What do you think?
Rate this book
Great Shakespeare Actors: Burbage to Branagh
Great Shakespeare Actors offers a series of essays on great Shakespeare actors from his time to ours, starting by asking whether Shakespeare himself was the first--the answer is No--and continuing with essays on the men and women who have given great stage performances in his plays from Elizabethan times to our own. They include both English and American performers such as David Garrick, Sarah Siddons, Charlotte Cushman, Ira Aldridge, Edwin Booth, Henry Irving, Ellen Terry, Edith Evans, Laurence Olivier, John Gielgud, Ralph Richardson, Peggy Ashcroft, Janet Suzman, Judi Dench, Ian McKellen, and Kenneth Branagh. Individual chapters tell the story of their subjects' careers, but together these overlapping tales combine to offer a succinct, actor-centred history of Shakespearian theatrical performance.
Stanley Wells examines what it takes to be a great Shakespeare actor and then offers a concise sketch of each actor's career in Shakespeare, an assessment of their specific talents and claims to greatness, and an account, drawing on contemporary reviews, biographies, anecdotes, and, for some of the more recent actors, the author's personal memories of their most notable performances in Shakespeare roles.
Stanley Wells examines what it takes to be a great Shakespeare actor and then offers a concise sketch of each actor's career in Shakespeare, an assessment of their specific talents and claims to greatness, and an account, drawing on contemporary reviews, biographies, anecdotes, and, for some of the more recent actors, the author's personal memories of their most notable performances in Shakespeare roles.
324 pages, Hardcover
First published April 23, 2015
3 people are currently reading
49 people want to read
About the author
Stanley Wells
189 books47 followersStanley William Wells, CBE, is a Shakespeare scholar and Chairman of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 17, 2015
http://www.themaineedge.com/style/the...
There are few lovers of theater who would dispute the importance of William Shakespeare. Widely acknowledged as the greatest of all playwrights, his works have become the standard by which all dramatic literature is ultimately measured.
However, while the plays are deservedly celebrated as literary works, the Bard’s words were originally intended to be spoken from the stage. Yes, they have much merit on their own, but it is only in collaboration with the actor that those words can truly be put on display in the manner in which they were intended.
Stanley Wells explores the men and women who were the best at bringing the Bard’s words to life in his book “Great Shakespeare Actors: From Burbage to Branagh.” Wells is a preeminent Shakespeare scholar; he was a longtime director of the University of Birmingham’s Shakespeare Institute and has been a general editor for the Oxford Shakespeare series since the late 1970s. In short, this is someone who knows from Shakespeare.
In this book, Wells travels through time looking at the most renowned and the most talented of those treading the boards and bringing Shakespeare’s words to life. From the Elizabethan era in which Shakespeare was actively creating his works to the present day, Wells evokes scores of names – some familiar, some largely lost to history for all but a scholarly few.
The book begins with some thoughts relating to the man himself. Wells explores the idea that Shakespeare himself might have been one of the greats, though he rather quickly deems that notion unlikely. He also takes a few moments to discuss just how little use he has for the conspiracy theorists – the Shakespeare deniers, if you will – that question the veracity of authorship. As a longtime Shakespearean scholar, you can imagine how Wells feels about that line of thought.
From there, we delve into the names. Each of these actors – of whom there are many – is accompanied by a biographical sketch and a breakdown of his or her connection with the works of Shakespeare. The introduction to each section even includes a list of the actor’s most prominent/important Shakespearean roles. Through these essays, we’re offered a look at not only the kind of work these actors were doing, but how they came to be doing it. They make for fascinating glimpses at what sorts of lives were lived by actors over the course of the last four centuries.
The first is that of Richard Burbage – an obvious choice, considering his many ties to Shakespeare and his work; he’s one of the few actors of that time whose name might prove familiar. Other highlights include the acclaimed David Garrick and the American powerhouse Edwin Booth. Sarah Siddons is widely considered to be the first female to tackle the works of Shakespeare, taking on the roles that to that point had been occupied by boys. Ira Aldridge, an American black man, became the first of his race to achieve wide success on the Shakespearean stage – even if he did have to cross the Atlantic to do so. Later, more familiar names include Judi Dench and Kenneth Branagh.
“Great Shakespeare Actors” is the sort of scholarly tome that doesn’t often get reviewed in these pages. However, just because it was written by an academic doesn’t mean that it reads like it. Wells brings a wonderful dryness to the pages, condensing his admiration for these brilliant figures from past and present theatrical history into brief essays that are both fascinating and easily consumed. Any fan of the Bard will welcome the addition of this edition to their library.
There are few lovers of theater who would dispute the importance of William Shakespeare. Widely acknowledged as the greatest of all playwrights, his works have become the standard by which all dramatic literature is ultimately measured.
However, while the plays are deservedly celebrated as literary works, the Bard’s words were originally intended to be spoken from the stage. Yes, they have much merit on their own, but it is only in collaboration with the actor that those words can truly be put on display in the manner in which they were intended.
