Play Review for The Tempest

            Prior to experiencing the performance of The Tempest at the Globe theatre, I was concerned as to how the acting company would portray the characters especially the personas of Prospero and Caliban. Throughout my reading of The Tempest I regarded Prospero’s character with disdain and contemplated how this specific production would stage him. There are a variety of documented productions, including those directed by Peter Brooks (1957) and William Charles Macready (1838), casting Prospero as being either exceptionally abrasive or a romanticized paternal figure whose singular motivation is to guarantee the most benefits for his daughter Miranda. Contrary to my skepticism upon viewing the performance, Roger Allam’s portrayal of Prospero was both inspiring and amiable. Despite my preconceived opinions, I found myself favoring Roger Allam’s representation of Prospero--perhaps more so than any of the other actors and the characters they embodied. It is most probable that Prospero’s unanticipated amicability was a consequence of this particular production’s divergence from the master-slave dynamic that was exceedingly emphasized within the text between Prospero and the “poisonous slave” Caliban. Although this production casted Caliban with the intentions of reflecting the stereotypical characteristics often associated with the “savage native,” his interactions with Prospero throughout the performance endorsed a more confident and less begotten interpretation of Caliban as opposed to the submissive servant the play text encourages. The most notable occurrence of Caliban’s unexpected insurgence occurred early in the play whenever he is first introduced carrying logs to Prospero’s cell. Despite Prospero’s reiteration of derogatory remarks referring to Caliban’s unfortunate appearance and status as a slave, the manner in which each character delivered their respective lines illustrated a relationship that was not entirely reminiscent of the traditional expectations regarding the interactions between an assumed master and the individuals one considered to be their inferior subjects. Surprisingly it was Prospero’s daughter Miranda that was most successful in commanding the obedience of the derisive Caliban. In the same scene whenever an enraged Miranda approaches Caliban, he cowers and immediately falls to his knees emulating the subservient behavior one would expect a slave to perform. The absence of a prominent master-slave relationship effectively promotes Prospero as an approachable character and as a result, his subsequent interactions with Caliban and other characters are primarily characterized by his exasperated appearance and the frequent mockery that is evident in his exuberant responses.

            In addition to witnessing this production’s portrayal of characters such as Prospero and Caliban, I was predominantly curious as to how this particular company would incorporate special effects into significant scenes specifically, the manifestation of the tempest and the disappearing banquet table. Since its inception, special effects have been essential in promoting The Tempest. As the years progressed and the play was revised and reproduced, promises of new and innovated special effects contributed to the play’s success when promoting each subsequent performance. Considering the Globe’s traditional atmosphere and reputation in utilizing contemporary Shakespearean techniques, the concluding special effects were executed successfully. The simultaneous projections of the doomed sailors on stage in addition to the model ship tossing among the groundlings was especially interesting and effective in simulating the turbulence of Prospero’s vengeful storm. The sheeted metal used to generate the thunder, albeit exceptionally simple in design, was true to the materials that may have been available at the time of Shakespeare’s first performance. In conjunction with the Globe’s proximity to the airport and the coincidental sounds of airplanes flying overhead it was quite obvious that a storm was being staged.

            As the climax of the play’s plot the vanishing banquet table remains the most difficult scene to stage in The Tempest and despite a few reservations concerning the company’s costuming of Ariel as the harpy, the scene was exhilarating and well delivered. As mentioned above, the special effects prior to this scene were a reflection of the materials and techniques that may have been available in 1611; however, the vanishing table scene successfully embraced more modern special effects, such as pyrotechnics, to justify the table’s abrupt disappearance. Rather than simply lowering the table below stage, Prospero’s conjured inferno was especially effective in validating his character in lieu of his previous appearances that encouraged a positive image of Prospero as a likable personality. Additionally, the roaring flame that consumed the table and the food it supported paralleled the chaotic undertones achieved by Prospero’s conjuring of the violent storm. The only fault I experienced with this particular scene was the manner in which Ariel was portrayed as the harpy. In respect to delivery and overall embodiment of the role, Ariel’s harpy performance was effectively terrifying and convincing and surpassed the expectations promoted by the text; however, Ariel’s costume, complete with encumbering wings and awkward stilted feet, was rather distracting to behold. The wings themselves were separated from his body and required the aid of four other personnel in order to function properly and in conjunction with the ostentatious feet, Ariel dominated the stage causing me to neglect the reactions of Alonso, Sebastian, Antonio, and others. The scene may have been more effective had Ariel’s wings been more proportional and attached to his body as opposed to a separate entity and the clustering of unnecessary individuals on the stage. Contrary to the minor grievances I maintained concerning the costuming of Ariel’s disguised portrayal of the harpy, the scene was successful in reflecting the climactic actions that are perhaps lost when one only experiences this particular scene through an examination of Shakespeare’s text. For this reason, Ariel’s performance and the incorporated special effects must be judged as a success in respect to the overall achievement of the play’s engrossing plot.