Judges

Judges' Comments on Performances at Finals

Fourth Chinese Universities Shakespeare Festival

Introduction

We have decided to make the three judges' comments on each team available to all present and future participants in the Festival. The judges were asked to be frank in their comments because teams and directors naturally want to know how they can improve. Giving nothing but praise will not be so helpful. This new team of judges, Shakespeare experts from a variety of different backgrounds and places, saw the performances in very similar ways. They have been very generous in the detail they have included in their very thoughtful reports.The Festival organizers hope that every university can learn from them.

David Parker, on behalf of the Organizing Committee, Shakespeare Festival

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prof. Geoffrey Borny

1. Richard III Macao Polytechnic Institute

This was a performance of mixed quality. While there were some nice dramatic moments – for instance Richard’s climbing on the coffin – the overall impression was rather dull. The blocking in particular needed to be much more active. For too much of the time the characters were completely static. This applied not just to the soliloquies but also to the major scene between Richard III and the Lady Anne. The directors, Maggie and Josh, need to ensure that there is much more interaction between the characters. As it was, Peggy and Ada did not really relate to each other [Why didn’t Richard actually talk to the Lady Ann?] and the result was that the scene lacked a sense of reality.

Krystal (Richard 1) and Ada (Lady Anne) were the most competent English speakers, while Peggy (Richard 2) was not always easy to understand. All three actors, in their attempt to maintain clarity, became at times rather too deliberate and slow in their delivery and there were far too many unnecessary pauses in their speeches. There was not enough variation of tone and pace and the energy level of the performance needs to be greater. This would enable the actors to build each of their scenes to a dramatic climax.

The basically 18^th century costumes worked well and the dividing up of Richard’s role was effectively done. I’m not sure that the use of Verdi’s “La Donna Mobile” was really suited to this scene, and I think the use of a second Richard figure to represent Richard III ‘s “shadow” was not really effective.

2. The Comedy of Errors Lingnan University

The performance by Jason as both Dromio I and II was for me the highlight of this performance. Jason has a very good sense of how to play comedy and he related well both to the other characters on stage and to the audience. At times Penny (Antipholus of Syracuse/Luciana) and Ruby (Adriana) were rather hard to understand. Even Jason at times could have spoken more clearly. What is interesting is that when the three actors were interviewed after their performance they all spoke English with greater clarity than they had when performing. Ruby in particular needs to be careful not to superimpose emotion over the words as this leads to the language becoming incomprehensible. The secret with Shakespeare is to find the emotion through the clear delivery of the words.

There was a nice energy in all of the performances and overall the blocking was interesting and the use of direct address, if a little over-used was generally effective. The costumes had an appealing Eastern quality to them and the use of music and the arrangement of the columns was well thought out the scenes chosen.

I think that there perhaps there were too many short scenes in the performance. It would have been better to have chosen fewer scenes that would have allowed for greater dramatic development rather than having the performance fragmented into tiny scenes with the inevitable slow changes of scene.

3. Hamlet Wuhan University

This was an impressive piece of work both in terms of the acting and the direction. There was a seamless piece of editing that joined sections of the “nunnery” scene with “Mousetrap” play scene that was most effective. The blocking was a high standard and this, combined with nice variation of pace and appropriate size of the performances, helped greatly to communicate powerfully the reality of the scenes.

The quality of the acting was almost uniformly of a high standard. Zhao Zhiwen (Hamlet) was particularly impressive. Not only was his English beautifully clear but his fine acting ability meant that he could convincingly express madness and anger in the scene with Gertrude and then deliver the “To be or not to be” soliloquy with a contemplative rationality. Of all of the actors he showed the benefit of trusting Shakespeare’s language in order to find the appropriate level of emotion. While still giving fine performances, both Jin Jing (Ophelia) and Zhang Xue (Gertrude) occasionally fell into the trap of superimposing emotion over the words instead of finding the emotion through Shakespeare’s language. The general standard of English was very high.

The use of appropriate sound effects for the Ghost; the fine costumes; the use of simple but effective changes of lighting; and the delightful ending of the excerpts where Hamlet, holding a candle, exits while repeating the first line of the “To be or not to be” all suggested that the director, Dai Danni, not only clearly knows what Hamlet is about but also has a very fine sense of what works theatrically.

I t was the combination of high quality direction and intelligent acting that led the adjudicators to decide to give this performance the first prize. The choice was not a simple one as the runner up also presented a very impressive production.

4. The Taming of the Shrew Sichuan University

My enjoyment of this performance was greatly diminished by the fact that the English of all three actors were very hard to understand. What is strange is that when the actors were interviewed after their performance their spoken English was perfectly clear. All three actors need to remember that the first task in performing Shakespeare is to make the language intelligible. While Shi Wenjie (Petruchio) had a strong stage presence, she tended to break her speech up too much with the result that the through-line of action was impeded. Zhang Qin (Katherina) was too soft vocally. Dong Tong-jian (Baptista) vocally the clearest of the actors.

My major criticism of this performance was that the actors were directed to perform in a “cod” funny manner. By this I mean that, instead of finding the comedy through the language and the action, the performers superimposed unfunny “comic” business on top. With the exception of the broken guitar round Hortensio’s next most of the business failed to be funny or assist the audience in understanding the excerpt. There was far too much of what I call “acting acting” or “indicating” and lots of “fake” emotion. The result was that very little sense of the reality of the scene was created. The actors need to begin by finding the truth of what they are playing and play that truth, rather than trying to tell us that they are “funny” characters. Even comic characters have a reality which needs to be created on stage.

The director, Li Yi should pay a little more attention to the blocking which was not very convincing. As Hamlet says to the actors in Hamlet “suit the word to the action, the action to the word.” Any director needs to look “impulses” or reasons for the actors to move and care should be taken to think about how interesting such movements will be for the audience.

5. Measure for Measure Shenzhen University

This was a very intelligent performance of well chosen scenes. The director, Patrick has a very clear idea of the action of each of the scenes chosen and has clearly directed his actors to find the emotion through the meaning inherent in the play’s language. There was very little fake emotionalism in any of the actors performances. This was a refreshing contrast to some other performances where this fault was prevalent.

Ziying Xie (Isabella) and Kirby (Angelo) both gave convincing performances and Edwin (Claudio), while giving a less powerful performance, nevertheless played the truthfulness of the action.

