Shakespeare in Southern Africa 2021-01-19T15:30:50+00:00 Dr. Chris Thurman Open Journal Systems <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Helvetica; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536902279 -2147483648 8 0 511 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> <!--[if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><! /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} --> <!--[endif]--><p><em>Shakespeare in Southern Africa</em> is interested in both literary and theatrical approaches to Shakespeare. Its geographical scope is not confined to Southern Africa. Contributions discussing the legacy of Shakespeare elsewhere in Africa, with a specific focus on the Shakespearean experience in particular African countries, are especially welcome. The journal actively seeks to publish articles investigating the impact of Shakespeare in other parts of the world, such as India, the United States, South East Asia and South America.</p><p>Other websites related to this journal: <span><a title="" href="" target="_blank"><span></span></a></span></p> Editorial 2021-01-19T14:19:16+00:00 Chris Thurman <p>No Abstract</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Close Encounters: Staging <i>Julius Caesar, Coriolanus</i> and <i>Antony and Cleopatra</i> in contemporary South Africa 2020-11-26T09:51:28+00:00 Marguerite de Waal <p>Is there room, as Natasha Distiller asked in 2012, for a “close encounter” with Shakespeare in post-apartheid South Africa? This question has become increasingly pertinent. Following the Fallist movements which were ignited at universities across the country in 2015, calls for the decolonisation of curricula and cultural institutions have been coupled with growing resistance against pervading socio-economic inequalities. Amongst other things, the student protests represented a rejection of “old ways of reading” characterised in both ideological and material terms by&nbsp; exclusion, lack of access and disempowerment. This article suggests that Distiller’s question may be engaged with reference to stage adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays in educational and/or academic settings which took&nbsp; place before, during and after the student movements of 2015–16. These are two productions by the National&nbsp; Children’s Theatre aimed at secondary school students –<em> Coriolanus</em> (2016) and <em>Antony and Cleopatra</em> (2018) – and two university productions: <em>The Julius Caesar Project</em> (2013) at the University of the Witwatersrand, and <em>DCoriolanus</em> (2017) at the University of Pretoria. Through close consideration of the strategies and decisions employed in staging these productions, the paper argues that the medium of theatre, and the ways in which it has been used by South African performers and theatre-makers, is key to understanding how both subversive and productive “close encounters” with Shakespeare might be enacted</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Positionality and Performance: Staging <i>Antony and Cleopatra</i> for South African schools in the context of decolonisation imperatives 2020-11-26T10:08:31+00:00 Néka Da Costa <p>Since the start of the #RhodesMustFall and #FeesMustFall campaigns in 2015–16, decolonisation has been a prominent topic in the South African academy. Yet practical guidance as to how one might start to apply decolonisation and transformation strategies tangibly, both in education and pedagogy – and, more precisely for the purposes of this article, in theatre and performance spaces – has been in short supply. By adopting a dialogic approach which prioritises the voices of her collaborators, the author contextualises and critiques some of the key creative, philosophical and pedagogical strategies employed while rehearsing and performing a school’s touring production of<em> Antony and Cleopatra</em> for the National Children’s Theatre in 2018. Shakespeare is a symbol of colonial and imperial legacies, and the relevance of his work in both English and Performance Studies curricula merits scrutiny, as does the way in which we discuss, teach, perform and value it. Through an unfolding acknowledgement of the author’s own positionality in relation to the text and its performance in a contemporary South African context, this article exemplifies some of the contradictions and productive discoveries of the <em>Antony</em> <em>and Cleopatra</em> process, in the hopes of contributing to a more action-based approach to decolonisation and social justice in practising the arts and in arts education.</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Accents and Original Pronunciation as Tools for Teaching and Performing Shakespeare in South Africa 2020-11-26T10:13:39+00:00 Fiona Ramsay <p>In multicultural and multilingual South Africa, recent initiatives to decolonise curricula have suggested dispensing with the works of Shakespeare and other ‘Western’ texts to make space for African and postcolonial texts. The elevated and archaic language of classical texts often proves difficult for students to access comprehensively and discourages their interest or engagement. This article gives an account of the author’s interventions in the field of Theatre and Performance, and specifically vocal pedagogy, to tackle the language conundrum and therefore to broaden entry into and to invigorate Shakespeare’s plays. The study of Original Pronunciation (OP) is proposed as a means of ‘levelling the playing field’. In the project described, characters from the Shakespearean canon are chosen as possibly representative of individual students’ cultural backgrounds; then key speeches are translated into students’ first/home languages, spoken in the accents of those languages, shared and discussed before an engagement with the sounds of OP. The project culminates in a production and an analysis of how the language shifts described can increase access to, and understanding of, text. The article concludes that the exploration of accents and OP in studying Shakespeare’s works proves an invaluable tool.</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Dispossession and Disintegration, Pity and Fear: The instrumentality of objects in two productions of <i>King Lear</i> 2020-11-26T10:16:51+00:00 Sarah Roberts <p>Acknowledging the limits of theatre activism in the face of escalating displays of power and social injustices which define a contemporary context for staging Shakespearean (and classical) tragedy, this article reflects on the Take Away Shakespeare Company production of<em> King Lear (</em>1998) and on Jonathan Munby’s National Theatre production of the play (2018). As a member of the creative team of the 1998 production, the author takes on the quasi-archaeological exercise of piecing together residual fragments. Following Stephen Halliwell, the article revisits the value of pity and fear as critical tools for analysing modes of response, since these may be more analytically productive than empathy, which suffers from extended application and overuse. The roles of spectator and designer both raise pressing questions about theatre as a medium in relation to the intertwining of form and reception. The affective impact of intertwined word and image – actor and object – invites analysis of the rhetoric of the objects embedded in the action of Shakespeare’s plays. In <em>King Lear</em>, variously deployed, ‘things’ augment words as crucial mechanisms for advancing action and staging violations of human life and dignity, triggering responses of pity and fear.</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Lear, Land and Expropriation without Compensation 2020-11-26T10:21:16+00:00 Geoffrey Haresnape <p><em>King Lear</em> has been extensively used by Shakespearean critics in South Africa for the discussion of land ownership issues. This essay alludes to the work of Martin Orkin and Nicholas Visser, who brought postcolonial and materialistic critiques to bear upon the play in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The essay itself carries the investigation forward to present times, when the text asks to be read in relation to expropriation without compensation: a land proposal being ventilated at the highest political level. The issues which emerge are diverse and unexpected.<em> King Lear’s</em> gifts of land to his daughters are actually ‘deals’ requiring the compensation of their public declarations of love for him. For various reasons this strategy fails. The reader is then invited by the play’s imagery to see the body of the old king as a piece of ‘real estate’ that is incrementally expropriated by the ageing process and the onset of dementia. Spenser’s allegory of the House of Temperance in Book II of<em> The Faerie Queene</em> is discussed as a likely influence here. By the end of the play, Lear is divested of his own bodily health and cognitive ability by the arch expropriator, ‘time’, and its subaltern, the fallible human cell. With regard to critical reception, this essay argues that <em>King Lear</em> has complexity and substance enough to engage the interest of postcolonialists, materialists and universalists alike – even in relation to a topic as specific as land.</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) <i>Kunene and the King</i> and <i>The Fall</i> in the Age of #MeToo, #FeesMustFall and Black Lives Matter 2021-01-19T15:30:50+00:00 David Schalkwyk <p>This article pairs and compares John Kani’s play<em> Kunene and the King</em> (in which Kani has starred opposite Antony Sher) and the collaborative Baxter Theatre production <em>The Fall. Kunene and the King</em> – devised in South Africa, produced by the Royal Shakespeare Company in England, exported to Cape Town’s Fugard Theatre in May 2019, and revived at London’s Ambassadors Theatre in the West End in early 2020 – employs <em>King Lear</em> as a scaffold. It is a two-hander about race in contemporary South Africa: an encounter between two very different men, who find themselves trying to span the gap between black and white. The argument presented in this article is that the play’s ostensible realism is a screen, behind which lies complex metaphorical and allegorical depth. Whereas <em>Kunene and the King</em> attempts to deal with the present by evoking and working through memory and history located in two separate, exemplary consciousnesses,<em> The Fall</em>, though narrated in the past tense, is rooted in the necessities of the present. The latter play is a response to, and a re-telling of, the student protests of 2015–16; as the characters finally split along differentiated lines of regret, anger and aspiration, #RhodesMustFall is challenged by #MeToo. In this way,<em> The Fall</em> exposes a fatal silence between the two men of<em> Kunene</em>: women have no voice in Kani’s play. The article ends with a coda re-situating the two plays under discussion in the context of Black Lives Matter and other protests in 2020.</p> 2020-11-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) “Did not great Julius bleed for justice’ sake?”: Examining a theory of social justice through will-making in Shakespeare’s <i>Julius Caesar</i> 2021-01-19T14:19:57+00:00 Lisa M. Barksdale-Shaw <p>This article submits that, in<em> Julius Caesar</em>, Caesar’s will functions as the pivotal, legal instrument that subscribes<br>a path toward social justice for every Roman citizen by providing an economic legacy, and simultaneously<br>overshadows the deadly allegations against<em> Caesar,</em> thereby highlighting his reputedly vile, tyrannical rule and<br>exposing the calculating motives of<em> Cassius</em> and Brutus. The conveyance of land – as an act of empowering the<br>Roman people – creates a strategic way toward leveraging economic power into their hands. I examine Caesar’s<br>will, Roman inheritance, and Caesar’s legacy. I find similarities with the more recent South African legislation<br>surrounding land expropriation “in the public interest” with an effort “to tackle injustices”. The article also<br>examines how law negotiates as theatrical stage property, and as a legal instrument to gauge the rights of an<br>economically undervalued class. Here, this analysis surveys justice, the law, and material culture, as a way to<br>interrogate this distinctive Roman history while considering written evidence, particularly its negotiation as a<br>fundamental, early modern legal vehicle</p> 2020-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) A Question of ‘Honour’: Anne Barnard, social justice and the <i>Henriad</i> 2020-12-04T09:58:11+00:00 Laurence Wright <p>Can post-revolutionary notions of social justice be imposed on pre-revolutionary works of art? This article explores the concept of honour in the <em>Henriad</em>, using experiences of Lady Anne Barnard to illustrate how Shakespeare’s critique of monarchical government can speak meaningfully to political behaviour across time. Starting with her excoriating dismissal of Governor George Yonge’s dishonourable regime, captured in her description of 1 Henry IV as performed for the opening of the African Theatre in Cape Town in 1801, the paper goes on to unpack her complex attitudes to slavery, including her courageous decision, described as a “debt of honour”, to take care of her deceased husband’s previously unknown ‘love child’ conceived with a slave, Rachel van de Caap. The account draws on fresh insights found in Stephen Taylor’s recent biography of Anne Barnard and argues that the <em>Henriad’s</em> treatment of honour resonates across time, supplying counsel that post-revolutionary ages would do well to heed.</p> 2020-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) In Memoriam: André Neethling Lemmer (1944–2020) 2020-12-04T10:08:45+00:00 Paul Walters Charles Van Renen <p>No Abstract</p> 2020-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Illuminating Shakespeare’s <i>Terra Anglia</i> 2020-12-04T10:02:14+00:00 Tony Voss <p><strong>Review</strong>:<br>– Stuart Elden, Shakespearean Territories (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2018)<br>– Margaret Tudeau-Clayton, Shakespeare’s Englishes: Against Englishness (Cambridge: Cambridge University<br>Press, 2020)</p> 2020-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Thinking Like Shakespeare – Today 2020-12-04T10:05:31+00:00 Tony Voss <p>Scott Newstok, How to Think like Shakespeare: Lessons from a Renaissance Education (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2020)</p> 2020-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c)