ChatterBank2 mins ago
Alan Bennett 'S Talking Heads
41 Answers
There are going to be 12 of these monologues on BBC1 - 10 old ones rewritten for new actors and 2 new ones. I'm really looking forward to them- I thought the originals were superb.
There are 2 this coming week - Tuesday and Thursday.
There are 2 this coming week - Tuesday and Thursday.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Rosie29. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think that these pieces were written at a time when they were very convincing and moving. I worry that a modern take on them would be less persuasive. Referring to AH's first post, "his ear for dialogue, the rhythms and nuances of his speeches" - possibly less convincing nowadays; language has moved on. Maybe old codgers like me would still appreciate the emotion, but they might sound a bit old-fashioned to younger viewers. I'll be interested to watch them.
Atheist - // Referring to AH's first post, "his ear for dialogue, the rhythms and nuances of his speeches" - possibly less convincing nowadays; language has moved on. //
Indeed it has, but not as much as it has moved on from the late sixteenth century - its evolution has done no harm to the genius of, and appreciation for, William Shakespeare!
Indeed it has, but not as much as it has moved on from the late sixteenth century - its evolution has done no harm to the genius of, and appreciation for, William Shakespeare!
I more or less agree, AH (although I'm not sure that WS is as much appreciated by modern generations, apart from the intelligensia). I suppose I'm a bit reluctant to change my allegiance from Thora et al. Talking heads isn't just about language, but also the actors - it wasn't a literary piece, it was a televisual production - faces and words.....
Atheist - // I more or less agree, AH (although I'm not sure that WS is as much appreciated by modern generations, apart from the intelligensia). //
Have you actually how many of Shakespeare's works are performed to sell-out audiences around the world? To assume that his work now only appeals to 'the intelligentsia' is to do the vast number of theatre goers who enjoy his work for exactly the same reasons as his original audiences did, a severe disservice.
// I suppose I'm a bit reluctant to change my allegiance from Thora et al. Talking heads isn't just about language, but also the actors - it wasn't a literary piece, it was a televisual production - faces and words..... //
I never suggested that Talking Heads was only about the language, but the best actor in the world cannot produce a peerless performance of memorable dialogue if the memorable dialogue is not there in the first place.
An average actor can make brilliant dialogue sound brilliant, but a brilliant actor can only ever make average dialogue sound average.
Have you actually how many of Shakespeare's works are performed to sell-out audiences around the world? To assume that his work now only appeals to 'the intelligentsia' is to do the vast number of theatre goers who enjoy his work for exactly the same reasons as his original audiences did, a severe disservice.
// I suppose I'm a bit reluctant to change my allegiance from Thora et al. Talking heads isn't just about language, but also the actors - it wasn't a literary piece, it was a televisual production - faces and words..... //
I never suggested that Talking Heads was only about the language, but the best actor in the world cannot produce a peerless performance of memorable dialogue if the memorable dialogue is not there in the first place.
An average actor can make brilliant dialogue sound brilliant, but a brilliant actor can only ever make average dialogue sound average.
My comparison between Mr Bennett and Mr Shakespeare is based on the major feature they both have in common - their words are written to be listened to as they are delivered.
Far too many school children are delayed in their appreciation of Shakespeare by being made to read it from a book in a classroom, when the only real place ever to appreciate it, is to see and hear it performed on stage, the only medium it was ever designed for.
Far too many school children are delayed in their appreciation of Shakespeare by being made to read it from a book in a classroom, when the only real place ever to appreciate it, is to see and hear it performed on stage, the only medium it was ever designed for.
jno - // I think Shakespeare is slipping away; his language - 400 years old - is becoming more difficult to follow as time moves on, increasingly it takes very good actors to make it comprehensible when played live. //
I cannot agree.
The idioms and phraseology employed by Shakespeare were obsolete within a hundred years of their writing. The reason why his impact remains is because people take the time to decipher the language in order to hear the resonances and themes he employed, which remain timeless.
It has been understood since the seventeenth century and up to today, that in order to understand and appreciate what makes Shakespeare so wonderful is going to take a little effort on behalf of the audience member.
Shakespeare is never going to be delivered to a modern audience in the same way as an episode of EastEnders, and that additional effort to understand is what makes the reward that much greater.
Without that effort, Shakespeare's Elizabethan English has remained as incomprehensible as it has always been since it ceased to be the speech patterns of the time.
The skill of the actors is not the thrust of its successful delivery to an audience. As I pointed out, but it bears repeating - an average actor can make brilliant dialogue sound brilliant, but a brilliant actor can only ever make average dialogue sound average.
I cannot agree.
The idioms and phraseology employed by Shakespeare were obsolete within a hundred years of their writing. The reason why his impact remains is because people take the time to decipher the language in order to hear the resonances and themes he employed, which remain timeless.
