What a Contrast!

Last night was Thomas Middleton's 1606 play, The Revenger's Tragedy at the National. No risk of not following what was going on there. Of course, it did help, as my companion pointed out, that the characters told you what they were going to do before they did it, then did it, and then recapped afterwards about what they had done, and it's pretty much all sex, disguises and lots and lots of murder, which is all nice and visual, but even so, the key is: I almost never felt as if the dialogue was running away from me. Perhaps the language wasn't as idiomatic as Shakespeare, but even so.

Quite aside from that, it was a brilliantly designed, strikingly modern production, almost over the top but still controlled, and full of shocks and gore. The acting and directing were perfectly pitched to be large enough to carry the dialogue where it was difficult, but still retain genuine emotional resonance. And it was one of the very few plays of this type I've seen where I didn't think that the storyline and mounting bodycount were laughably ridiculous, probably because of the magnificent scene-setting of the opening minutes - some of the best theatre I've seen - which place you convincingly in that dark, decadent world.

In conclusion of what has become an unexpected two-part post (see below for the related first half), it shouldn't matter if the play is written in Early Modern English, it is possible to follow the dialogue if it is well performed, and directors do audiences a disservice by assuming we are all familiar with plays that we might not be, and not bothering to make the meaning clear.

Tickets for The Revenger's Tragedy at the National are still available, and it's part of the travelex season, so they are dead (so to speak) cheap (mine were £10).