My major problem with this production relates to “size” of the performance. I was fortunate enough to see Shenzhen’s earlier DVD presentation of these scenes. I was truly surprised at how powerful the performances were. The performances were perfectly suited to the intimate nature of a filmed Shakespeare. Unfortunately, such an intimate style of performance is simply not big enough to communicate with an audience in a theatre of the size of Sir Run Run Shaw. I don’t know if the actors had rehearsed in a much smaller theatre or not, but whether they did or not, the performance they gave in the finals did not take into account the need to suit the size of their performance to the acting space in which the finals took place. Both the staging and the vocal delivery needed to be made larger in order to fill the space in which they performed and to communicate with an audience that is quite distant from the stage.

Having made the above comments, I do want to add how much I enjoyed the clarity of direction and acting, the effective costuming and the clear sense that all involved had a thorough understanding of the dramatic action of the scenes chosen.

6. Twelfth Night Soochow University

While it can be refreshing to have a contemporary setting for Shakespeare it is important that this “updating “help to illuminate the action of the play being updated. One thinks of Baz Luhrmann’s film version of Romeo and Juliet or Richard Loncraine’s film version of Richard III as two successful examples of such an approach.

Unfortunately version of Twelfth Night presented by Soochow did little to illuminate the play’s action. Much of the clarity of action was obscured by gratuitous “business”. The comedy was superimposed in a heavy-handed fashion and the result was that the performance became laboured. The comedy needs to be discovered through the language of the play and appropriate blocking and business invented that fits with the meanings that arise from that language. There was some very peculiar “weight lifting” business that seemed to have little to do with the meaning of the line “in Orsino’s bosom”. Again and again this over-busy production lost focus due too attention being drawn to a piece of business rather than to the play’s action. One glaring example occurred when Viola had to remove her skates – the time taken to carry out this task meant that any impetus to the action was lost.

Some of the acting was quite effective. Felicia (Feste) had a very nice sense of energy in her performance and Daphne (Olivia) provided the most convincing piece of acting during her mercifully “business” free “inventory” speech. Ellen Yeh (Viola) although a little too soft in her vocal delivery, showed that she has acting ability.

The actors were hampered by being buried by largely unfunny business in this “concept” driven production. What the director, Don Gilleland, needs to do is to generate blocking and business that arises from an understanding of Shakespeare’s text. It is always wiser to start by coming to a simple understanding of the comedy in the text rather than by inventing gratuitous stage business that obscures the play’s comedy. Even comedies need to have a sense of reality about them and, while that reality may be different from the kind found in tragedy, the comedies need to be performed in a manner that is truthful and not “cod”.

7. King Lear Hubei University

This was a very brave attempt to capture the power of this difficult play. For the most part I think that the attempt was successful. There was a powerful and appropriate formality in the opening scene in which Lear divides his kingdom, and this was nicely juxtaposed with the more intimate scene in which Lear reconnects with his daughter Cordelia. What particularly pleased me was they way in which this production had improved since I saw the DVD submitted for First Round adjudication.

There was a real attempt by the director, Zhou Hongbing to get his actors to discover the reality of the scenes by getting them to find the required emotion through the discovery of the impulses toward feelings that are generated by Shakespeare’s language. He Chuan (Cordelia), though a little too softly spoken in the last scene, was effectively natural and moving in her portrayal of Lear’s daughter. Li Yang (Lear) was an imposing authoritarian ruler in the first scene and made a valiant attempt to create the dying Lear. This latter part of his role was not as successful as his earlier rendition mainly because he was given a rather comically silly white wig to wear. Also he tended to break up Lear’s speech too much and this not only slowed the action down too much but also it made it seem a little “cod” [fake/unconvincing/lacking in any sense of truth or reality] Liu Rongting (Kent/Goneril) was less clear than the two other actors as far as English expression was concerned.

The costumes were generally effective and the lighting was also appropriate. There was a rather long blackout between scenes which needed to be shorter or filled with music. Total blackouts between scenes should generally be avoided as they break the audience’s concentration and this means that the actors have to win that concentration back again just as they had to at the beginning of the play.

8. Antony and Cleopatra The Chinese University of Hong Kong

This was a very impressive production that showed that the director, Julian Lamb, and all of his actors had a thorough grasp of both the play’s meaning and the ways to turn that meaning into exciting theatre. All three of the adjudicators agreed on the high quality of this performance and it was only after a great deal of considered thought that we came to our decision to place CUHK second in the Festival competition. If there could have been two first prizes our task would have been made much simpler!

The production had a powerful dramatic opening with effective use of music and the ending was likewise convincing. The acting was for the most part of very high quality and the clarity of English expression was excellent. Minna Cheung (Cleopatra) was very impressive as a kind of spoiled sex-kitten who was used to having her own way. This was an interpretation that made her more youthful than most Cleopatras, but it suited this actor perfectly. Emmy Chow (Charmian) was a very effective foil for Cleopatra and the relationship between the two convincingly created. Hollis Ngai was very effective and funny as the Messenger and those scenes in which he was harangued and bulied by Cleopatra worked really well. His performance as Antony was not quite as convincing.

The scene in which Antony appeared was the only scene that did not quite work. This scene could have been played with a degree of tragic seriousness that would have contrasted nicely with the other comic scenes that followed. As it was, this opening scene was also played comically. The result was that the opportunity was lost to show a greater range in both the acting and direction and gave a rather one-sided picture of the play which is essentially a tragedy interlarded with comic scenes.

The technical aspects of the production were excellent. The costumes, lighting and setting were all of a high quality.

9. Othello Xiamen University of Technology

This was an interesting and sensitive production. One can generally tell whether or not a performance of the killing of Desdemona is effectively done or not by seeing if an audience of young people get embarrassed and start to laugh. In this performance there was not a sound from the audience and this suggests that they were gripped by the acting.

There was a real sense of directorial style about this production. The director, Ballet Liu approached the excerpts as if they were part of a musical score. The Oriental music and the beautiful costuming gave this a definite Oriental feeling. The use of music was particularly effective for Desdemona’s Willow Song. Occasionally the music overpowered the actors making them a little hard to hear, but generally there was a very thoughtful use of music.

