The Price: It's Just Stuff, Isn't It?

By Kathryn Neves

This season, Arthur Miller’s The Price will give us a glimpse of just what it is to be human. It’s an astounding play full of universal themes and archetypes, but one of the more fascinating subjects that the play addresses is the idea of physical objects—the way we attach emotion to things and materials. Through the characters’ attachment to various items in the play, we get a better look at who they are and the ways that they deal with the complicated relationships they have. This theme raises an interesting question: Why do we attach emotion to things? Afterall, it’s just stuff, isn’t it?

The answer to this can perhaps be found in social psychology. One study argues that this attachment can arise due to insecure personal relationships: “People attach to objects, at least in part, to compensate for the perception that close others are insufficiently reliable sources of security” (Keefer, Lucas A., Mark J. Landau, Zachary K. Rothschild, and Daniel Sullivan, “Attachment to Objects as Compensation for Close Others’ Perceived Unreliability” [Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48, 2012], 912). This idea comes through pretty clearly in The Price. Throughout the play, we learn that Victor, a policeman who regrets not attending university, resents nearly everyone in his life—most especially his brother Walter and his late father. Though Miller doesn’t say as much, it’s clear that the emotional attachment most family members have with each other is absent in this particular family. Near the end of the play, Walter proclaims: “All that is standing between us now—an illusion. . . . I only saw then what you see now—there was nothing here to betray. . . . It is all an illusion and if you could walk through it, we could meet” (Miller, 438). It becomes obvious throughout the play that the family dynamic was and still is dysfunctional. We learn of different lies and betrayals, we learn old family secrets, and we see age-old resentments that have torn the family apart.

Keefer et al. claim that “people whose attachment figures consistently reject them in times of need may learn that relying on others is not an effective way to manage distress. People typically respond to this situation with attachment avoidance: maintaining independence and emotional distance from close others to avoid rejection” (912). Again, we can see this in Victor and Walter. Because each of them feels he cannot rely on the other, each has spent years without speaking to each other, trying to live completely independent of each other. This leads them to bond with the furniture and other objects in their father’s house. 

“Attachment to material objects can similarly serve to compensate for the threat to attachment security posed by close others’ perceived unreliability” (913). In other words, the items that Victor and Walter are trying to sell have become substitutes for real familial love. Victor explains it himself early on in the play: “This whole thing— it hit me like some kind of craziness. Piling up all this stuff here like it was made of gold. He half-laughs, almost embarrassed. I brought up every stick; damn near saved the carpet tacks” (Miller, 360).

As Victor and Walter prepare to sell their parents’ old belongings, there are several items that seem to take on a greater meaning as the play goes along. Their mother’s harp and their father’s chair are particularly important in the script. It’s almost as though each of those items has come to represent the family as it used to be, and the relationships that the family used to share. For instance, Miller focuses a lot on the harp throughout the play. Both in dialogue and in stage directions, it’s clear that the harp is more than just a harp—it’s a representation of their deceased mother, and an embodiment of old relationships that have either completely changed or been destroyed altogether. “My mother’d play for hours down in the library,” Victor says, “Which is peculiar, because a harp is so soft. But it penetrates, I guess” (Miller, 363). Victor and Walter both speak of the harp with a certain reverence, as though they’re remembering not just the harp, but all the memories and associations that surround it. However, even though the harp is clearly important to each of them, the object itself is not enough to make up for the emotional distance they have with their family Victor explains: “It’s odd. . . . Like the harp! I can almost hear the music. . . . But I can never see her face. Somehow. For a moment, silence, as he looks across at the harp” (Miller, 409).