Stanley Wells explores the men and women who were the best at bringing the Bard’s words to life in his book “Great Shakespeare Actors: From Burbage to Branagh.” Wells is a preeminent Shakespeare scholar; he was a longtime director of the University of Birmingham’s Shakespeare Institute and has been a general editor for the Oxford Shakespeare series since the late 1970s. In short, this is someone who knows from Shakespeare.
In this book, Wells travels through time looking at the most renowned and the most talented of those treading the boards and bringing Shakespeare’s words to life. From the Elizabethan era in which Shakespeare was actively creating his works to the present day, Wells evokes scores of names – some familiar, some largely lost to history for all but a scholarly few.
The book begins with some thoughts relating to the man himself. Wells explores the idea that Shakespeare himself might have been one of the greats, though he rather quickly deems that notion unlikely. He also takes a few moments to discuss just how little use he has for the conspiracy theorists – the Shakespeare deniers, if you will – that question the veracity of authorship. As a longtime Shakespearean scholar, you can imagine how Wells feels about that line of thought.
From there, we delve into the names. Each of these actors – of whom there are many – is accompanied by a biographical sketch and a breakdown of his or her connection with the works of Shakespeare. The introduction to each section even includes a list of the actor’s most prominent/important Shakespearean roles. Through these essays, we’re offered a look at not only the kind of work these actors were doing, but how they came to be doing it. They make for fascinating glimpses at what sorts of lives were lived by actors over the course of the last four centuries.
The first is that of Richard Burbage – an obvious choice, considering his many ties to Shakespeare and his work; he’s one of the few actors of that time whose name might prove familiar. Other highlights include the acclaimed David Garrick and the American powerhouse Edwin Booth. Sarah Siddons is widely considered to be the first female to tackle the works of Shakespeare, taking on the roles that to that point had been occupied by boys. Ira Aldridge, an American black man, became the first of his race to achieve wide success on the Shakespearean stage – even if he did have to cross the Atlantic to do so. Later, more familiar names include Judi Dench and Kenneth Branagh.
“Great Shakespeare Actors” is the sort of scholarly tome that doesn’t often get reviewed in these pages. However, just because it was written by an academic doesn’t mean that it reads like it. Wells brings a wonderful dryness to the pages, condensing his admiration for these brilliant figures from past and present theatrical history into brief essays that are both fascinating and easily consumed. Any fan of the Bard will welcome the addition of this edition to their library.
March 5, 2015
Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley.
Stanley Wells is one of the best sources of Shakespeare critical work. Everyone knows Bloom, but in some cases Wells is better because he, in many cases, combines the viewer and the professor. This offers brief discussion of the acting abilities of actors (and actresses) associated with Shakespeare, starting with his contemporaries and working into the modern era.
The description of the various acting skills and styles as well as the influence that each respective actor has upon a role are both well discussed. However, in some cases, a bit more biographical data about the various people would have been appreciated. It is clear that the book is intended for a somewhat general audience because biographical information is given about Shakespeare, and if that is the case, then why isn’t biographical information give about some of the less known but still influential or popular actors?
Additionally, why are the actresses described in terms of looks more than the actors? While Wells does play attention to the physical attributes of male actors, this is primary done in the pre -1950s group. Even when Wells is describing a modern actress , say Judi Dench, he comments upon their looks. It isn’t down in a condescending way but it is interesting because there is less comment about the male actors’ looks.
It is also strange that he ends with Branagh and doesn’t mention, even in passing, more recent productions, say David Tenent’s hamlet. Admittedly, though, it is not as strange as neglecting to mention Bram Stoker when dealing with Henry Irving and Ellen Terry.
But aside from those reservations, the book is entreating and a good tour of acting and the Bard. Wells gives attention to first – including the first African (Black) American acting company as well as the first Black man to perform Shakespeare on a regular basis. He discusses in depth who the first woman actor in terms of Shakespeare was, and there is enough discussion about style to make interesting to an actor, reader, and enjoyer of Shakespeare.
Stanley Wells is one of the best sources of Shakespeare critical work. Everyone knows Bloom, but in some cases Wells is better because he, in many cases, combines the viewer and the professor. This offers brief discussion of the acting abilities of actors (and actresses) associated with Shakespeare, starting with his contemporaries and working into the modern era.
The description of the various acting skills and styles as well as the influence that each respective actor has upon a role are both well discussed. However, in some cases, a bit more biographical data about the various people would have been appreciated. It is clear that the book is intended for a somewhat general audience because biographical information is given about Shakespeare, and if that is the case, then why isn’t biographical information give about some of the less known but still influential or popular actors?
Additionally, why are the actresses described in terms of looks more than the actors? While Wells does play attention to the physical attributes of male actors, this is primary done in the pre -1950s group. Even when Wells is describing a modern actress , say Judi Dench, he comments upon their looks. It isn’t down in a condescending way but it is interesting because there is less comment about the male actors’ looks.
It is also strange that he ends with Branagh and doesn’t mention, even in passing, more recent productions, say David Tenent’s hamlet. Admittedly, though, it is not as strange as neglecting to mention Bram Stoker when dealing with Henry Irving and Ellen Terry.