Deng Ying (Desdemona) was vocally a little too soft, but she acted with great sensitivity. Chen Tingting (Emelia) gave a very powerful performance. Vocally she was the strongest of the three actors and was never drowned out by the music. Chen Rong (Othello) also gave a strong performance. At times his delivery seemed a little too slow for my taste, but I believe this was a directorial decision in keeping with the overall style of the piece. I would have liked cues to be picked up a little more quickly. The blocking was for the most par interesting and appropriate. The strangulation scene was very well done.

The one jarring part of this production that I found unconvincing was when Emilia was performing off-stage. I could not really see why the decision to do this was taken. This scene suddenly lost its dramatic power and was very distracting.

10. Much Ado About Nothing Nanjing University

This was a brave attempt to have the three male actors play the three female roles and the three male roles. Putting aside the fact that such a choice led to a rather tedious interval where the stage hand s worked on the set while the actors changed, the casting could have worked and made the audience appreciate the actors’ versatility. Unfortunately there was so much “cod” [fake/unconvincing/lacking in any sense of truth or reality].

We know that all the female roles in Elizabethan and Jacobean times were played by men, but all the evidence we have suggests that they played the female roles seriously. Indeed when female actors were introduced onto the stage in the Restoration there are reports of spectators who had seen the male actors of Shakespeare’s day claiming that the new female actors were less convincing in the female roles than the male actors had been! Having seen the all male cast at the Globe Theatre in London perform Twelfth Night I can attest to the effectiveness of male actors playing female parts seriously.

Now I’m afraid that Han Bingbin (Hero), Jiao Jian (Beatrice) and Cai Wenquiang (Ursula) all fell into the trap of “sending up” or caricaturing their roles. Rather than really attempt to play the roles of three women the three actors “camped up” their performances in order to get cheap laughs. It was as though they wished to draw attention to the fact that they were men playing the roles of women. The result was that the real comedy of the play was lost. [It is interesting to note that many of the male Shakespearean roles have been played by women in this Shakespeare festival yet none of the female actors have drawn attention to the fact that they are cross-dresing.]

In general there was too much cod “acting acting”. There was almost no sense of the reality created for these scenes. For an audience to believe that Beatrice is taken in by Ursula and Hero and that Benedick is taken in by Don Pedro and Leonato those fabricating the stories that will trick Beatrice and Benedick into believing that they are loved must themselves be believable. No one could possibly believe that Beatrice and Benedick would be taken in by the silly prancing and posturing performance given by Ursula /Hero and Don Pedro/Leonarto.

The great pity is that I think the three actors are talented enough to have played their roles in a manner that would have created the comic reality of the situation had they been directed to act with some degree of reality, albeit comic reality.

11. Macbeth Tianjin University of Commerce

This was a rather uneven production. On the positive side there was some effective use of dramatic music and the costumes and lighting were both excellent. The evocation of the witches was particularly eerie and effective.

Unfortunately the direction and acting were not as successful as these technical elements. There was very little meaningful interaction between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth and the blocking was either very strange – moving back and forth horizontally without any use of the upstage/downstage plane – or it was practically non-existent. Characters placed themselves in one spot and delivered speeches. Unless Macbeth and Lady Macbeth relate to each other there can be no dramatic tension.

Both Jiang Zhe (Macbeth) and Wang Jingyin (Lady Macbeth) spoke rather too softly and their English was rather heavily accented making them hard to understand. Zhang Siqi (Doctor) was the clearest English speaker. Jiang Zhe was at his best during the “Macbeth has murdered sleep” scene because he raised the energy and size of his performance. The “Tomorrow and tomorrow” soliloquy was performed so slowly that all dramatic impetus was lost.

Once again, when the actors spoke after their performance their English expression was much clearer than it had been in the Macbeth excerpt.

12. Hamlet Sichuan International studies University

This production was quite unlike any of the other performances at the Shakespeare Festival. In many ways it was the most original production and some of the directorial ideas were superbly realized. The transformation of the Mousetrap play into a puppet show with Hamlet as the puppeteer was a splendid example. The problem was that the director, Steve Zhang, who also played Hamlet and choreographed the fencing, appears to have been carried away by originality for its own sake. As a result the audience’s attention was drawn toward individual pieces of theatrical inventiveness, like turning half of the play into a musical with direct reference to The Phantom of the Opera. The problem was that the originality did not clarify the action of the play or the scenes chosen.

There were far too many scenes chosen in an unwise attempt to present a version of the whole of Hamlet and while individual scenes were well handled - such as the fight sequence – the overall meaning of the action was buried under what seemed in the end to be self-indulgent gimmickry.

The acting in general was of a high quality. Steve Zhang (Hamlet) is a fine actor who takes risks. His first soliloquy was well handled and his mad scene had a dramatic intensity that was pleasing. Joyce He (Claudius/Laertes) was like wise convincing in both roles. Christine Le (Gertrude) while also performing her role with skill was a little harder to understand due to the fact that her English was more heavily accented than the two other performers.

The technical side of the production was superb. The Puppet Show, the costumes, the Mirror , and the lighting all showed what a great deal of effort and care had gone into this production.

I believe that if Steve Zhang in his role as director can focus his creativity more on finding original ways to communicate Shakespeare’s play, he is likely in the future to produce truly exciting theatrical versions of this playwright. His commitment to creating exciting theatre is to be encouraged.

Dr. Simon Palfrey

Chinese University of Hong Kong - Antony and Cleopatra

Director: Julian Lamb

This was a brilliant production of three linked scenes, all featuring Cleopatra at their centre as she tangled with Antony, and, pre-eminently, the messenger from Rome. The Cleopatra-actor (Minna Cheung) turned in a bravura performance. She was funny, sexy, domineering, capricious, charismatic - every inch Cleopatra. Hers was far and away the outstanding performance by a female actor, and Minna was rightly awarded Best Actress. Charmian (Emmy Chow) was also very good, witty in both speech and movement. Holis Ngai was excellent as the harassed messenger, though he slightly lacked clarity and authority in his brief turn as Mark Antony. The actors were helped by crisp and authoritative direction. The scenes were beautifully timed and blocked. It was easily the funniest single production in the festival, and probably the most successful as pure theatre. The costumes were dazzling. This production very nearly won the overall prize, but was pipped at the post by Wuhan University’s Hamlet. This was mainly because the chosen scenes displayed a relatively limited palette, especially in view of the play’s vast range. In particular, they preferred farce or irony to tragedy; they gave us mock-sublimity but not the real thing. This was on the whole appropriate to the scenes chosen, but the chance was there to choose a scene which showed Cleopatra transform her fake annihilation or fake self-monumentalising into something much more lasting. The chosen scenes could hardly have been done better; but the scenes might have been chosen with more ambition.