Even more poignant than the harp, however, is the way that Miller treats their father’s chair throughout the script. Nearly every time someone references their late father, they point to his empty chair. The stage directions are littered with references to it. As much as the harp represents the insecure emotional attachment to their mother and their childhood in general, the father’s chair does it even more. Toward the end of the play, we learn a dark family secret about the father that has been haunting each brother for their entire lives, and the chair becomes emblematic of that insecurity. Because of their father’s secrecy and deception, neither Walter nor Victor could truly have a reliable relationship with their father: instead, these feelings of emotional attachment transferred over to the objects and the furniture kept in the old house— especially their father’s chair. Many of Walter’s lines demonstrate this really well: “I wasted thirty years protecting myself from that catastrophe. He indicates the chair: And I only got out when I saw that there was no catastrophe, there had never been” (Miller, 438). Victor even addresses the chair at one point, further solidifying the chair as a substitute for his actual father. A stage direction says “He stops; his stare is on the center chair, caught by memory; in effect, the last line was addressed to the chair” (Miller, 438).

Walter and Victor spend the play unable to truly connect with each other emotionally. Instead, they are stuck in old patterns of emotional insecurity and unreliability. Instead of connecting with each other as brothers, they—especially Victor—hold on to the sentimental attachments they have with the furniture and objects in their parents’ old home. Their refusal to face the past and instead attach themselves to material items is a poignant point that Arthur Miller makes through the play: as humans, we have a tendency to avoid emotions and relationships, and instead turn our attentions to the physical world, putting too much value on things. In the end, the character Gregory Solomon says it best: “With used furniture you cannot be emotional” (Miller 371).

Arthur Miller: An American Master

Playwright Arthur Miller

By Kathryn Neves

This isn’t the first time the Utah Shakespeare Festival has produced an Arthur Miller play. The 1991 season saw Death of a Salesman in the Randall L. Jones Theatre. Death of a Salesman is arguably Arthur Miller’s most famous play, but many people would argue that everything Arthur Miller wrote was a masterpiece. He was, after all, one of America’s greatest writers. So as we produce one of his lesser known works this season, The Price, it might be good to understand a little more about the man and the context in which he wrote his plays.

The Price, though many people haven’t even heard of it, is a stunningly beautiful piece of theatre. After opening on Broadway in 1968 it was nominated for two Tony Awards. “The Price is one of the most engrossing and entertaining plays that Miller has ever written. It is superbly, even flamboyantly, theatrical” (Clive Barnes, “Theater: Arthur Miller’s ‘The Price’” [The New York Times, 2/8 1968]). It’s the story of two brothers, a wife, and an antiques dealer coming together after years apart to sell their late father’s belongings. Through the eyes of these characters, we see the results of old family grudges and prejudices, and we ultimately learn the ways in which they do, and they don’t, reconcile. The now deceased father, once a very wealthy man, lost everything in the Great Depression, and his sons, decades later, have to deal with the ramifications of the loss, deception, and resentment in their family.

This isn’t an autobiographical piece; Arthur Miller’s work is mostly fiction. Still, if you look closely at the characters and events in this play and others, it’s pretty clear that Miller used concepts from his own life to enrich his work.

Miller was born in 1915, the son of a Polish Jew who moved to America during the Jewish pogroms of the Russian Empire. His family owned a coat-making business, but when the Great Depression hit, all the Millers had to give up and move. Miller then began working in a bakery to help support his family. This is remarkably similar to an important character in The Price, Victor Franz. As the play goes on, we learn that he once had dreams of becoming a doctor and a scholar, but after the Great Depression he ended up becoming a police officer in order to support his poor, incapacitated father. There are similar themes of father-son dissatisfaction, poor economy, and work ethics in his other plays too, most notably Death of a Salesman.

But it’s not only Miller’s personal life that’s mirrored in his work; the events of his world— historical moments, great figures, and political movements— made their way into his works as well. And it’s not just The Price— you can see it in many of his other plays. The Crucible is a great example; written in 1953, it showed the story of the Salem Witch trials through the eyes of a few fictional characters. The story went deeper than that, though. It was actually an allegory for the Red Scare and the Communist “witch hunts” conducted by Senator Joseph McCarthy. Interestingly enough, Miller himself was brought before the House of Un-American Activities Committee just three years later and was investigated for his supposed Communist leanings.

His play All My Sons revolves around family loss and trauma after the events of World War II, and the ways in which people come to terms with the casualties of war. Death of a Salesman deals with economic complications and individual responses to disastrous events around them— i.e., the Great Depression. The list could go on for quite a while.

All in all, Arthur Miller’s works are more than just fiction; they are reflections of the author himself, and of the tumultuous events of the history that he lived through. By watching his plays, we can understand more about not just Arthur Miller, but about the world itself. Take the chance the summer to see The Price. This complex masterpiece is just one example of Arthur Miller’s genius, brilliance, and amazing understanding of the human condition.

Living with Hamlet: Part One

Quinn Mattfeld as Hamlet

By Quinn Mattfeld

Editor’s Note: Over the next few weeks, actor Quinn Mattfeld will be writing blog posts about what it is like to play the role of Hamlet. This is the first of three such posts.

As an actor, what can I say about Hamlet that hasn’t already been said (and far better) by countless literary critics, theatre critics, philosophers, poets, et. al.? Surely, if there is a way to think of or articulate Hamlet, it has been thought and articulated long before I even knew the play existed. But one of the many beautiful things about being a Shakespearean actor is that we know these plays were intended to be heard not read. In fact, the only people who were ever supposed to have read the plays were actors.

So while the play, as it exists on the page, has been poured over for nearly half a millennium by legions of analytical minds far superior to my own, as an actor I know that there is a difference between reading Hamlet, and living with Hamlet.

Four times a week for almost four months this summer, I have the unparalleled privilege and honor of playing the greatest character in Western literature for thousands of people. For the next few months, as I have for the last few, I will live with Hamlet.

Though this is my third time playing the role, I have learned exponentially more this time through. Every production of Hamlet is different. And every performance within that production is also a new and different experience for an actor (and the audience).

Our job as actors, as is the task with any ritual, is to perform an action for the thousandth time as if it were the first. What naturally emerges from such a prolonged level of intensity and investment is a kind of spontaneous creative impulse within the framework of the story. In those places where I expect to find myself laughing, I may instead find myself moved to tears and vice versa. Often a word will leap into my ear in a way that gives it a depth and resonance it never previously had. A look, a gesture, a movement emerges or fades in some way unexpected but perfectly appropriate for this Hamlet, on this day and no other.

This is what it means to live with Hamlet.

All of these experiences are teaching me that this role, perhaps more than any other role in the canon, cannot be confined to the character as it exists on the page. Hamlet is a perpetual unfolding of revelation. The play begins with a question. The word “question” itself appears more in Hamlet than any other Shakespeare play. The character and the play itself are a relentless search for truth and so to live with Hamlet is to live between spiraling pillars of doubt and discovery.

It is a journey of intimacy and investigation that even the most brilliant scholars will never know unless they step into Hamlet’s boots and experience it for themselves.

Living with Hamlet is the kind of journey that every actor dreams of taking, a journey I look very much forward to continuing into the fall.

Read Part Two

We Appreciate Our Soldiers

The Utah Shakespeare Festival will be celebrating our Armed Forces with free tickets for military personnel to selected performances on August 26 to September 3. The Festival appreciates the sacrifices of the men and women who serve and recognizes their dedication and commitment to this country.

The offer is for anyone with a military ID, active or veteran, and includes four tickets per ID total to any of the following shows (all begin at 8 p.m.): Every Brilliant Thing on August 26, The Conclusion of Henry VI: Parts Two and Three on August 28, The Book of Will on September 2, Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat on September 3, Hamlet on September 5, and Macbeth on September 6.

Military personnel are invited to reserve tickets by calling 800-PLAYTIX or visiting the ticket office near the Anes Studio Theatre. A valid military ID will be required to pick up the tickets, and there is a limit of four tickets per ID. Tickets are not available in the Premier seating section. Space is limited for this special offer, so call soon to reserve your seats.  

“I’m honored to be the son of a proud Vietnam veteran,” said Donn Jersey, director of development and communication, “and once again the Utah Shakespeare Festival wants to extend a warm welcome and humble thank you to all of those that made sacrifices to our country and every one of us.” 

Regular tickets for the Festival’s 2019 season are still on sale. The Conclusion of Henry VI: Parts Two and Three runs through August 31. Twelfth Night, The Book of Will, and Macbeth continue in the Engelstad Theatre through the weekend of September 5–7. Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, Hamlet, and Every Brilliant Thing continue through October 12; and the Festival’s last show of the season, Arthur Miller’s The Price, opens September 12 and plays through October 12. For specific days and times and to purchase tickets, visit www.bard.org or call 1-800-PLAYTIX.

"The King" Is Back

Russ Benton as the Pharoah

By Kathryn Neves

There are countless reasons to come and see Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat this season: song and dance, fun characters, and a universal story that everyone can relate to. But there’s one particularly compelling reason to come to Cedar City and see this show: the character of the Pharaoh, a.k.a. Elvis, the King himself, played by fantastic actor Russ Benton.     

Watching Russ onstage is an awesome experience in its own right, with his great voice, a talent for ’50s style rock-’n’-roll dance moves, and an Elvis impression fit to beat any of the Kings in Las Vegas chapels and hotels. But there’s an added benefit to seeing Russ as the Pharaoh. This is Benton’s second time playing the Pharoah/Elvis: in the Utah Shakespeare Festival’s first production of Joseph, directed by Fred Adams in 1998, Russ was— you guessed it— a much younger Pharoah, a young version of Elvis.

“Now I am the old man in the show, but back then we were all young and full of energy,” said Benton. “I was a much younger man when I played it last. So the idea that [Pharaoh] is an aging rock star this time around makes it much more fun to play now.”

Those who have seen the show will know that it’s no small feat to play the Pharaoh. The amount of energy it takes to wear the Elvis jumpsuit and do the famous swivels, splits, and air guitars is frankly astounding. But it certainly pays off: audiences scream and cheer when Benton goes into his routine.          

“It is certainly more difficult to put out the kind of energy and moves that I used to, but that makes it all the more funny now. I enjoy playing with the idea that, although [Pharaoh] believes he can, he really can’t keep up. . . . He is just an absolute narcissist, and despite his execution of the number, still sees himself as godlike,” says Benton. His zany characterization of the beloved character has audiences in stitches every performance.          

Audiences who got the chance to see Joseph twenty years ago remember the production with great fondness— and so does Benton. “My strongest and fondest memory was getting to work with Fred Adams, a man who has been a teacher, director, and friend for so many years,” he said. “We had an absolute blast finding the funny moments in the show.”

His love for this show continues to this day. “I’ve really enjoyed working with the director, Brad Carroll,” he says, “and really trying to make sure that, although we have fun, we really pay respect to the story and find our way to the funny through that. . . . I really love this team and cast, and I find their creativity and energy remarkable.”     

All in all, Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat is definitely worth seeing this season. Whether you’ve seen it once or a hundred times, there’s always something new to be learned, something new to enjoy. “It’s a story of family, forgiveness, and redemption. I think that speaks a lot to people,” says Benton. “It’s just great fun, with great music and lyrics that are so catchy and fun to listen to and sing along.” So, drop in and catch on of Lloyd Webber’s finest this year— and keep your eyes peeled for a familiar Festival face!

The "Genesis" of Joseph and His Dreamcoat

Hilary Alexa Caldwell (left) as Rachel, Aaron Young as Joseph, and Michael A. Harding as Jacob.

By Kathryn Neves

Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat is one of musical theatre’s most popular shows. And it’s no wonder: with fun music, great lyrics, and zany characters, it’s a show not easily forgotten. But more than that, the story of Joseph is something that resonates with many people. After all, at its core, Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat is a biblical story, passed down century after century. It is a story of family, mistakes, and forgiveness. And Joseph himself is an important figure in several of the world’s major religions;  his story is familiar to many people across the globe. So what is the real story of Joseph?

