The Tempest

The Tempest (Theatre Royal, Bath, 8.4.2009)

The Tempest is open to many interpretations and I have always enjoyed the idea that it is a self-aware story of the stage. Another popular interpretation, and the one favoured by Janice Honeyman in this production, is that The Tempest is a comment on colonial England. Honeyman has responded to this idea by bringing an African flavour to play, making it lively and colourful, like Shakespeare meets 'The Lion King'.

As I left the theatre on April 8th I was listening to what other audience members said and two comments that stuck with me were (from a posh old dear) "oh, it makes much more sense now" and (from a posher, older dear) "well, aside from Sher, I think the cast was quite weak". Let's start with the first comment.

The stage was clearly made to look African - the ground was a sandy colour and in the background was a tree that the musicians sat behind and the puppeteers and cast members climbed all over. The puppeteers resembled animals in their costumes and movements and in the sounds they made. The outstanding Ariel was made up like a tribesman. Credit is due to the designers of this production, as no half measures were taken in putting Honeyman's interpretation across to the audience visually. And she remained true to her vision as the story progressed. The focus was wholly upon Caliban and Ariel who were revealed to me as once noble characters who were mistreated by invaders to their lands. This was refreshing, as I've seen too much of Caliban portrayed as a bitter creep and Ariel as a camp boy in a gold loincloth. Honeyman allows the audience to see the story from the other side, from the point of view of the mistreated 'savage', rather than the 'noble' lords. Even the epilogue, in which the player traditionally speaks to the audience and ask for their applause, is directed at Caliban. Prospero's plea for our indulgence to set him free is directed at Caliban, and comes across as an apology and a miserable request for forgiveness.

So what of the second comment? As I've already said, Honeyman's direction was sympathetic towards the islanders, and to this extent the lords, even Prospero, were made to look foolish. Sometimes, too foolish. The lords who were ship-wrecked on the island were forgetable, and I was quite bored by their dawdling and wanted to get back to Prospero's magic tricks. Ferdinand was equally unremarkable. I realise that these characters were purposefully ridiculous, but it didn't work properly for me and seemed that the minor characters had been forgotten about as the relationship between Prospero and Caliban was explored. What unsettled me most was the two drunkards that Caliban befriended. This production wanted me to pity Caliban, but when I saw him put his trust in two idiots that were from time to time irritating, I questioned his judgement and lost sympathy for him. This was frustrating, because John Kani put so much gravity and anger into Caliban that jarred with the young drunks. The minor performances were not bad, however, and I would say to the very old dear that Sher and Kani just hogged the spotlight a little.

As I said regarding Othello, Shakespeare has the wonderful benefit of hindsight. To his audience, England was gloriously expanding but modern theatre-goers have seen the effects of such expansion. This performance of The Tempest was an RSC effort in conjunction with the Baxter Theatre Centre from South Africa, a nation perhaps more aware than others of the mess that European colonialism caused. This production chose that aspect of the play and stuck to it and though some characters were left behind, the audience enjoyed two hours of colourful action that made 'a lot more sense' than some tangents one can take with a play with so many levels.