Hubei University - King Lear

Director: Zhou Hongbing

This performance had some moments of real theatrical effectiveness. In particular, the reconciliation scene between Lear (Li Yang) and Cordelia (He Chuan) was very moving. The production really took on the emotions of the scene, which are so delicate and powerful, and did so entirely persuasively. This was brave and impressive. Elsewhere there were a few weaknesses. There were too many near-farcical moments, some of them produced by inadequate props (eg Lear’s toy sword) or unnecessarily baroque costuming (the wigs of Goneril and Lear). I feared Lear’s wig would slip off as Cordelia held him, which was an unnecessary distraction. The scene changes were stiff, and could have been handled with more speed or finesse; music might have helped manage the gaps. The acting was strong. They overcame audience laughter with dignity. Goneril/Kent (Liu Rongting) was sometimes difficult to understand, and he was forced to play Goneril slightly for laughs (partly because of the drag queen costume). Nevertheless, he retained focus and concentration admirably. Lear (Li Yang) was stern and kingly in the first scene, and persuasively fragile in the second. Cordelia (He Chuan) did very well indeed. She looked beautiful, embodied the emotions with powerful understatement, and spoke throughout with nobility and lucidity. She fully deserved the outstanding actor award that she won. This production was very close indeed to being 4^th runner-up.

Lingnan Universtity - The Comedy of Errors

Director: M. A. Ingham

This production had some very good features. The costumes were glamorous and the Turkish-style music was effective. The direction was in the main quite effective, and relied heavily upon body language. However, some opportunities for comedy were missed, especially in the slapstick moments – very precise choreography is essential if farce is to work as it should. The wife-actor (Chan Ming-Wai, Ruby) displayed good articulation, and the Dromio-actor (Chan Siu-chuen, Jason) showed considerable comic energy, particularly when re-enacting the abusive dialogue with his master. The movement between one ‘Dromio’ and the other could have been more clearly signalled, perhaps with more distinctive costuming or closer attention to exit and entrance–points. Again, the overriding need when doing farce is to make the blocking absolutely exact – not visually complicated, but worked out to the tiniest detail so that the onstage confusions are never shared by the audience, but are instead rendered with lucidity, simplicity, and visual conciseness.

Macao Polytechnic Institute - Richard III

Director: Maggie, Wang Yu Ying

This was an interesting, very thoughtful production. It featured two Richard-actors, their parts segueing neatly into each other – the first Richard (Wen Jing, Krystal) spoke the opening and closing soliloquies, the second Richard (Peng Qi Wan, Peggy) took over for the seduction scene with Lady Anne (Ada, Xu Jin Jing). Both Richards did well in parts; the first had fairly good articulation, though perhaps lacking in real demonic energy, and some of the words were hard to understand; the second looked the part, with a persuasively crabbed use of body and a wicked grin. Lady Anne was performed with pathos and dignity. All three actors were charming, funny, and articulate in the after-performance interview. The music was imaginatively chosen. The transitions between scenes were neatly choreographed, and the director managed to achieve some nice statuesque moments, almost like tableaux. However, this also points to the main weakness of the production, which was that it was rather too slow and laborious. It lacked dramatic energy. Greater gusto was needed in both the soliloquies and the confrontation between Richard and Anne. These scenes should be electric, but the performances were so deliberate that occasionally they instead became a little boring.

Nanjing University - Much Ado About Nothing

Director: Alex Yang

This production concentrated upon the two eavesdropping scenes in Much Ado. These should be extremely funny, but this was not often the case and the production as a whole felt like a missed opportunity. The cast (Hang Bingbin, Jiao Jian, Cai Wenqiang) were unusually fluent and clear in their speaking of English; they were also very adept at putting on different voices and theatrically very confident. However, this maturity and competence was slightly frittered away in silliness. There was too much chortling, too much ‘camping’ it up. The women characters, for example, were briefly funny (large fake breasts, and so on) but everything was mortgaged out to a Monty Python-esque drag queen act. This meant that the scene they played – where Beatrice hears of Benedick’s love and recognises her suddenly changed destiny – had no chance of gathering any emotional truth or intensity. There was no sense at all of revelation. The problem was that the basic tone of the performance was not keyed-in to the crucial switches in tone in the script: those moments of passionate transition, where a character’s ironic manner is transformed by or into confession. The scenes, that is, did not escalate in any way; moments of climax were blurred. There needed to be more attention to the specifics of dialogue. This would have helped the actors locate their moments where a change in address was necessary; also it would have helped clarify the visible comedy, where again there were numerous missed opportunities.

Sichuan International Studies University - Hamlet

Director: (Steve) Zhang Shuzhi

This was a very ambitious production, full of interesting ideas, but which ultimately failed because the director wanted to do too much. The production did not have one look, or one conceit, but many. It seemed clear that the director had enjoyed many things that he had seen and he wanted to transport them all into his 20 minute go at Hamlet. There were too many sources, too many styles, and it was all a little bit frantic and centreless. Part of the problem was the decision to offer a précis of the whole play, which was almost bound to end up like a summary, lacking real heart or emotional magnetism. Also problematic was the starting conceit, that the play is Hamlet’s bad dream, as glimpsed in a mirror -- but the dream-conceit mainly served to license an undisciplined array of tricks and looks, as artistically-rendered dreams tend to do. There were some good things in it: the puppet-show as the play within the play; the sword-fight; and the first bit of singing, when Gertrude (Christine Li) entered and began a lovely lament for Ophelia. But this was ruined when the whole scene continued in the same vein, turning into a cod-Lloyd Webber musical. One could admire the audacity, and even the voices, but the effect was bathetic, and the opposite of tragic. There was a warning of this earlier on, when Hamlet (Steve Zhang) appeared with a Phantom of the Opera facemask. This, like other such tricks, was dashing but a little histrionic, a little self-applauding. It was only occasionally that this Hamlet touched upon real feeling; he seemed very distant from the audience, and close mainly to himself (the actor/singer/songwriter/director). He needed to show more discipline and restraint in his editing. For instance, the closing song (‘quintessence of dust’) was potentially a nice idea, turning Hamlet’s prose speech into a sung monody for the dead. But in the context it was simply too much (not another song! isn’t he dead yet?) The production ended up feeling coercive, with the audience left watching rather than feeling.

Shenzhen University - Measure for Measure

Director: Jian (Patrick) Zhang

This was an impressive production in many ways. It was very spare, very chaste, suggesting a world of repressed and fearful desire. The Angelo-actor (Lewei Wang) was poised and clear, and by turns grave and tender in his address. His English pronunciation was excellent. The Isabella-actor (Ziying Xie) was occasionally a little harder to understand; at first I thought she was too static, but this stillness paid off when she moved into passionate denunciations of both Angelo and Claudio. Isabella’s brittleness and sexlessness were very marked. Ziying Xie deserved the outstanding acting award she was given. It was mainly her performance which gave the production its intensity. Claudio (Yan Gao, Edwin) was comparatively underwhelming. His great soliloquy on death was unpersuasive, and lacked terror. The production was hampered by being very quiet - sometimes words seemed to be mumbled, or got lost in the vast auditorium. There was no music in the scene changes, which was doubtless a careful choice but perhaps contributed a slightly clumsy and laboured feel. However, there was a nice symmetry about the choice of scenes – two assaults on Isabella’s chastity. The production was awarded 3^rd runner-up in the competition.

Sichuan University - Taming of the Shrew

Director: Li Yi

Like some of the other performances of comedy, this production did not manage to tap into the emotions of the play. Once again, everything was over-acted. It is not the case that comedy always requires exaggerated faces and voices and gestures. Very often it is best to underplay things, or to allow the words to speak for themselves: to allow the words to produce the actions, or to insist that any actions should be attributable to or returnable to the script. The problem with the kind of over-acting here on show was that it was almost all one-note. It was as though the actors had been told to adopt a certain manner or attitude, and that this attitude should be sustained throughout, from beginning to end, no matter what is said or done to or by the character. This fatally ignores the fact that Shakespearean comedy is all about gradations – sometimes subtle, sometimes radically transformative – between one state of being and another. Productions of his comedies have to be keyed in to these shifts in understanding or passion. Too often the comedies put on in the festival treated the plays as though they were simply ‘humoural’ comedies, like some of Ben Jonson’s, where a single ‘type’ (rage, jealousy, boastfulness, etc) is displayed to be enjoyed or jeered at. Shakespeare only rarely writes such characters; and his main characters are never simply types. The highlight of this production was the Petruchio-actor (Shi Wenjie). Although she over-acted slightly, she displayed a nice relish for certain words and sounds; she looked the part, and had a compelling stage presence. Overall, however, the production was static.

Soochow University - Twelfth Night

Don Gilleland

This production was very visibly dominated by its director. There were some exuberant touches, and the actors clearly enjoyed the performance. The music was sometimes imaginative, as were some inventive changes of back-colour. However, the directorial intervention was so incessant that the story, jokes, and emotion all got lost. Everything was rendered farcical. It was briefly amusing to see Olivia’s grief for her brother being mocked by grandiloquent music, but it soon became apparent that mockery was the only key that this production possessed. This meant that Viola’s appearance to Olivia meant nothing; Olivia was mere vanity, and Viola/Cesario was an assemblage of silly pseudo-modernising pantomimes (lifting weights and so on). There was nothing at stake, and the production became frankly boring, more and more boring as more and more superfluous tricks were tried out. The director claimed to be representing ‘ideas and feelings metaphorically’, but what this in fact meant was (a) no trust in or exploration of the actual words spoken, and (b) scenes in which the allegorical conceit (Taiwanese pop star/model/rapper) takes over as the only source of recognition or humour. This was a shame, because the actors (Lin Wei Tzu, Lin Yu Mei, Ellen Yeh) were pretty good.

Tianjin University of Commerce - Macbeth

Director: Zhao Peng

This production tried to encapsulate the entire play by choosing lots of small bits from different scenes. Sometimes this worked well, and the extracts were cannily chosen, but there was a slight loss of intensity because in the end it tried to cover too much. At times the production was a little messy and bitty, with one part of the stage being used for one scene, and another part of the stage for another scene, without really exploiting the fact that the audience are seeing both scenes at once. It needed more elegant blocking, and more careful thought about how to use the whole stage and to manage exits and entrances. The music was excellent. Lady Macbeth (Wang Jinyin) was often difficult to understand, though better in the sleepwalking scene. Macbeth (Jiang Zhe) was often impressive, although at times slightly melodramatic and forced in his pacing and emphases. His speaking of the soliloquies was perhaps slightly mannered, but still it was impressive. It was clear that he had really lived inside the words, and he handed the shifts in intensity and terror very well. I particularly enjoyed the ‘sleep no more’ speech. Here and elsewhere the actor really embodied Macbeth’s isolation.

Wuhan University - Hamlet

Director: Danni Dai

Assistant Director: Shi Wenbin

This was an outstanding production that deservedly won first prize in the festival. It was dominated by an exceptional Hamlet, played by Zhao Zhiwen. He animated the full range of attitudes and emotions, moving from rage, to bawdry, to meditative solemnity with finesse and assurance. Hamlet’s troubled and mercurial nature was absolutely done justice. The performance was capped by a very fine rendering of ‘To be or not to be…’. This is perhaps the hardest speech of all to pull off persuasively, but the production managed it beautifully. The words were spoken with clarity and intelligence, sitting at the front of the stage, lit only by a candle. It was very simple and very good. Zhao Zhiwen was admirably supported by Ophelia (Jin Jing) and Gertrude (Zhang Xue). The scenes were put together with graceful symmetry – both scenes featured Hamlet spurning or assaulting a once-adored woman, and at the end of the piece the correspondences were briefly highlighted in such a way that we seemed to have seen played before us the very heart of Hamlet’s tragedy. The superb performances aside, this was the reason Yuhan University came first: for all of the elegance and simplicity of the production, it was utterly unafraid of passion, or emotional violence, or philosophy. In 20 minutes it delivered a dynamic epitome of Shakespeare’s masterpiece.

Xiamen University of Technology - Othello

Director: Ballet Liu

This was a very beautiful production, and won the prize for 2^nd runner-up. The production was marked by tremendous narrative clarity. They cut or telescoped quite a bit of dialogue, but the movement of events to their catastrophe was always powerfully clear. The set and costumes looked rich and splendid, and both the acoustics and the acting were fully the equal of the production’s visual luxury. Music was used with wonderful effect. The ‘Willow’ song was sung gorgeously by Deng Ying, and throughout the scenes music, both instrumental and vocal, was employed in intelligent counterpoint to the dialogue – often ‘answering’ or prompting the spoken words in ways that helped give the scenes real emotional pregnancy. Once or twice there was perhaps too much superimposing of music, but in the main it was very tactfully done. Desdemona (Deng Ying) was very poised, and spoke the verse with a natural ease; her performance was keyed mainly to tenderness, but she was roused to persuasive passion when she saw what was coming. Emilia (Chen Tingting) was very powerfully performed. The cutting and acting was such that Emilia’s tragedy derived every bit as much poignancy as those of Desdemona and Othello. Chen Tingting deservedly received an award for outstanding acting. Othello (Chen Rong) was performed with real passion. He used the full area of the stage very well, in particular the ‘platea’ (the area closest to the audience) which he crossed on to at various points in his soliloquies. Unfortunately his English wasn’t always easy to understand – but his movements and gestures were extremely articulate, and, like the whole production, very moving. The production was also given weight and integrity by apt indigenous elements – music and costuming were both inspired by the minority Dai culture of China. This influence did not seem at all imposed, but rather was the element in which the tragedy happened.

Mr. Raymond Caldwell

1. Richard II – Macao Polytechnic Institute

Overall, I thought this an admirable and earnest production. I appreciate the simplicity of the scene selection as well as the casting of two different actors to play the role of Richard, which I felt helped to elucidate Richard’s duplicity.

In my opinion, Krystal (Richard 1) was the most proficient in English and seemed the most completely invested in the performance. Ada (Lady Anne) created a lovely visual image and presence, and although she obviously understood the role and was careful in her speaking, her pronunciation still needs a bit of work. Peggy (Richard 2) was well cast among the trio, and she had a very nice moment after the “spit,” but I also had a problem understanding her words.

I would suggest that the entire team pay more careful attention to scansion, phrasing, caesura, and supporting the ends of the lines. To the director (Maggie): Be cautious about allowing actors to stand in the three-quarter position while speaking, and work to establish and sustain a forward-moving pace and rhythm. I thought the second scene lost its conflict and antithesis and failed to build on the scene before it, breaking the momentum. There were nice moments with Richard on the bier with the rose and also with Anne in the embrace. Perhaps the second Richard should deliver the final soliloquy for the sake of fluidity and continuity.

On the technical side: The use of scenic elements was acceptable; the first and second music selections added nice atmosphere, but the final music seemed unexpectedly comical to me. One minor comment: Perhaps Anne’s costume could be more in keeping with the tradition of mourning.

2. Comedy of Errors – Lingnan University

Jason did an outstanding job as Dromio. He has a nice sense of rhythm, a good comic aptitude, and a physical agility that create a character that is both entertaining and suited to his world of probability. I found it interesting, however, that both Jason and Penny were much easier to understand in the after-performance interview than they were while acting onstage. Penny and Ruby need to trust the words and language more to express emotions as well as meanings rather than attempt to “play an attitude.” Unlike modern, realistic scripts, Shakespeare’s plays seldom depend on “subtext” or require actors to play intentions that are not overtly stated in the dialog. Dromio may not need to play “out to the audience,” as in an “aside,” as much as he did, but I suppose that is a director’s choice. I thought the final moment (final moments are always important) of Dromio with the apple was clever.

Regarding the Technical Arts: The use of the columns and the music were both appropriate. The musical transitions seemed too long, breaking the momentum. I loved the costumes. One final note: I think this play is hard to cut successfully by using only one Antipholus but both Dromios. It seems to be missing an element of plot that is necessary for maximum effect.

3. Hamlet – Wuhan University

First, Zhao Zhiwen (Hamlet) has remarkable stage presence. He is totally invested; he stays “in the moment;” he listens; his English is excellent; and he trusts Shakespeare’s language, allowing its poetic genius to convey the message as well as its emotional colors. Nice work, indeed.

The scene between Hamlet and Gertrude had some admirable intensity and quite believable moments. Zhang Xue (Gertrude) has a beautiful vocal quality and a lovely presence that make her not only a good choice for the role but also an actor who is pleasant to watch. Both she and Jin Jing (Ophelia), however, need to trust the language and the words more fully, paying closer attention to the poetry – the arrangement of the words. Perhaps spending a bit more time or effort on scansion, phrasing, and antithetical nuances would help. These two young actresses, like so many other actors in the other casts, need to place firmer emphasis of the final words of phrases and the iambic pentameter lines. In Shakespeare’s works the last word of a printed line or sentence is often key to the meaning and serves as a springboard for the following thought. In my opinion, the early part of the Hamlet/Gertrude scene lacked strong character relationship (on the couch, for instance), but the latter part of that scene was much better. I thought Jin Jing’s made too much use of pauses and that she tended to play an emotion or attitude rather than an action – searching, perhaps, for subtextual meaning which, in Shakespeare, is usually unnecessary. Simplicity and directness almost always work in Shakespeare.

In my personal notes and method of evaluating the twelve productions at the festival, the difference between this show and the one that was named first runner-up was only one percentage point.

Technical Arts: The choice and use of music were excellent as were the visual tableaux, the costumes, and the lighting effects. I particularly liked the “ghost” music and light, the candle, and the repeated “To be or not to be” at the final curtain. Overall, I thought the production showed real theatrical skills of not only the actors but also of the director.

4. Taming of the Shrew – Sichuan University

Shi Wen-jie did some very nice physical work as Petruchio, finding interesting, clever, and appropriate stances, postures, and movements to illustrate “masculinity.” In fact, her physical performance of that role was, in my opinion, the highlight of this production – at least of the one performance that we saw. All three actors were energetic and fully committed to the performance. Overall, however, I thought that the actors failed to trust the language and that they attempted to illustrate emotions, play attitudes, and, in essence, to impose interpretation onto the text that went beyond what could be truly believable. In the terminology of acting, this is often called “indicating,” and this production (as well as some of the others in the festival) fell into the “indicating” trap. Actors should never play an emotion or indicate an attitude. To do so is to be guilty of deciding HOW or WHY to perform an action before fully understanding WHAT the action should be.