But aside from those reservations, the book is entreating and a good tour of acting and the Bard. Wells gives attention to first – including the first African (Black) American acting company as well as the first Black man to perform Shakespeare on a regular basis. He discusses in depth who the first woman actor in terms of Shakespeare was, and there is enough discussion about style to make interesting to an actor, reader, and enjoyer of Shakespeare.
May 23, 2017
As somebody who has spent nearly 25 years playing and studying Shakespearean acting, I have often been left cold and unimpressed by accounts of what it takes to actually perform a role and the descriptions of great actors which often lack the technical and phemomenological resources to explain what makes an actor's performance "great".
Stanley Wells has simply written one of the more perceptive surveys on what makes great acting. For one of those very rare times that I have ever encountered, Wells describes features, physicality, expressiveness, and - yes! - vocality with an evocativeness that comes from his long career of studying and attending Shakespearean performances. Indeed, the book really flies when we get to the 20th Century and Wells's personal stories of encounters with actors and their performances both on and off stage. And even more exceptionally, Wells is able to make connections and comparisons between actors of the current age and those of the past, drawing accurate distinctions between different acting styles and physicalities. He also is not afraid to honestly criticize, mentioning critical failures and Shakespearean roles that certain actors were not suited to play. This is essential reading for those interested in Shakespearean acting, particularly the individual performers who have reached the pinnacle of critical success (and quite a few more that should have made the cut to be honest).
Stanley Wells has simply written one of the more perceptive surveys on what makes great acting. For one of those very rare times that I have ever encountered, Wells describes features, physicality, expressiveness, and - yes! - vocality with an evocativeness that comes from his long career of studying and attending Shakespearean performances. Indeed, the book really flies when we get to the 20th Century and Wells's personal stories of encounters with actors and their performances both on and off stage. And even more exceptionally, Wells is able to make connections and comparisons between actors of the current age and those of the past, drawing accurate distinctions between different acting styles and physicalities. He also is not afraid to honestly criticize, mentioning critical failures and Shakespearean roles that certain actors were not suited to play. This is essential reading for those interested in Shakespearean acting, particularly the individual performers who have reached the pinnacle of critical success (and quite a few more that should have made the cut to be honest).
July 30, 2015
Stanley Wells’ Great Shakespeare Actors is a wonderful read for fans of theatre, literature, and history. Besides providing us with descriptions of some of history’s great actors at work, Wells gives readers a sense of the evolving understanding of Shakespeare’s works and of actors’ interpretations of them: “There is, we might say, no such thing as a play: there are only scripts which come to life in different ways each time they are performed.”
Wells is working with challenging material. We have very little documentary evidence regarding early performers of the plays, sometimes a single painting, sometimes not even that. He provides illustrations wherever possible, and the number of these increase as the book progresses.
Wells looks at the types of roles these early actors were known for and at first-person accounts of viewing plays in order to attempt a written portrait of their work. For example, given their differences as texts, it’s likely the roles of Falstaff and Macbeth’s porter were written for different actors: the first a clown (perhaps the era’s Will Ferrell); the second a much darker sort of comic (maybe a Lewis Black).
Wells also moves us from the era of men-only acting to today’s gender-inclusive theatre, and he pays attention to male roles mastered by women (Sarah Bernhardt’s Hamlet, for instance), as well as the historical use of boys to play female characters. Why do so many of Shakespeare’s female characters find themselves in situations that require cross-dressing? For the plot, yes, but also to get boy actors out of skirts whenever possible.
Given that Great Shakespeare Actors is a static text attempting to depict a highly plastic medium, at times the reader will have difficulty “seeing” what Wells sees as he writes. Nonetheless, the specificity of Wells’ writing brings to life performances that remain almost undocumented.
Wells is working with challenging material. We have very little documentary evidence regarding early performers of the plays, sometimes a single painting, sometimes not even that. He provides illustrations wherever possible, and the number of these increase as the book progresses.
Wells looks at the types of roles these early actors were known for and at first-person accounts of viewing plays in order to attempt a written portrait of their work. For example, given their differences as texts, it’s likely the roles of Falstaff and Macbeth’s porter were written for different actors: the first a clown (perhaps the era’s Will Ferrell); the second a much darker sort of comic (maybe a Lewis Black).
Wells also moves us from the era of men-only acting to today’s gender-inclusive theatre, and he pays attention to male roles mastered by women (Sarah Bernhardt’s Hamlet, for instance), as well as the historical use of boys to play female characters. Why do so many of Shakespeare’s female characters find themselves in situations that require cross-dressing? For the plot, yes, but also to get boy actors out of skirts whenever possible.
Given that Great Shakespeare Actors is a static text attempting to depict a highly plastic medium, at times the reader will have difficulty “seeing” what Wells sees as he writes. Nonetheless, the specificity of Wells’ writing brings to life performances that remain almost undocumented.
December 31, 2016
From the early actors (Burbage d.1619 & Kemp) who were contemporaries of the Bard who knew them both and wrote with both in mind, to the mid-1980's, Wells provides short vingettes on his own choice of both male and female actors, and of what and when they performed. These include women who have taken on male roles (incl. Sarah Siddons d.1831), and Wells often chose his subjects for their performance and their ability to taken on the role / character.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews