《结束的狂欢:乔治亚·莎士比亚的缺席

A. Hartley
{"title":"《结束的狂欢:乔治亚·莎士比亚的缺席","authors":"A. Hartley","doi":"10.1353/shb.2021.0044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This essay discusses two Atlanta Shakespeare companies, Georgia Shakespeare (formerly the Georgia Shakespeare Festival) and the Atlanta Shakespeare Company (known locally as The Shakespeare Tavern) in terms of their different rehearsal approaches and budget structures. It argues that the former company (now defunct) invested in the region through its payment of higher actor rates and longer rehearsal periods, while the latter justified lower payments through a claim to early modern production practices which actually privilege author and text over the value of those who do the necessary work of production in the present. As such, the Tavern manifests the paradox of a regional company whose ideology and working practice is fundamentally anti-regional, while Georgia Shakespeare's commitment to rigorous, inventive work and support of its personnel finally proved fiscally untenable. The demise of Georgia Shakespeare has left a significant hole in the region's LORT arts scene which cannot be filled by smaller, less well-funded companies; as larger outfits have moved steadily toward more populist commercial fare, Shakespeare is being monopolized by culturally nostalgic and conservative operations.","PeriodicalId":304234,"journal":{"name":"Shakespeare Bulletin","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ended Revels: The Absence Left by Georgia Shakespeare\",\"authors\":\"A. Hartley\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/shb.2021.0044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:This essay discusses two Atlanta Shakespeare companies, Georgia Shakespeare (formerly the Georgia Shakespeare Festival) and the Atlanta Shakespeare Company (known locally as The Shakespeare Tavern) in terms of their different rehearsal approaches and budget structures. It argues that the former company (now defunct) invested in the region through its payment of higher actor rates and longer rehearsal periods, while the latter justified lower payments through a claim to early modern production practices which actually privilege author and text over the value of those who do the necessary work of production in the present. As such, the Tavern manifests the paradox of a regional company whose ideology and working practice is fundamentally anti-regional, while Georgia Shakespeare's commitment to rigorous, inventive work and support of its personnel finally proved fiscally untenable. The demise of Georgia Shakespeare has left a significant hole in the region's LORT arts scene which cannot be filled by smaller, less well-funded companies; as larger outfits have moved steadily toward more populist commercial fare, Shakespeare is being monopolized by culturally nostalgic and conservative operations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":304234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Shakespeare Bulletin\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Shakespeare Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/shb.2021.0044\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shakespeare Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/shb.2021.0044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:本文讨论了亚特兰大的两个莎士比亚剧团,佐治亚莎士比亚剧团(原佐治亚莎士比亚戏剧节)和亚特兰大莎士比亚剧团(当地称为莎士比亚酒馆)在排练方法和预算结构方面的不同。它认为,前一家公司(现已倒闭)通过支付更高的演员报酬和更长的排练时间来投资该地区,而后者则通过声称早期现代生产实践来证明较低的报酬是合理的,这种实践实际上赋予了作者和文本高于那些在目前从事必要生产工作的人的价值。因此,酒馆体现了一个自相矛盾的现象:一家地区性公司的意识形态和工作实践从根本上是反地区性的,而格鲁吉亚·莎士比亚(Georgia Shakespeare)对严谨、创造性工作的承诺和对员工的支持,最终在财政上站不住脚。格鲁吉亚莎士比亚的消亡给该地区的LORT艺术界留下了一个巨大的空白,这是规模较小、资金不足的公司无法填补的;随着大型剧团逐渐转向更民粹主义的商业票价,莎士比亚的作品正被文化怀旧和保守的剧目所垄断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ended Revels: The Absence Left by Georgia Shakespeare
Abstract:This essay discusses two Atlanta Shakespeare companies, Georgia Shakespeare (formerly the Georgia Shakespeare Festival) and the Atlanta Shakespeare Company (known locally as The Shakespeare Tavern) in terms of their different rehearsal approaches and budget structures. It argues that the former company (now defunct) invested in the region through its payment of higher actor rates and longer rehearsal periods, while the latter justified lower payments through a claim to early modern production practices which actually privilege author and text over the value of those who do the necessary work of production in the present. As such, the Tavern manifests the paradox of a regional company whose ideology and working practice is fundamentally anti-regional, while Georgia Shakespeare's commitment to rigorous, inventive work and support of its personnel finally proved fiscally untenable. The demise of Georgia Shakespeare has left a significant hole in the region's LORT arts scene which cannot be filled by smaller, less well-funded companies; as larger outfits have moved steadily toward more populist commercial fare, Shakespeare is being monopolized by culturally nostalgic and conservative operations.
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信