Conference turris::womannotes-v2

Did someone say Shakespeare?!?!? :-)

The Taming of the Shrew is a play within a play; it is Petruchio's drunken
fantasy (the very first scene bears this out; Kate is the barmaid who
participates in his getting thrown out). Of course, it is rarely produced this
way nowadays, which is why people point to is a mysogynist. 

And, there are _many_ ways to read Shakespeare's Shrew that leave Kate with a
great deal of spark, and a new appreciation of what other people do. Of course,
I'm always on the alert to those. Stratford Ontarios production the season
before last hightened the dream elements, and gave Petrucio a wakeup at the
end. In the Taylor/Burton version, he was a jerk, and he was also kind to her.
When she rejected that kindness, he was a jerk again. 

Shakespeare does the same sort of thing in Merchant of Venice (the gentiles are
_awful_), Othello, and The Tempest (slavery, as evidenced by Caliban and
Ariel). He can evoke the humanity on all sides, while still being 'true' to the
baser reactions of people (a black ram is tupping your white ewe, he is your
lord, etc.).
	Mez

Berkeley Shakespeare Festival did a _Shrew_ last year that got alot of
flack for it's updated interpretation.  

Kate was shown as a very strong, self-confident woman, who eventually
figured that Petrucio needed, for his ego, to have her say "yes, OK,
*sure* it's nightime...", etc.    The person who really got "tamed"
in this production was a skinhead who'd come into the bar to smash up
the place, and stopped to watch them do the play-within-a-play.

I liked the interpretation alot (though I could have done without the
Rap numbers); it made it palatable to watch, and I'd been wondering
how they would pull off doing that play in modern-day Berkeley.

	MKV

    I've been to the Medieval Manor, and, as Liesl observed in the other
    note, the show is bawdy but I can't consider it sexist.  If any of
    the characters are taken advantage of and put in a bad light, it's
    the men.  As a period piece, it's probably not at all authentic.  I
    don't doubt that in the real medieval times, sexism was
    blatant and ubiquitous.
    
    I and my two female companions enjoyed the show and the meal
    tremendously.  All of us are eager to return.  I'd recommend
    it highly, and would scoff at allegations that the show is
    in the least sexist.
    
    				Steve

    re:.2
    
    There's also the MOONLIGHTING episode "Atomic Shakespeare" which
    takes "The Taming of the Shrew" and sort of drops it on its head.
    
    --- jerry

>    There's also the MOONLIGHTING episode "Atomic Shakespeare" which
>    takes "The Taming of the Shrew" and sort of drops it on its head.

Jerry, *all* of Moonlighting is the Taming of the Shrew (moved to LA
of course).

Martin.

<batty imagination on>

What's the name of that other dinner theater in Boston -- Plantation Manor, 
isn't it -- where you can go feast on corn pone and grits, with the Massa 
holding court; and instead of "wenches" serving food and singing, there are 
"darkies" bowing and scraping and doing all the work, and doing minstrel 
numbers; and maybe a flock of "pickaninnies" playing about;...

What's that? You say there's no such place? Why not? Offensive? To whom? 
Because you know, this is *history,* it's just a *play,* it's only supposed 
to be *fun*...

Oh well. Never mind.  Bunch of spoilsports...

<batty imagination off>

re .6,

I have no personal knowledge of Medieval Manor.  However, based on the comments
by those who have, both in this topic and in its parent, it appears that the
parody in .6 misses the mark seriously.  

The defenders of MM are not saying that "the sexism is ok because it's 
authentic".  They're saying that it isn't there.  As I read those comments, 
they are saying that the "wenches" *aren't* "bowing and scraping", and that 
the show in general *does not* celebrate or symbolize the suppression of 
women, either in medieval history or in the present.

Thus, a comparison to a hypothetical show which emphasizes and capitalizes
on the objectionable racist elements of antebellum southern American society
seems uninformative.

	-Neil

    The problem here is that many of us find it _OK_ to have a show be
    described openly as  "sexist, yes, even misogynistic."  We don't seem
    to be bothered by that.  The analogy to "Plantation Manor" makes that
    clear.  
    
    HOWEVER, having said that, I don't think it's been proved that the
    *description* of the show as "sexist" is accurate.  I haven't been to
    Medieval Manor but I know people who have gone.  None mentioned rampant
    misogyny/sexism.  People in this notesfile have commented that the
    women give as good as they get, which is probably not authentic to how
    they were treated at the time.  So part of my surprise at the quote in
    the GLOBE is that it was made at all!  I'd have to see the show for
    myself to judge whether it really is sexist.  
    
    I agree with .7 that the analogy in .6, although powerful, isn't
    focusing on the right message.  The "PM" idea puts the emphasis on
    glorifying bad race relations from a slaveowners point of view, when
    from my knowledge of "MM", the emphasis is on recreating the costumes
    and manners of the era, not on glorifying the subjegation of women. 
    People walk out talking about drinking mead and eating using only their
    hands, not about how "that wench got what she deserved" ...
    
    King Richard's Faire in Carver, Mass., is a similar idea. (Visitors
    spend the day (or the meal) surrounded by actors in costume pretending
    to be from another era.)  I don't find it to be sexist.  The Gypsy
    dancers, for instance, pick on both men and women in the crowd.  Each
    year there's a theme running through the whole fair -- one year it was
    based on the Queen's plotting, one year on the King's.  The joust is
    men-only, but that's authentic.  Acrobats, singers, food-servers, etc.,
    are both men and women.
    
    Pam