It has been understood since the seventeenth century and up to today, that in order to understand and appreciate what makes Shakespeare so wonderful is going to take a little effort on behalf of the audience member.
Shakespeare is never going to be delivered to a modern audience in the same way as an episode of EastEnders, and that additional effort to understand is what makes the reward that much greater.
Without that effort, Shakespeare's Elizabethan English has remained as incomprehensible as it has always been since it ceased to be the speech patterns of the time.
The skill of the actors is not the thrust of its successful delivery to an audience. As I pointed out, but it bears repeating - an average actor can make brilliant dialogue sound brilliant, but a brilliant actor can only ever make average dialogue sound average.
jno - // here's what Chaucer, a few centuries earlier, sounds like - pretty much as comprehensible as Klingon. Shakespeare will be going the same way //
I think that's not a valid comparison.
Chaucer's language has always been subject to study as much for its own sake as for the literature he wrote.
Shakespeare's appeal lies in his dramas - as I pointed out, the quickest way to put someone off Shakespeare's is the read them from a book in a classroom. Shakespeare's plays only come to life and make sense when the are acted out before an audience, because that is what they were conceived and written for.
The impact and appeal of those plays remains today because their themes are timeless, and therefore, as I said, taking a little time to get into the speech patterns, is richly rewarded, and that is why his work has endured, and will continue to do so.
I think that's not a valid comparison.
Chaucer's language has always been subject to study as much for its own sake as for the literature he wrote.
Shakespeare's appeal lies in his dramas - as I pointed out, the quickest way to put someone off Shakespeare's is the read them from a book in a classroom. Shakespeare's plays only come to life and make sense when the are acted out before an audience, because that is what they were conceived and written for.
The impact and appeal of those plays remains today because their themes are timeless, and therefore, as I said, taking a little time to get into the speech patterns, is richly rewarded, and that is why his work has endured, and will continue to do so.
you're asking people to take time to understand a dying language, andy. Some will (especially if teachers are poking them with sharp sticks); but most will sit through 10 minutes of Timon of Athens and switch off.
Midsummer Night's Dream and Romeo and Juliet, the most popular, will last longer than the rest, but if you want to perform Cymbeline, best do it to a captive audience in prison.
Midsummer Night's Dream and Romeo and Juliet, the most popular, will last longer than the rest, but if you want to perform Cymbeline, best do it to a captive audience in prison.
its sad but I agree Jno...even today people think Juliet is asking where Romeo is and not why he is called Romeo. the stories may last (Sharks are cool and the Jets are hot) but the language will vanish. its the same with a lot of literature...Pride and Prejudice survives because of TV adaptation but who reads Fanny Burney? and who understands the amount of social commentary and subversive political comment there was in Jane Austen's writing?
I admire Alan Bennett's writing but don't watch or read much by him. Its much too sad.
I admire Alan Bennett's writing but don't watch or read much by him. Its much too sad.
jno - // You're asking people to take time to understand a dying language, andy. //
Dying??? Hardly!!
https:/
Language doesn't die, it evolves and changes, it always has and it always will, and as I pointed out, millions of people around the world consider the effort of understanding Shakespeare worth it to see his plays performed.
// Midsummer Night's Dream and Romeo and Juliet, the most popular, will last longer than the rest, but if you want to perform Cymbeline, best do it to a captive audience in prison. //
No artist of genius has works that are universally applauded at the same level, that is not how art works. Any great artist has works that endure and are popular, and works that are less popular, and even works that simply fade away from the audience consciousness due to lack of interest, so that's not really an argument to say that Shakespeare is no longer valid or popular because his less popular works have not stood the test of time.
Steve Harley's 'Make Me Smile' is the most played song on Radio Two, but the fact that I can't same a single track off any of his albums from album three onwards doesn't indicate that he is slipping into obscurity!
Dying??? Hardly!!
https:/
Language doesn't die, it evolves and changes, it always has and it always will, and as I pointed out, millions of people around the world consider the effort of understanding Shakespeare worth it to see his plays performed.
// Midsummer Night's Dream and Romeo and Juliet, the most popular, will last longer than the rest, but if you want to perform Cymbeline, best do it to a captive audience in prison. //
No artist of genius has works that are universally applauded at the same level, that is not how art works. Any great artist has works that endure and are popular, and works that are less popular, and even works that simply fade away from the audience consciousness due to lack of interest, so that's not really an argument to say that Shakespeare is no longer valid or popular because his less popular works have not stood the test of time.
Steve Harley's 'Make Me Smile' is the most played song on Radio Two, but the fact that I can't same a single track off any of his albums from album three onwards doesn't indicate that he is slipping into obscurity!
Latest Posts
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Crosswords10 mins ago
Crosswords11 mins ago
