PN Review Print and Online Poetry Magazine
Most Read... Rebecca WattsThe Cult of the Noble Amateur
(PN Review 239)
Mark FordLetters And So It Goes
Letters from Young Mr Grace
(aka John Ashbery)

(PN Review 239)
Kei Millerthe Fat Black Woman
In Praise of the Fat Black Woman & Volume

(PN Review 241)
Henry Kingon Toby Martinez de las Rivas
(PN Review 244)
Eavan BolandA Lyric Voice at Bay
(PN Review 121)
Vahni CapildeoOn Judging Prizes, & Reading More than Six Really Good Books
(PN Review 237)
Next Issue John McAuliffe poems and conversation Charles Dobzynski translated by Marilyn Hacker Maya C. Popa in conversation with Caroline Bird Richard Gwyn With Lowry in Cuernavaca Jane Draycott Four Poems
Poems Articles Interviews Reports Reviews Contributors
PNR 250 Poetry Archive Banner
Monthly Carcanet Books
PN Review Blog

This report is taken from PN Review 153, Volume 30 Number 1, September - October 2003.

Through Hamlet's Eyes Timothy Harris

Two years ago, Peter Brook's version of Hamlet for eight players and a musician was performed at the Setagaya Public Theatre in Tokyo, where I saw it, and subsequently at the Young Vic in London. The original performances were at Brook's base, Theatre des Bouffes du Nord, in Paris. I was very impressed by certain aspects of the production, particularly the performance of Adrian Lester as Hamlet, but had some reservations, reservations that have been reinforced by the high-definition video of this Hamlet that is now available. By denying Brook the strengths that spring from live performance, the video brings out the weaknesses of the production more clearly. The principal weakness lies in Brook's conception, and this weakness may be summed up in Harley Granville Barker's remark about the play as a whole: 'Hamlet so dominates the play that we are too apt to see things through his eyes.' In the interview that accompanied the showing of the video on Japanese television, Brook said that 'many, many great authorities have said that Hamlet is an artistic failure', and that this was so because Shakespeare did not conceive of the play as a whole since he was re-working an older and 'not very good... melodrama'. Granville Barker certainly thought that Shakespeare had been unable to 'so assimilate character and story that no incongruities appear', but equally certainly he did not judge the play an artistic failure (his Preface on Hamlet is by far the longest of the Prefaces). That was ...


Searching, please wait... animated waiting image