The biggest news in the recent announcement of the Royal Shakespeare Company’s upcoming season at Stratford-upon-Avon is the casting of the Australian actress Elizabeth Debicki in the title role of Richard II. The Telegraph headlined that she was “set to be the first woman to play” the role for the RSC, although it has been cast with an actress before, most notably Fiona Shaw at the National Theatre in 1995. The question raised by Debicki’s casting is not necessarily one of genderbending. It is one of Shakespearean experience.
Debicki is best known for playing Diana in the last two seasons of The Crown. Her career has predominantly been on screen, and whilst she does have some experience on stage, this was in modern rather than classical dramas. Have previous roles, or her drama degree at the Victorian College of the Arts, adequately prepared her for Stratford?
Richard II is one of Shakespeare’s most challenging and lyrical parts. It was a signature role of John Gielgud, whose mellifluous tones enthralled audiences with the famous speeches. The job demands lyricism, rhetoric, ceremonial control, emotional volatility and the ability to sustain thought through verse, especially where the syntax becomes thorny.
Join Britain’s most civilised publication.
Challenge the consensus. Access rigorous analysis.
Those old school performers came to the role with substantial classical experience, after a long apprenticeship in Shakespeare
A roll call of the actors who have played the part at Stratford illustrates the standard to which audiences have been accustomed: David Warner, Jeremy Irons, and David Tennant are among them. In John Barton’s famous 1973 production, audiences could see Ian Richardson and Richard Pasco showing off by alternating the title role and his nemesis, Bolingbroke. It is hard to see Debicki managing such a feat. Those old school performers came to the role with substantial classical experience, after a long apprenticeship in Shakespeare and other demanding classical stage work.
The Royal Shakespeare Company was founded under Peter Hall in 1960 around a very different idea from the preceding, star-led Stratford festival. Hall wanted a permanent company in which actors, directors and designers could develop a shared approach to Shakespeare over time. At its centre was the belief that great classical acting could be cultivated through sustained work in an ensemble. Within a few years, the success of the company’s history cycle The Wars of the Roses displayed the wisdom of Hall’s vision.
One of the strengths of the ensemble model was that actors could join the company playing small roles, become familiar with its techniques, become popular with the regular audience, and work their way to the major parts. Some became household names, Patrick Stewart being a good example. Actors could become stars almost entirely through classical theatre. Alan Howard was a draw because he had played Shakespeare’s kings from Richard II through Richard III, with various Henries betwixt them. His screen appearances were relatively few, yet audiences booked specifically to see his next Shakespearean venture.
This creation of stars from within the company stood in stark contrast to the old annual Shakespeare festival at what was then the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre. Producers would tempt international stars to Warwickshire for the summer. The results could be spectacular. Laurence Olivier and Vivien Leigh enjoyed a triumphant season in 1955 with Macbeth, Titus Andronicus and Twelfth Night. Yet the quality was uneven: Paul Robeson was past his sell-by date as Othello in 1959, while Charles Laughton’s Lear in the same year was lambasted. Hall’s aim was to replace this inconsistency with a company whose standards could be developed and sustained from within.
The company still has the development of talent as one of the main aims on its website, presenting itself as “a model for nurturing skills and talent locally and regionally.” Yet pulling in well-known international names from commercial theatre, film and TV is becoming common. Outlander star Sam Heughan was brought in to play Macbeth. Hollywood names Bill Pullman and Helen Hunt co-starred with Kenneth Branagh in The Cherry Orchard. The company currently has an all-male As You Like It, with the Broadway musical star Jonathan Groff as Rosalind.
Heughan was well received in a production that attracted rather mixed reviews overall. Hunt, though, was dismissed as “stilted” and “bland” in the Chekhov. Groff has been generally welcomed in a well-reviewed production. The really intriguing thing about Groff, however, is the investment the RSC has made in its imported star.
Groff has never played Shakespeare before and has been frank about the work he has needed to do to bring himself up to scratch. In an interview with The Stage, he describes six months of weekly one-to-one Shakespeare language sessions via video before rehearsals began. Co-Artistic Director Daniel Evans was involved in the sessions, often accompanied by the company’s emeritus voice guru, Patsy Rodenburg. This represents quite an investment on the company’s part. Evans carved the weekly meetings out of his presumably costly time, while one suspects Rodenburg’s freelance involvement does not come cheap; she also worked on the Heughan Macbeth. Given the demands of Richard II, it would be surprising if Debicki were not to receive similarly intensive preparation.
The RSC receives more than £15 million a year in direct Arts Council funding. What bang are the company and the taxpayer getting for their buck by investing so heavily in developing a star’s Shakespearean skills? After a couple of decades investing in Patrick Stewart, audiences got dozens of memorable performances, and the taxman eventually received a lucrative return on that investment — although the US Treasury doubtless got the better deal. The RSC will be lucky to get more than a single Shakespearean performance from its investment in Groff, Heughan or Debicki.
The company will, of course, get the extra publicity that comes with a star. Debicki’s casting was a big news story. But Stratford Shakespeare productions habitually sell out, so any additional commercial value from a star’s presence is more likely to come from transfers, disc and television sales, and streaming rights. This sits rather awkwardly with recent comments from RSC executive Jacqui O’Hanlon, who stated that “if your starting point is: ‘How do you make something that will be commercially successful or will transfer somewhere?’, it will be a disaster.”
The RSC’s current approach to casting is hard to reconcile with this. Is it in the business of producing star-led productions? Is it becoming a taxpayer-funded training ground for international stars who want classical theatre as another string to their bow? It is difficult to say with any certainty that it is continuing Hall’s vision of an ensemble, with the consistency and long-term development that model once supplied. We need a Royal Shakespeare Company with clarity of vision, even if that vision is different from Hall’s. Otherwise, we are back to the 1950s.