More time needs to be spent on finding the operative words and phrases, the active verbs, the rhythm and pacing before settling on how to “create character.” I found it curious that both Shi Wen-jie and Shang Qin were much easier to understand in the after-show interview than they were onstage. The actors should, therefore, use their own natural voices onstage and relax into the language. Baptista (Dong Tong-jian) has a tendency to “huff,” or to exhale breath in short puffs before and after speeches or words – a habit that robs an actor of vocal power and clarity, but also a habit that is relatively easy to overcome once it is called to the actor’s attention.

Technical Arts: The music was fine. You might do a bit less on Baptista’s makeup. Some of the blocking and arrangement of body positions seemed to misplace focus at times.

5. Measure for Measure – Shenzhen University

First, congratulations to Ziying Xie for her performance as Isabella. I admired the simplicity and directness with which she approached the role. She also has a nice vocal quality.

Perhaps my most valuable advice to the cast is the same that I offer to several other participants (and to my own students) – study the language so that you can trust it more confidently. With Shakespeare, a thorough mastery of word meanings, scansion, phrasing, caesura, antithesis, and line endings must precede any attempt to create a character. Indeed, once the language is assimilated, you will discover that Shakespeare has virtually dictated every character choice that an actor should make. Knowing WHAT one is saying (including nuance) informs both WHY it is said and HOW to say it.

Volume was a problem with this performance, leaving me to wonder if this team is accustomed to rehearsing in a space much smaller than the CUHK auditorium. Actors need to learn how to control breathing and to speak “at the top of the breath,” meaning at the beginning of the exhalation, in order to add strength, energy, and stamina and to avoid wasting breath on huffs and puffs between words. Try to play the actions by delivering the lines simply and clearly rather than indicating, illustrating, or imposing an emotion onto the delivery. Become aware of “patterned pauses” and how they impede the necessary forward movement of the play and prevent build and focus which are critical in sustaining the conflict.

I thought that Angelo needed to set up the opening dramatic situation more energetically and with stronger motivation. Clear, forceful delivery of the speeches would accomplish this task.

Technical Arts: The transitions need music or sound. The second scene was placed too far upstage, I think.

6. Twelfth Night – Soochow University

Although I appreciated the attempt to contemporize this play, and I have no objection to updating Shakespeare’s plays to maximize their relevance, I thought that this particular performance missed the mark and failed to achieve its intended objective. The show was energetic (especially Liu Wei Tzu as the Clown), colorful, and cleverly conceived, but my overall reaction is that the “concept” was too heavily imposed upon the script at the expense of the story and plot. Lin Yu Mei (Olivia) has excellent English skills, as does Ellen Yeh, and I liked the opening with Olivia’s triple cross and the Clown’s comic reactions. I regret, however, that most of the rest of the performance was, in my opinion, “over-the-top” with extraneous business, gimmicks, indicating and uneven pacing – all elements that cheapen the words, obscure the humanity, and strain believability. Comedy, just as much as serious drama, must be rooted in believability, at least in its peculiar world of probability. Throughout, the dialog needs clarity and definition; the pauses need to be saved for emphasis; and the characters need to relate truthfully to their words as well as to each other.

With all due respect (and humility), I think that this show has capable actors who are willing to risk a lot but who needed clear and detailed guidance – and disciplined specificity – in order to succeed in creating a cohesive and satisfactory production.

7. King Lear – Hubei University

There was much to admire about this production: Li Yang’s voice; He Chuan’s lovely, economical performance; Liu Rongting’s bravery and commitment; and the entire team’s evident respect for the play. Zhou Hongbing’s sensitive ear for phrasing and keen eye for picturization are talents that all directors must possess.

I realize that every team is restricted to a time limit, and although it is difficult to reduce this massive play to two brief scenes and still retain a sense of continuity and satisfactory dramatic tension, I think the director did an adequate job of selecting the scenes to stage.

In Lear’s second scene I thought the actor’s speech was too broken with pauses, causing it to lose effectiveness. His first scene was better. Cordelia’s English is excellent; Lear’s is quite often good; but Kent/Goneril’s still needs some attention.

Technical Arts: Cordelia’s costume is excellent. The music and lighting at the end were a nice touch. I think you should fill the black-out during the transition with music or sound to help change the mood or atmosphere. Lear’s wig and sword are not totally successful in achieving the desired effect, and I might not mention them except for the fact that they elicited distracting responses from the audience.

8. Antony and Cleopatra – Chinese University of Hong Kong

In my improvised system of evaluating all of the 12 productions on a numerical scale, only one percentage point separated this production from the one that received the highest rating. My notes, taken during the performance, include the following: “Nice ensemble work;” “a thoroughly entertaining production;” “the director made many admirable choices;” “interesting selection of scenes;” and “beautiful costumes and setting and use of music.” I congratulate Julian Lamb and the entire company.

Cleopatra (Minna Cheung) is a lovely image with an excellent voice and clear speech. She obviously enjoys performing which gives her work energy and charm. Her English is virtually perfect. At times, however, she “plays false,” meaning that her interpretation feels imposed upon the text, as if she decided on how to execute a movement or deliver a line before thoroughly understanding what the line means. Actors are often over-eager to “create character” prematurely, and that tendency sometimes sets them at odds with the language and its intention. It short-circuits probability and truth.

Charmian (Emmy Chow) created nice support for the other actors, remaining focused on the action at all times. She probably does not realize it, but she tends to silently mouth the lines of her fellow actors – a not-uncommon temptation for young actors who are intent on listening, but a distraction for the audience. A side-note: The printed program indicates that Ms. Chow is also playing the character of Octavia, yet I did not see Octavia appear. Was a scene deleted from the performance after the program went to press?

As the Messenger, Hollis Ngai did a very nice job. All of the physical work between him and Cleopatra was fun to watch and well done. As Antony, however, I found his performance less satisfying. There was even a marked difference in his English proficiency in the two roles.

I thoroughly enjoyed the production, and my only real reservation relates to the decision to select only comic moments from a script that is not, in reality, a comedy, thereby limiting not only the story of the play but also the actors’ ability to show versatility.

