john gielgud directs richard burton in "hamlet"
this is the book that i mentioned the other day that is about the same production of "hamlet" as the book letters from an actor that i borrowed from cassielsander last week. i had read it at least twice before, but i came to it with fresh eyes after reading the other book.
i love this book and the reason that i love this book is clearly not because of the author, richard sterne, who acts mainly as an editor and transcriber (and had the idea to clandestinely tape all the rehearsals--quite odd, but in the end, no one objected). i love it because what it is, chiefly, is john gielgud talking about shakespeare and acting and "hamlet," all three of which he clearly loves. other people respond to gielgud upon occasion, in here, and there is an interview with richard burton, as well as gielgud, at the end (where they know that they are talking to a tape recorder), but the bulk of the book that is not the prompt script is gielgud talking.
what we don't see in this book, as opposed to the other one, is how confused the actors are as time goes on. redfield clearly was and his letters indicate that he had a lot of company. sterne does indicate that blocking would go in and then gielgud would change it and then would change it all back but there's nothing of people's reactions to that in this book.
sterne does give excerpts from the reviews in all three cities (toronto, boston and new york) where redfield emphatically did not read them. amusing since two people seeing the same production sometimes saw the exact opposite end result. i did notice that the only person who i think got good reviews in every review i read was hume cronyn, as polonius--he must have really nailed it. i'll have to watch for that in the viewing.
one person who comes off really well in both books is elizabeth taylor. both authors find her sweet and helpful, and we can see through burton conveying some of her suggestions that while she may not consider herself much of an actor, she has good insights and suggestions and is actually pretty clever about things that burton, at least, is doing.
the other thing about these books is that they both are by people who love language--i refer to redfield and gielgud--sterne appreciates language, going by his choices of what to include, but gielgud just brims with it in these quotes. the tones of the books are very different but both are clearly intelligent people with a deep knowledge of acting and shakespeare.
sterne appears to have almost disappeared after this production, as best i can discern--if the internet broadway database is to be believed. wait, i just went to imdb, and he had an uncredited part in "soylent green." but his career didn't take off to stratospheres after this production--maybe they were too afraid he'd show up with a tape recorder.
i love this book and the reason that i love this book is clearly not because of the author, richard sterne, who acts mainly as an editor and transcriber (and had the idea to clandestinely tape all the rehearsals--quite odd, but in the end, no one objected). i love it because what it is, chiefly, is john gielgud talking about shakespeare and acting and "hamlet," all three of which he clearly loves. other people respond to gielgud upon occasion, in here, and there is an interview with richard burton, as well as gielgud, at the end (where they know that they are talking to a tape recorder), but the bulk of the book that is not the prompt script is gielgud talking.
what we don't see in this book, as opposed to the other one, is how confused the actors are as time goes on. redfield clearly was and his letters indicate that he had a lot of company. sterne does indicate that blocking would go in and then gielgud would change it and then would change it all back but there's nothing of people's reactions to that in this book.
sterne does give excerpts from the reviews in all three cities (toronto, boston and new york) where redfield emphatically did not read them. amusing since two people seeing the same production sometimes saw the exact opposite end result. i did notice that the only person who i think got good reviews in every review i read was hume cronyn, as polonius--he must have really nailed it. i'll have to watch for that in the viewing.
one person who comes off really well in both books is elizabeth taylor. both authors find her sweet and helpful, and we can see through burton conveying some of her suggestions that while she may not consider herself much of an actor, she has good insights and suggestions and is actually pretty clever about things that burton, at least, is doing.
the other thing about these books is that they both are by people who love language--i refer to redfield and gielgud--sterne appreciates language, going by his choices of what to include, but gielgud just brims with it in these quotes. the tones of the books are very different but both are clearly intelligent people with a deep knowledge of acting and shakespeare.
sterne appears to have almost disappeared after this production, as best i can discern--if the internet broadway database is to be believed. wait, i just went to imdb, and he had an uncredited part in "soylent green." but his career didn't take off to stratospheres after this production--maybe they were too afraid he'd show up with a tape recorder.