Well, in truth, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical does a pretty good job of telling the story accurately, at least according to scripture. Here’s a quick rundown: Joseph is one of the twelve sons of Jacob (otherwise known as Israel). And even though he’s toward the younger end of the litter, he is Jacob’s favorite son, the first son of his favorite wife. So, he gets the birthright, and Jacob gives Joseph a colorful coat to signify his importance. Beyond that, Joseph has prophetic dreams that seem to imply his superiority over his brothers. This doesn’t sit well with them, and they sell him into slavery. Joseph is taken to Egypt, where he moves from place to place and master to master—from a large and important household, to prison, and finally to the Pharaoh. Here, his ability to decipher prophetic dreams comes in handy and saves him from the life in prison. He interprets the Pharaoh’s dreams, and is promoted to the position of vizier— essentially the most powerful man in Egypt besides Pharaoh himself. Joseph leads Egypt through a time of famine, reunites with his brothers and father (after testing their loyalty), and they all move to Egypt to be together with Joseph and be saved from famine.

Joseph was originally from Canaan, which is in modern-day Palestine, Syria, and Israel. According to the Bible, he invited his family—jealous brothers and all—to live with him in the Pharaoh’s household; thus starting the years of Israel in Egypt. Interestingly, it’s said that he asked his descendants to bring his bones back to Canaan if they ever left Egypt. So, according to the Bible, Moses brought Joseph’s remains back to Sechem— modern-day Palestine— where they remain to this day. In fact, there is a funerary monument there today that is a sacred site to many religions. 

As the vizier, Joseph would have had immense power. Although there are no records (beyond scripture) of a vizier named Joseph from this time period, there are some interesting pieces of historical evidence that corroborate parts of the story. For one thing, there is evidence of a drought in Egypt around the time of the story. For another, during this time period “a canal was built to keep the ranches of the Nile permanently open, enabling water to . . . keep the land fertile . . . in Arabic it’s the Bahr Yusef. This translates into English as The Waterway of Joseph” (“Joseph,” Religions: Judaism, [BBC, 2009]). It’s possible that Joseph built the canal as part of his plan to save Egypt from the famine. 

Practicers of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism all revere Joseph as a prophet, as well as the father of important bloodlines. In Judaism, he’s known as the figure who initially brought the tribes of Israel into Egypt. In Christianity, he is considered to be a symbol, or type, of Christ. In Islam, it’s said Muhammed declared that Joseph was incredibly handsome, receiving half the beauty God apportioned for mankind. Beyond that, throughout the centuries Joseph’s story has provided an example of morality and faith for religious people to follow.

This is why the story has endured for so long. Whether you revere Joseph as a prophet or just want to watch Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical, Joseph’s story is universal. Themes of jealousy, love, loyalty, and above all, family, resonate with everyone—whether read from the Bible or seen from the stage. “The story of a boy whose dreams came true” appeals to us all—because “it could be you.”

Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat plays through October 12 at the Festival. Tickets are available by calling 800-PLAYTIX or at www.bard.org.

Festival Reorganizes Senior Staff Roles

The Utah Shakespeare Festival recently adjusted some of its organizational structure and the roles of some of its senior staff, merging what were formerly the Development Department and the Marketing and Communications Department. The new department will be known as the Department of Development and Communications and will be led by Donn Jersey, formerly the director of development. Tyler Morgan will take on the role of director of advertising and promotion.

 “One benefit we seek by making this change is to further integrate the external communications of the Festival so we will have a more unified message from both of these departments,” said Frank Mack, Festival executive producer. “We believe that development and marketing should always communicate the same message, and having one senior staff member leading the definition of that message will be an improvement.”

 “We have undertaken these changes in an effort to better align individual strengths with the needs of the Festival,” said Mack and Artistic Director Brian Vaughn in a joint statement to the Festival staff. “We hope this will improve how we operate, and we are committed to fully supporting both Donn and Tyler in their new roles.”

 “I look forward to working with everybody at the Festival as we move forward in our mission to entertain, educate, and enrich all of our various audiences,” said Jersey. “We have an amazing development and communication team, and I’m excited to rub shoulders with them as we integrate these important aspects of our company.”

Announcing Our 2020 Season

The Utah Shakespeare Festival has announced a new, extended season for 2020. The Tony Award-winning theatre company will be producing nine plays from June 1 to October 10, a season that is three weeks longer than this year. It is the longest season the Festival has ever produced.

 “It’s a season of love, laughter, romance, and revenge,” said Artistic Director Brian Vaughn. “Complete with identical twins, singing cowboys, dancing pirates, charming villains, and inspiring women, each of these plays celebrate the glory of life, the magnitude of love, and the laughter that lives in us all.”

 As usual the plays will be performed in three world-class theatres, with a wide variety of musicals; Shakespeare comedies, tragedies, and histories; and classic and modern theatre.

 “The Festival is breaking new ground by producing in June,” said Frank Mack, executive producer. “Changes to the calendar at Southern Utah University enable the Festival to fulfill a long-held ambition to start producing plays earlier in the summer than our traditional late June/early July start. This not only opens new programming opportunities, but provides audiences a chance to visit the Festival as early as June 1.”

 The 2020 season will start June 1 with two shows running in rotating repertory in the Eileen and Allen Anes Studio Theatre, a musical and a Shakespeare play. A third production will be added to the Anes Theatre in August.

Cymbeline, William Shakespeare’s fantastical romance, will open the season on June 1 and run through October 10. A wicked stepmother, a banished soulmate, villains, ghosts, long-lost princes, and a lion-hearted heroine are all a part of this mythic tale based on the legends of ancient Celts and chock-full of deception, intrigue, innocence, and jealousy.

 A musical comedy gone wild, Desperate Measures by Peter Kellogg and David Friedman will be in performance from June 2 to October 10. This critically acclaimed new show takes Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure and goes west—way west—as in cowboys, a mysterious sheriff, a saloon girl gone good, and a nun out of the habit. You will laugh until you cry as this show shakes things up with toe-tappin’ music and a script fully loaded with laughs.

 These two shows will run in rotating repertory, with matinee and evening performances through August 6 when a third show will be added to the mix.

 The final play to open in the Anes Studio Theatre will be the United States premiere of Shakespeare’s Worst! with performances from August 6 to October 9. Written by Mike Reiss of The Simpsons fame and actor and teacher Nick Newlin, Shakespeare’s Worst, is an original and hilarious retelling of a Shakespeare classic. Workshopped as part of the Festival’s Words3 new play program in 2018, this new play is set in a small-town theatre where a group of actors are performing The Two Gentlemen of Verona. But one of the cast members is unhappy: his career is going nowhere, he’s tired of the show, he wants out, and he is all-to-happy to tell the audience exactly what he thinks!

 Three Shakespeare plays will open the fourth week of June in the outdoor Engelstad Shakespeare Theatre:

The Comedy of Errors, one of Shakespeare’s funniest plays, will open on June 22 and play through September 4. Featuring not just one, but two sets of bewildered twins, it’s double the laughter and twice the fun as confusion reigns supreme. You will laugh from beginning to end as these bewildered twins try to unravel the lunatic events swirling around them.

Playgoers will have a chance to see the rarely performed Pericles from June 23 to September 3, as the Festival performs this tale of high adventure for only the third time in its history. Pericles is searching for thrills, treasure, and family. But his loves die, his friends deceive him, and the gods seem to be against him. In the end, he finds the most important treasure of all: himself.

Richard III is the next installment in the Festival’s History Cycle, completing the story of the War of the Roses told in Henry V, and the three parts of Henry VI. Playing from June 24 to September 5, Richard III features one of Shakespeare’s most charming and evil villains. Richard, the ambitious son of York, has taken the English throne by exploiting or murdering everyone in his path, but it isn’t clear that he can keep it in the twisted world he has created.

Three more classics will fill out the 2020 season in the beautiful Randall L. Jones Theatre:

First to open is One Man, Two Guvnors, the hilarious new comedy by Richard Bean, running June 25 to October 10. Winner of multiple Tony and Drama Desk Awards, this glorious comedy is a fresh take on the classic farce A Servant of Two Masters and a unique laugh-out-loud mix of satire, songs, and stupendous physical comedy as Francis finds himself with two new jobs and two new bosses, who (against all odds) he must continue to please through mistaken identities, outrageous farce, love triangles, and inspired lunacy.

Next is the ever-popular Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, The Pirates of Penzance, which plays from June 26 to September 5. Spotlighting a ship full of zany pirates, a bevy of giggling maidens, and a band of bumbling policemen, the show is one of the most charmingly silly love stories ever to grace the stage. Alack! Alack! Will our hero, Frederic, ever be reunited with his love, Mabel?

The final show in the Randall Theatre will be Into the Breeches!, a hilarious and heartwarming look at the WWII home front and a group of women who band together to keep their favorite theatre going while the men are off to war—by mounting an all-female production of Henry V. This modern comedy is like a theatre version of A League of Their Own and plays from July 28 to October 10.

Tickets for the 2020 shows are $20 to $82 and are now on sale: visit the Festival website at bard.org, call 800-PLAYTIX, or visit the Ticket Office at the Beverley Center for the Arts.

Witches in Utah

1989

1996

2004

2010

2019

By Kathryn Neves

“Double, double toil and trouble; fire burn and cauldron bubble. . . . By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.” These are the words that ominously echo whenever we think of witches. I mean, it’s even in Harry Potter. Definitely, Shakespeare’s witches are among literature’s scariest, and most fascinating, characters.

Macbeth has been produced at the Utah Shakespeare Festival seven times, the 2019 production being the eighth; with all that, there have been some pretty interesting witches on our stages. Take a look at a few of the ways that Macbeth’s demons have been portrayed throughout the years:

In 1989, the witches were so ominous that even pictures are frightening. Look at the beard there; clearly, the designer wanted to be as close as possible to Shakespeare’s words. “You should be women, and yet your beards forbid me to interpret that you are so” (1.3.47-49). Portraying the witches here are Laurie Birmingham, Amy Thone, and Doug Zschiegner.

Up next, in 1996, we have a trio of witches that have clearly embraced every aspect of their dark side. Their ragged costumes and hair and the sinister props, not to mention the deep red lighting and the terrifying facial expression, all point to witches operating on a plane far more terrifying than our own. Actors here are Erin Annarella, Manon Halliburton, and Kari Hayter.

The witches of the 2004 production of Macbeth are dark, sinister, and gruesome. Their makeup makes them look deathly, as though they’ve come back from the grave to torment Macbeth. The use of blood and frightening symbols made these witches’ performance absolutely unforgettable. Witches were portrayed by Misty Cotton, Pat Sibley, and Afton Quast (with Henry Woronicz as Macbeth).

And lastly, in our most recent 2010 production, these witches look wild. They look as though they live in the wilderness, waiting to prey upon susceptible people like Macbeth. Their tangled hair and matted clothing all point to their roles as creatures of another world. Their frightening demeanor and poses are threatening, even in picture form. These witches are portrayed by Chelsea Steverson, Lillian Castillo, and Monica Lopez.

 The witches in 2019 are portrayed by Emma Geer, Sarah Hollis, and Betsy Mugavero. They are supernatural and chilling, mysterious and otherworldly. They are gritty and dark and . . . well, you need to come and see for yourself.

King James I and Macbeth

By Kathryn Neves

It’s commonly held that Shakespeare wrote his plays for the monarchs of England. There are many stories, mostly apocryphal, that connect this play to that monarch; for example, one popular story says that Queen Elizabeth, upon learning that John Falstaff dies in Henry V, demanded that Shakespeare write a new play for Falstaff, one in which he falls in love— resulting in The Merry Wives of Windsor (whether or not this is a true story, it’s definitely entertaining). But there’s one play that was clearly written with a monarch in mind. Shakespeare’s Macbeth was pretty obviously a nod (and not a subtle one) to King James I.

There are a lot of reasons to say this. For one thing, the play is entirely set in Scotland, based on Scottish history and legend, and populated with Scotsmen. James I of England was actually from Scotland as well; he ruled over both England and his own home country, where he was called James VI. Though there are other Scottish characters in Shakespearean plays, there are none with so many as in Macbeth.          

Then there’s all the supernatural elements. James I was an avid scholar of all things strange, weird, and superstitious. In 1597, the king published a book called Daemonologie; it was a study of witchcraft, necromancy, demons, werewolves, vampires, and all sorts of other spooky things. In fact, much of the witchcraft in Macbeth was actually taken directly from Daemonologie, probably as a form of flattery to the king himself. It goes further than that, though. Witchcraft seems to have been a real obsession of James, as he was heavily involved in a series of witch trials in 1590. Supposedly, a coven of witches were trying to personally attack him, which was high treason, so James had them tracked down, forced them to confess to witchcraft, tortured them, and had them burned at the stake. So it’s no wonder that the witches in Macbeth are so demented and evil! Shakespeare wanted to make it clear that he was on the king’s side in the whole witch debacle.         

King James was widely considered paranoid (can you tell from the witch thing?). Throughout his whole reign, he was terrified that he would be assassinated. He was very harsh with treasonous criminals and he constantly seemed to fear usurpation. And to be fair, he had some real reasons to be afraid of all of that. When Queen Elizabeth I died, she left no children behind, which meant England fell into a crisis. The English throne only came to James because he was technically the closest relative. Even so, Elizabeth never formally acknowledged him as her heir, so he never felt fully secure on the throne. Not only that, but Elizabeth had executed his mother years before, so he had more reason to fear the English. In 1605, James uncovered an assassination attempt against him: the Gunpowder Plot. The plan was for a group of dissatisfied Jesuits to blow up the House of Lords when James was there. After discovering the plot, James arrested and executed the conspirators. The whole incident only served to feed the fire of his paranoia.          

Because of the Gunpowder Plot, most scholars today date Macbeth to 1606, just after the plot. There seem to be a few references to it in the play: for instance, the porter at Macbeth’s castle, in a little joke to himself, says “Knock, knock! Who’s there, in th’ other devil’s name? Faith, here’s an equivocator, that could swear in both the scales against either scale, who committed treason enough for God’s sake yet could not equivocate to heaven. O, come in, equivocator” (2.3.7-12). Equivocation, which is both lying and telling the truth at the same time, was used as a defense by one of the conspirators at the Gunpowder Plot trial, so Shakespeare could easily be alluding to that in order to get further into the king’s good graces (Globe Research Team, “The Gunpowder Plot and Shakespeare’s Macbeth,” Shakespeare’s Globe Blog, November 5, 2014).        

Besides that, Macbeth is full of other references to James’ fears. King Duncan, a beloved, good king, is assassinated by one of his noblemen— something that seems to have been a great fear for James. Not only that, but the nobleman was consorting with witches and demons— another fear. So Shakespeare punishes Macbeth for his treason and evil behavior in the play; Macbeth himself becomes increasingly paranoid, he gets haunted by the ghosts of those he’s wronged, and he ends up beheaded and hated by all of Scotland. Shakespeare wanted Macbeth to get his just desserts so that James would be appeased.

Scottish history and legend contain a real life King Duncan, who was really murdered by Macbeth (the real Macbeth apparently was a decent king— that wouldn’t have really worked for Shakespeare’s play though). Banquo, too, was apparently a real figure. King James claimed descendance through him, so in Macbeth, when the Weird Sisters tell Banquo that “thou shalt get [beget] kings, though thou be none,” Shakespeare was really trying to help legitimize James’s place on the Scottish throne— he was saying that Banquo’s descendants deserve to be king, therefore James has a rightful claim to the throne.

Even though Macbeth was written for King James I, it’s really for all of us. The themes of triumph over evil, of greed and ambition, and of tyranny are all very important— they were relevant in Shakespeare’s day, and they’re relevant now. The reasons it was written aren’t nearly as important as the words themselves. So don’t miss your chance to see Macbeth this summer at the Festival. It’s bound to be an amazing experience.