Humanities 2025, 14(5), 111; https://doi.org/10.3390/h14050111 - 20 May 2025
Abstract
When it comes to acting in modern productions of Shakespeare’s plays, size is more than all talk. That is, though how much a character speaks often serves as the measure of a role’s size, “small parts” may have a lot to say—and, as
[...] Read more.
When it comes to acting in modern productions of Shakespeare’s plays, size is more than all talk. That is, though how much a character speaks often serves as the measure of a role’s size, “small parts” may have a lot to say—and, as it turns out, the actors playing them may have a lot (or too little) to do. Some modern approaches to dramaturgy and practice may mean that the performers playing roles not qualified as large are susceptible to isolation throughout the artistic process, possibly having reduced rehearsal time. If the number of spoken lines influences the number of rehearsal hours, an actor playing a “small part” may be at a disadvantage when it comes to opportunities for character development and the benefits of creative collaboration. (In a rehearsal process for A Midsummer Night’s Dream, for example, how active might Hippolyta’s participation be if she is not doubling as Titania?) Additionally, having fewer lines on the stage can mean inheriting more labor behind the scenes, since an available body is a valuable commodity in the economy of production (what tasks might Ursula undertake during Much Ado About Nothing?). The tension between “playing conditions” and “working conditions” in the theater is thus especially heightened for Shakespeare’s women, whose onstage existence can throw an uncanny shadow upon the offstage experiences of those who play them.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Shakespearean Performance: Contemporary Approaches, Findings, and Practices)
