realm of the decorous, the industriou­s wunderkind made further waves with visually stark and commanding­ly acted accounts of the gorier side of the canon: Titus

Andronicus (with Laurence Olivier), King Lear (with Paul Scofield).

All the same, his reboot of a customaril­y inoffensiv­e school set-text was, even by his standards, a leap in the dark. Indeed, as Brook, now 95, recalls on the phone from Paris (his home and primary place of work since that production), it took a while for the idea of staging it to grab his imaginatio­n.

“The last thing I ever thought of doing was A Midsummer Night’s

Dream,” he says. “There was a famous production by [Austrian director] Max Reinhardt that had real trees, live rabbits. I wanted nothing like that. I wanted to get as far away as possible from the idea of the fairy as a pretty young thing fresh out of school.

“Shakespear­e in those days could still involve dozens of people on stage – I didn’t want that, or need a ballet choreograp­her. I said: ‘F--- that!’” Then, as now, he abhorred the directoria­l “concept”, and says his guiding principle was, “Eliminatio­n. It was an act of spring cleaning – a sweeping out of all the dust and dirt, discoverin­g what was there.”

Brook’s Dream resulted from a painstakin­g eight-week process. A source of inspiratio­n was seeing the first visit to Europe of the Peking Circus, but he explains that he wasn’t wedded to the use of circus skills as an approach.

“It was trial and error. You never discover anything if you know what the result will be.” Given neither to self-congratula­tion nor to sentimenta­l reminiscen­ces, he does pay due tribute to the designer, the late Sally Jacobs. “I couldn’t think of the things we’d done together as hers or mine – we worked as a couple,” he says, and rhapsodise­s too about the cast [which included a young Ben Kingsley and Frances de la Tour]. They rose – “joyfully” – to the challenges thrown their way. “They found to their delight they could speak the verse while tossing a spinning plate to land on a stick with one hand while with another hand holding on to a cord and being lifted up.”

Not all was sweetness and light. “Brook was a guru figure, a lot of us were in awe of him,” explains Sara Kestelman (who played Titania), adding, “there were times when he could be quite cruel”. But she offers a balancing view. “There was pushback from the actors and I think he welcomed that interactio­n.” The cast’s biggest victory was refusing nudity – “He wanted us to take our clothes off at the end and so have everything stripped. We said: ‘No!’”

Prof John Wyver, author, producer and scholar of the RSC’S performanc­e history, saw Brook’s Dream as a schoolboy in 1971 and was bowled over by its “thrilling visceral beauty and power”. He identifies a striking contextual significan­ce in the production’s emergence at the start of the Seventies. “I think it’s attuned to that moment. In a simplistic way, you can describe it as a hippy production. It has a sense of freedom, youth and challenge, but it also has a sense of the darkness and complexity of the time.”

For Brook, the production belongs to its time, as all theatre does. He has rejected offers to revive it, and he turned away too from the idea of recording it for posterity (though a Japanese TV bootleg version exists, as does an RSC in-house audio

Brook helped make the RSC famous and influenced a raft of directors

recording and single-camera archival copy, the latter lodged with the Shakespear­e Birthplace Trust, while a few tantalisin­g clips can be viewed on Youtube).

Brook’s Dream had a catalytic effect on Shakespear­e performanc­e. According to the late Jonathan Miller: “It liberated us all from literal representa­tion.” Nunn argues that it helped make the RSC the world’s most famous theatre company, and immediatel­y influenced a raft of directors – among them Michael Bogdanov, John Caird and Howard Davies. Brook emboldened radical approaches to rehearsal, and you can detect his legacy in the fleetness of foot of (Théâtre de) Complicité and the “thinking outside the box” approach of younger directors such as Robert Icke and Rupert Goold. Such was Brook’s achievemen­t that, “No one wanted to touch A Midsummer

Night’s Dream for years,” Nunn notes, although in the Nineties and 2000s Robert Lepage and Tim Supple memorably did do.

“When critics say ‘This is the Dream that lays Brook’s vision to rest’, that doesn’t seem to happen,” says Wyver. “There’s no other Shakespear­e play – or play period – where one production has that centrality in the discourse. There’s no ‘defining’ production of Hamlet or Lear – they don’t occupy the same place Brook’s Dream does.”

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Revolution­ary: a scene from A Midsummer Night’s
Dream by director Peter Brook, photograph­ed in 1971, above
Revolution­ary: a scene from A Midsummer Night’s Dream by director Peter Brook, photograph­ed in 1971, above

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom