Sen - Final Thesis _Dec 2009

300 Pages·2009·1.65 MB·English

THE AFTERLIFE OF SHAKESPEARE’S PLAYS: A
STUDY OF CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATIONS INTO
OPERA AND FILM
by
Suddhaseel Sen
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Graduate Department of English and the Collaborative Program in South Asian
Studies
University of Toronto
© Copyright by Suddhaseel Sen (2010)
THE AFTERLIFE OF SHAKESPEARE’S PLAYS: A STUDY OF CROSS-
CULTURAL ADAPTATIONS INTO OPERA AND FILM

Suddhaseel Sen
Doctor of Philosophy
Graduate Department of English and the Collaborative Program in South Asian
Studies
University of Toronto
2010

ABSTRACT
This study considers the ways in which Shakespeare’s plays have been adapted in cross-
cultural contexts from the nineteenth century to the present, specifically in Europe and India,
through the media of opera and film. I bring into dialogue reception theory, adaptation
studies, Shakespeare scholarship, musicology, film studies, and postcolonial theory in order
to examine the mechanisms of Shakespeare’s reception in these two culturally diverse
regions of the globe, and argue that there are significant parallels between European and
Indian adaptations of Shakespeare. Despite the different cultural and political histories of the
two regions, Shakespeare’s plays reached out to local audiences only when they were
modified in order to make them relevant to the cultural and ideological concerns of the new
audiences that were far removed from Shakespeare’s own. Moving away from understanding
Shakespeare’s reception either in terms of the dramatist’s “universal appeal” or in terms of
colonial instrumentality, as has usually been the case, I argue that such predetermined critical
paradigms take away from what in Shakespeare various cultures have found truly valuable,
truly affective. Moreover, I argue that the degree of transculturation, both with European and
Indian adaptations, is greater when Shakespeare is adapted in media that involves
performance, than when he is adapted in a purely verbal medium, such as translations. This
process of indigenization through performance, one that I have termed “performative
ii
transculturation,” has opened up fresh avenues of cross-cultural exchange over the ages. The
works I examine in detail are Ambroise Thomas’ opera Hamlet, Giuseppe Verdi’s opera
Otello, Ishwarchandra Vidyasagar’s Bhrantibilash, a prose adaptation of The Comedy of
Errors, and Vishal Bhardwaj’s films Maqbool and Omkara, based on Macbeth and Othello
respectively.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It was possible to work on my thesis because of a number of fellowships, awards, and travel
grants – the Paul Foundation Award (India) for doctoral studies abroad, the University of
Toronto Fellowship and Teaching Assistantship, Massey College Junior Fellowship, Sir Val
Duncan Award (awarded by the Munk Center for International Studies at the University of
Toronto), George C. Metcalf Research Grant (Victoria College of the University of Toronto),
School of Graduate Studies (SGS) Travel Grant, University of Toronto Department of
English Travel Grant, and the Massey College Travel Grant. I am deeply thankful to all these
funding bodies, whose timely financial support made my research possible. I am also very
grateful to the staff of the Toronto Public Library and libraries at the University of Toronto
where I did most of my research work: Robarts (in particular, their interlibrary and audio-
visual sections), St. Michael’s College, the Faculty of Music and, especially, Victoria
College, where much of my thesis was written over succeeding summers.
I cannot express in words how supportive my supervisory committee has been over
the entire duration of my doctoral work. No sooner did I arrive in Toronto than I heard
unanimous praise from all about the legendary scholarship, generosity, promptness, and
support provided by Linda Hutcheon to all her students. As my dissertation supervisor, she
was exemplary in her intellectual engagement and the personal encouragement she provided
without fail all throughout these years. She is the kind of supervisor “as dreams are made
on,” and it has been my privilege to learn from her what a difference it can make if one’s
supervisor is intellectually stimulating, professionally supportive, and unfailingly kind. I am
also immensely thankful to Jill Levenson, whose critical acuity and constant encouragement
made it a pleasure for me to learn from her and benefit from her advice. Equally, Caryl Clark
iv
brought her vast musicological scholarship to guide my research, and my dissertation has
been enriched in countless ways because of her feedback. They have also helped me,
especially during my applications for travel and research grants, with a readiness and a sense
of responsibility that taught me the myriad ways in which mentors can make a difference in
the lives of their students. I am also very grateful to Lynne Magnusson, Deidre Lynch, and
especially Daniel Fischlin, my external examiner, for their detailed feedback, and for
questions and suggestions that have helped me conceive of new projects evolving from my
dissertation.
I have benefited immensely from the inputs of some other leading academicians and
scholars during the course of my work on this dissertation: Sukanta Chaudhuri, Poonam
Trivedi, and Kathryn Hansen for my work on Shakespeare in India; Roger Parker for my
chapter on Verdi; and Jean Chothia for the introductory chapter. Many thanks are also due to
Michael Hutcheon, Donna Orwin, Chelva Kanaganayakam, Neil ten Kortenaar, John D.
Baird, and Mark Crimmins from the University of Toronto; Amlan Das Gupta, Supriya
Chaudhuri, Malabika Sarkar, Indrani Halder, Swapan Chakravorty, Nilanjana Deb, and
Abhijit Gupta from Jadavpur University; Sudeshna Chakraborty, who taught me and my
fellow classmates how to read and love Shakespeare in school; Abraham Mazumder and
Anita Hazra, whose wonderful teaching gifts made me fall in love with Western music;
Gaurab Gupta for helping me in countless ways during my application process for doctoral
studies abroad; Kishore Chatterjee, Aveek Sen, Indranil Poddar, and Satyabrata Datta for
providing me much-needed recordings, librettos, and critical material when I was in India
preparing my dissertation proposal; and Kajari Biswas for introducing me to the Shakespeare
adaptations of Vishal Bhardwaj. Kathleen and Joseph O’Connell were instrumental in
v
bringing out my first peer-reviewed journal article in North America, and Mary McGeer
brought to fruition a series of concerts related to my article: their collective support helped
me to find a much-desired creative outlet for my academic work. My friends in Toronto, both
within and outside the department, provided a solid bedrock of support: Pooja and Tarun,
Rajit and Anjali, Sangram and Mahuya, Subrata and Jayashree, Jayita and Abhijit, Monali
and Debesh, Srabani and Subho, Prasad and Shiela, Anindo, and Ghalib, I am truly thankful
to all of you! A very special note of thanks to Alexander Rapoport, who not only let me audit
his highly engaging classes at the Faculty of Music, but also became a much-loved mentor:
he opened up several opportunities for creative work as a musician, and I shall always
remember with special pleasure our discussions on life, music, and literature.
I am also immensely indebted to two people who, alas, are no more with us. Douglas
Brooks, who accepted an abridged version of my chapter on Ambroise Thomas’s Hamlet for
publication in the Shakespeare Yearbook, shared my love for music, Shakespeare, and
languages, and has been, so far, the only Shakespeare scholar with whom I could discuss
Renaissance polyphony as well as aspects of editing Shakespeare in Hindi. Jiří Smrz, a dear
friend whose knowledge of nineteenth-century opera and vocal music was second to none,
made his rare collection of recordings freely available to me, including several that are not to
be found in any university library in North America. A number of projects, such as studies of
Shakespeare operas by Hermann Goetz and Zdeněk Fibich, which we planned to collaborate
on, had to be abandoned due to his death, which was as sudden and untimely as Douglas’s,
and I deeply miss them in this moment of happiness.
A special thank-you goes to my family. My aunt and her family in Seattle have
constantly stayed in touch and provided emotional support. With her vast intellectual breadth
vi
and, even more, warm personal encouragement, my wife, Anupama Mohan, has completely
transformed my academic and personal life since our first meeting six years ago. Her parents,
too, have been wonderfully supportive, and I have been delighted by their good cheer,
kindness and concern for both of us. My most abiding thanks go to Ma and Baba, who passed
on their deep love for cinema, literature and, above all, music, to me. Unlike many other
middle-class Indian parents, they encouraged me to pursue my interests, even if that involved
taking risks, and have unfailingly supported me all through, whether it is with books and
recordings, lessons in music and languages, or tickets to concerts and film screenings. Like
Anu, they have enthusiastically read my entire dissertation, and have successfully tracked
and sent me research material from India when I had given up all hope. It is, therefore, with
great pleasure that I dedicate this work to my wife and to my parents, without whom this
dissertation would not have been possible.

vii
Table of Contents

ABSTRACT ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

INTRODUCTION: Theorizing Cross-Cultural Adaptations of Shakespeare 1

Defining “Anglophone,” “Cross-cultural” and “Intercultural” 7
Shakespeare, “Englishness” and Cultural Difference 12
Defining Adaptations and Appropriations 24
Adaptation and Reception Theories 34
Overview of this Study 47

CHAPTER 1: Shakespeare’s Reception in France: The Case of Ambroise Thomas’s
Hamlet 55

Shakespeare’s Hamlet: A Brief Performance History 60
Hamlet in France 63
Hamlet by Thomas, Barbier and Carré 76
The Music for Thomas’s Hamlet 82
The Operatic Ophélie 101
The Afterlife of Thomas’s Hamlet 110

CHAPTER 2: Tradition, National Culture and Aesthetic Self-Fashioning: Verdi
and Boito’s Post-Risorgimento Otello 114

“Otherness” in Shakespeare’s Othello 120
Interrelations between Theatre and Opera in Nineteenth-Century Italy 129
Shakespeare’s Reception in Italy 134
Nineteenth-Century Italian Interpretations of Othello 140
Shakespeare’s Othello and Verdi’s Otello Compared 146
Otello and Sacred Revivalism in Post-Unification Italy 155
Musical “Otherness” in Verdi’s Otello 171
Conclusion 176

CHAPTER 3: Shakespeare’s Reception and Adaptation in India: From the
Nineteenth Century to the Present 181

English Education and Shakespeare in Nineteenth-Century Bengal 193
Vidyasagar’s Bhrantibilash and its Adaptation into Film 201
Shakespeare in Calcutta Theatres 207
Indigenizing Shakespeare in India: Shared Adaptation and Translation 210
Strategies
Shakespeare in Bombay: The Parsi Theatre and the Early Hindi Film 214
Contextualizing Bollywood 224
Maqbool and Omkara by Vishal Bhardwaj 226
Conclusion 243

CONCLUSION 247

WORKS CONSULTED 258

viii
Introduction: Theorizing Cross-Cultural Adaptations of Shakespeare

Sweet Swan of Avon, what a sight it were
To see thee in our waters yet appear . . .
- Ben Jonson1

The reason why classic plays should have survived is that people have been exploiting
them or even abusing them. . . . [T]he exploitation of it has secured classic drama a
foothold, as only what stimulates people may endure.
- Bertolt Brecht2

Shakespeare, the quintessential English poet and dramatist, has been read, acted,
translated, adapted, and alluded to so often, and in so many different cultures, that his
global reach is now generally assumed to be greater than that of any other author.3 Ben
Jonson seems to have anticipated the dual nature of the posthumous reputation of his
famous fellow dramatist in his poem, “To the Memory of My Beloved, the Author, Mr.
William Shakespeare” which appeared in the First Folio of Shakespeare’s works:
Shakespeare is both England’s most celebrated poet (as the quotation above implies) and,
as the same poem states, “he was not of an age, but for all time” (l.43). Jonson’s words
have been taken to imply Shakespeare’s transcendence in both historical and cultural
terms: indeed, these latter words seem true to the point of being a cliché in the present
day. As Gary Taylor has observed, “Shakespeare provides the best specimen in English,

1 “To the Memory of My Beloved, the Author, Mr. William Shakespeare: And What He
Hath Left Us” (1623), l. 71-2.

2 “Was die klassischen Stücke am Leben erhält, ist der Gebrauch, der von ihnen gemacht
wird, selbst wenn es Miβbrauch ist. . . . Kurz, das Verkommen bekommt den klassischen
Stücken, da nur lebt, was belebt” (Brecht 335-36; trans. and qtd. in Lin 18).

3 For a succinct overview of the many assumptions and misconceptions regarding
Shakespeare’s global reputation, see Hawkes, “Shakespeare’s Afterlife” 571-81.
1
2
one of the best specimens in any language, for investigating the mechanisms of cultural
renown” (5).
A closer reading of Jonson’s line, however, suggests that several assumptions are
being tacitly made here. Jonson clearly saw Shakespeare as a dramatist of timeless
significance, but in an age when England was just beginning its colonial exploits, could
Jonson have also thought of Shakespeare’s work as something that could also transcend
cultural differences? Could Jonson have also anticipated the rapid change in theatrical
practices or changes of literary fashion, and its implications for Shakespeare’s
posthumous reputation? If he did, would he have still regarded Shakespeare as the most
universal among dramatists? Moreover, if Shakespeare’s plays are the classics among
classics, do they, by the same token, get subjected to the “exploitation” or “abuse” that,
according to Brecht, ensures the survival of classic plays? Is it Shakespeare’s work that
people across the world get to know, or rather his name and aura? If Shakespeare’s plays
have found worldwide audiences purely on their own merit, what is it about them that
stimulates people all over the world? Is it their beauty of language, their plots, their
themes, their stageworthiness, their adaptability, their cultural capital, or any combination
of these factors that ensures their survival? Or are Shakespeare’s posthumous relevance
and reputation inextricably tied to British imperialism, the emergence of English as the
global lingua franca, and Shakespeare’s pre-eminence within the English literary canon?
If we assume that all these factors have their roles to play in ensuring
Shakespeare’s posthumous reputation, then any study of Shakespeare’s reception across
cultures should focus on, first, the ways in which Shakespeare’s reception has spread and
second, on the outcomes of his reception in any given culture – in short, on the processes