IBJOpinion

LOU'S VIEWS: No great Shakes

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
Lou Harry

It shouldn’t come as much of a surprise that, with limited resources, IUPUI’s Hoosier Bard Productions doesn’t make a masterpiece out of the most obscure of Shakespeare’s plays—one that may not even be Shakespeare’s play at all.

To be sure, “The History of Cardenio” is an oddity. And its disputed history is certainly fascinating (Records show that a play by unnamed writers was staged by Shakespeare’s company based on a section of “Don Quixote.” Other records, half a century later, show a play credited to Shakespeare and John Fletcher. Still other references…ah, why don’t you just Google it?)
 

ae-cardenio9318-15col.jpg It’s academic. Scholars are still pondering how much Shakespeare there is in “The History of Cardenio.” (Photo/ Eric Burrous: IUPUI)

For this production, “The History of Cardenio” has been credited as a play “by William Shakespeare and John Fletcher, re-created and reimagined by Gary Taylor.” Would I have enjoyed it more if the program had featured question marks after each of the supposed contributors’ authorship credit? That might have felt more intellectually honest but, ultimately, its history and its sourcing isn’t what was put on IUPUI’s new stage. The play—well, a play—was.

As offered here, “Cardenio” has betrayal, forgiveness, cross-dressing, insanity, a prominent coffin, and parent-approved and parent-disapproved pairings—all the stuff that has been used by Shakespeare in other works. It’s got a cast ranging from stiltedly amateur to full-out ham with occasional moments of truth and beauty. And it’s got a title hero upstaged by the more familiar characters Don Quixote (played with appropriate bombast by Jonah D. Winston) and his sidekick Sancho (a still-in-high-school standout Brandon Merriweather). Not to praise too faintly, but the overall quality of Hoosier Bard’s “Cardenio” is significantly higher than


ae-cardenio9343-15col.jpg Don Bernard (Michael Hosp), far right, interrupts a romantic encounter between his daughter, Lucinda (Maria Souza-Eglen), and the idealistic student, Cardenio (Thomas Cardwell) in IUPUI’s “The History of Cardenio.” (Photo/ Eric Burrous: IUPUI)

it was in the company’s freshman effort, the excruciating 2011 “Young Hamlet.”

As directed by Terri Bourus, “Cardenio” eschews sets, letting costumes and an onstage musical combo do the atmospheric heavy lifting. That, combined with the high-school-auditorium-like design of the new IUPUI Campus Center Theater, accents the overall amateurism of the exercise, although the sizable cast—without doubling of parts—certainly helps keep things understandable.

But should a production by Shakespeare or anyone else be applauded for being reasonably coherent? For getting some laughs (albeit primarily with sex jokes)? Or for existing in the first place?

Ah, there’s the rub.

Lesser-known shows not only offer greater acting and directing challenges, they also are likely to cause nervous breakdowns in the marketing department. On top of that, there’s also a greater risk of artistic failure.

Of course, while I’d gladly give up another “Romeo and Juliet” or “Midsummer Night’s Dream” for a chance to see a solid “Measure for Measure” or “Love’s Labours Lost” on area stages, I understand the conservative thinking of theater producers. Pulling off—and finding audiences for—a competent “As You Like It” is a lot easier than bringing “Troilus and Cressida” to life.

Or “The History of Cardenio.” Whether a guy named Shakespeare wrote any of it or not.•

__________

This column appears weekly. Send information on upcoming arts and entertainment events to lharry@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT