Changes in theatrical practice during the nineteenth century had a deep impact on the staging of Shakespeare’s plays. One tendency, represented by directors such as Henry Irving and Beerbohm Tree, was towards “illusionism” or “realism”, with sets becoming increasingly lavish, costumes historically accurate and an emphasis upon creating a believable and self-sufficient world on the other side of the proscenium arch.
Stage Technology
This realist approach to staging Shakespeare was enabled by the application of new technology, such as gas and electric lighting, to the theatres. Before the nineteenth century, the audience and stage tended to be equally lit, but advances in stage lighting allowed the auditorium to be darkened and lighting changes to occur almost instantaneously. Increased use of mechanical devices to place and move scenery allowed more detailed and monumental scenery to be deployed.
Scenery
This, in turn, discouraged the metatheatrical aspects of Shakespeare, such as asides to the audience, and soliloquies. Stages stopped jutting out into the audience (so-called “apron stage”), and were contained behind the proscenium arch, which became more and more elaborate. By the end of the nineteenth century, theatres such as the Haymarket and Aldwych had elaborately carved and gilded arches that functioned like a picture frames, making the actors look as if they were moving figures in a historical painting. Stage designers, including members of the prestigious Royal Academy of artists, were used to produce lavish scene settings, and these even became distractions from the action of the play. Beerbohm Tree took this tendency to pictorial realism to its height in his production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, where he constructed a stage “wood” from real tree trunks, and populated it with live rabbits.
Texts
The illusionist directors defended their staging of Shakespeare on the grounds that the nineteenth century theatre should make use of all available theatre technology. After all, Shakespeare had used the full potential of his stage, and Beerbohm Tree even suggested that The Tempest showed an impatience with the limitations of contemporary staging conditions. However, the elaborate sets and ponderous machinery required to move them did not always fit with Shakespeare’s texts, which often alternate quickly between large open scenes and intimate, close-up exchanges. The directors had to cut and reshape Shakespeare’s plays in order to fit their sets, and some nineteenth century critics were unimpressed. After seeing Henry Irving’s production of Cymbeline, George Bernard Shaw thundered in the Saturday Review that Irving “does not merely cut plays, he disembowels them.” Other contemporary directors, such as William Poel, found the lavish decor and spectacular effects merely pompous and sentimental. However, the illusionist tendency still has an influence on modern productions, particularly after the development of film opened up many more possibilities. The popularity of the 1999 Hollywood movie of A Midsummer Night’s Dream suggests that the taste for voluptuous costumes and sentimental settings in Shakespeare is still present in modern audiences.
Sources: Oxford Illustrated History of the Theatre, John Russell Brown (1995); A History of the Theatre, Glynne Wickham (1992); English Drama of the Early Modern Period 1890-1940, Jean Chothia (1996)