9. Othello – Xiamen University of Technology

The two things I admire most about this production are (1) the earnest dedication of the ensemble to the play and its performance, and (2) the director’s careful attention to staging sensitive, lyrical moments. I found Chen Tingting (Emilia) to be slightly more successful in establishing and maintaining a clear, three-dimensional character than the others, but all three actors were fully committed and had some beautiful moments. Overall, the actors need to work a bit harder on English pronunciation and phrasing of Shakespeare. Particularly, they need to understand the important difference between pause and caesura in speaking iambic pentameter dialog. There is a fine line that separates the two, but pausing unnecessarily hinders the rhythm and makes it difficult to create and build tension needed for conflict and sustained interest. Othello (Chen Rong) has a strong and effective voice; Emilia (Chen Tingting) possesses admirable grace and a pleasant vocal instrument; and Desdemona (Deng Ying) creates a memorable, musical, and sympathetic character.

I admit that this is a purely personal and subjective comment, but I question the choice of having Emilia speak from offstage for so long a time. One could interpret the choice as making some kind of psychological statement, I suppose, but in my opinion, it diminishes the drama/conflict and minimizes the tension and audience interest.

Technical Arts: I like the Oriental music and the mood it establishes before the curtain. A highlight of the show is the singing and the opening tableau. Excellent. A very lovely picture was created with Emilia and Desdemona down center and the “good night” scene. Covering the columns with fabric is a clever and effective idea. Having Desdemona’s song underscore the final scene is a brilliant touch. It was a visually effective performance throughout, performed by an earnest cast and staged by a thoughtful director.

10. Much Ado about Nothing – Nanjing University

This was a brave production. Since all of Shakespeare’s characters were originally played by males, it is fun to see contemporary males attempt the same feat. I applaud all three young men for their fearlessness and commitment to the task.

Han Bingbin speaks beautiful English and did some nice work as both Don Pedro and Hero. I was impressed with the clarity and believability of his feminine movements! Much of the same should be said for Jiao Jian as Leonato/Beatrice and Cai Wengiang as Benedick/Ursula. All three fellows seemed to be having fun in the roles, and that always enhances the audience’s enjoyment of the performance.

So, then, what did I find to criticize? The first and most important criticism is this: Whereas Shakespeare’s actors would have played the roles for truth, without calling undue attention to the cross-gender casting, I felt that this production emphasized the cross-gender element at the expense of the plot and the character relationships. It seemed to be a conceit that dominated all else, even to the extent of being foremost in the consciousness of the actors. In my opinion, this over-emphasis trapped the performers into “laughing at themselves” and at the characters they played, resulting in farcical posturing and self-conscious displays. All three actors excel in English proficiency, and it is obvious that they are intelligent and creative. I would have loved seeing them play the characters truthfully – as truthfully as they might have done if the play were not a comedy. Oftentimes I felt that the focus was more on the physical business than on the plot points, and that cliché comic bits were inserted just for a laugh.

I think Cai was more successful as Benedick than as Ursula, whereas Jiao succeeded more with Beatrice than with Leonato.

Technical Arts: The transition in which the stagehands moved scenic elements needs to move more quickly and spontaneously. Perhaps less needs to be done so as to shorten the long pause. The costumes, makeup and wigs were all excellent.

11. Macbeth – Tianjin University of Commerce

This production seemed to attempt a mime-like stylization in its movement and pacing, and I believe that Macbeth could certainly be done effectively that way. The performance we saw, however, failed to achieve the level of precision it needed to be totally successful.

Jiang Zhe has a nice voice, and he understands what he is saying, both necessary assets for any actor playing the role of Macbeth. The cast as a whole, however, needs to trust the playwright’s words and use them as directions for what to do moment to moment.

In my opinion, the performance was too deliberate, too slowly paced, too strained to attain any fluidity or forward movement. Overuse of horizontal blocking, pauses, and delayed entrances may have been intended to establish stylization, but instead they prevented the play from taking on any dramatic shape. The play seemed to start over again with each scene, so continuity was lost. Entrances and exits needed to be overlapped in order to establish momentum and “build.” For example, Macbeth’s “Tomorrow and tomorrow” speech was excessively slow, as though the actor wanted to exhibit emotions rather than to allow the poetic words to have their full effect. Lady Macbeth (Wang Jingyin) needs more volume to avoid losing final words and syllables.

I liked the somewhat cinematic use of music, especially the opening moments with the witches’ voices. That initial eeriness at the beginning created a mood and an expectation that would have been wonderful throughout the performance.

12. Hamlet – Sichuan International Studies University

In many ways, I thought this production was the bravest, most imaginative one of all. The director took bold risks and made some audacious choices, and I admire that. Yet, by definition, bold risks leave one open and vulnerable, and draw a thin line between “success” and “failure.”

My first thought about this performance was “This is a young director who is infatuated with the stage and all its theatrical possibilities.” As is so often the case with youthful effusiveness, this production attempted to do a little too much in too short a time. The performance was energetic, colorful, creative, and sometimes technically dazzling, and I congratulate the entire team (especially Steve Zhang) for the hard work and dedication that were evident in this production. The costumes, the lighting, the music, and especially the scenic elements were remarkably well done. The stage combat (fencing) was creative, economical, and aesthetically convincing. There were some memorable visual moments such as the graveyard scene with the tombstone and the flowering trees against a spring green backdrop and the actors’ singing and stylized movement. The puppet-show “Mousetrap” staging was also clever. And, personally, I was impressed with the director’s decision to add music and singing in unexpected places. Yet – in spite of all the technical effects, or perhaps because of them, I felt that the truth of the play and the pathos of the characters were almost lost. Perhaps some extraneous business and blocking need to be deleted so that what is kept could have more impact. Perhaps some of the attempts to “symbolize” should be removed in favor of emphasizing “reality.” For example, the use of the flashing lights, Hamlet’s mask, and the final moment with Hamlet’s body posed in a dance-like, athletic contortion within a pool of white light – these are all potentially useful and effective techniques, but they failed to communicate their purpose and meaning to me.

One way of summarizing my reaction to this production might be to say that it was visually rich but emotionally poor. Another way might be to say that the whole was less than the sum of its parts.

I encourage Mr. Zhang to continue experimenting and taking risks, but I also encourage him to practice economy, perhaps to embrace the idea that “less is more,” and to find clear justification for all of his directorial and performance choices in the incomparable language and wisdom of Shakespeare.