He did it!!!

He did it. He actually DID IT!!! Even though I kind of expected it I still cannot really believe it …

I MUST have expected it because I came to Stratford to see him rather than wait another six months or so for the DVD. And this is something I haven’t done for any other actor so far. The combination of “Macbeth” and Christopher Eccleston just appeared too good to be true – though he still wouldn’t have been who I had casted, but I know that I am usually wrong about this. Now I think that I didn’t even seriously consider the possibility that he might disappoint me. Nonetheless … (This is the moment where the cork pops …) By the way, seeing him on DVD, I couldn’t have accidentally have bumped into him in the ”Dirty Duck”. Not literally – PITY!!! – because then I would have apologized, and he would have said something, and I would have heard his voice and could have confirmed that it was really him. Now, until the end of my days, I will not know … SHITTT!

No matter, he did it and nailed Macbeth for me, though, quite literally, this isn’t possible: to see (and hear!) the “complete” Macbeth all in one go. I never experienced this as I did last Saturday: how important it is not to expect the WRONG things when I want to enjoy Shakespeare in the theatre. And to expect to see what I THINK the play is about is the worst I can do. What I expect and allow for in the first place is to be seduced and captivated, and if “they” are any good they will find something to seduce me. (The RSC usually does.) But this time I expected something more. I am not sure what it was exactly, but I wanted to be CONVINCED - if not by the RSC then by Christopher Eccleston. And he did it, he convinced me. Better still: I have now a REAL Macbeth to refer to instead of a mere concept. Of course I have added him now - after a long “vetting process” – to the growing list of actors that have unlimited credit with me.

Thinking about why I enjoyed his performance so much, my wonders and my praises grew and grew … and grew - to the point of forgiving him everything, even not knowing his text a few times and being quite arrogant as an actor. (I expressly wrote “as an actor” because I don’t know anything about him as a person. The only time I saw him as a (public) person was an interview about “Doctor Who” where he didn’t strike me as arrogant, and, looking for production photos for my desktop, I just hit on an interview by Gareth McLean from the Guardian (Mar 12, 2018) which is interesting in this respect. He describes Eccleston as “authentic”. Interesting! I mean that he uses THIS category - though he might be wrong because Christopher Eccleston certainly is somebody who can play ANYTHING, including himself … But McLean appears to be quite a good judge of people, and there actually is more about humbleness and arrogance by Christopher Eccleston himself in this interview which, I believe, will become relevant …)

There are three main reasons why this was one of the best performances of a Shakespeare character I have ever seen. The first one is the unique way he dealt with the TEXT, the second his profound relationship with the CHARACTER and, last but not least, that I could actually see some CHANGE in Macbeth – which was very subtle but, as I felt, extremely convincing. Besides he did some great physical stuff which was quite sexy, and, I think, helped him with the confidence and the dynamics. And – YESSS!!! -  he proved me right about the fact that Macbeth doesn’t lose it. SUBTLE works very well, until the end!

About the TEXT – briefly (I think there will be more …): There are many actors who play Shakespeare great but few who have this unique, kind of intimate relationship with the text. I wrote this about Lucian Msamati as Iago whom I expressly remembered kind of “singing” the text, and the joy and physical pleasure I felt in the aftermath … And, recently, there was Martin Hutson as Cassio in “Julius Caesar” (RSC). I will have to get back to him … Christopher Eccleston was even more stunning because his approach was so NATURAL. As if this was just WHAT YOU DO with a text by Shakespeare. I cannot pin it down exactly, of course. Maybe it was just that he got the “beat” and the timing so EXACTLY right. I expressly noticed the great timing a few times, and I still kind of feel the “beat” in a certain part of my body, about two inches beneath my heart ( - my “erogenous zone” for poetic stimulation …??? I should hear his “Revenger’s Tragedy” again, which I have on DVD and where I already felt something like this, to check.) And, at least where I am concerned, there is a seduction in this which probably made me FEEL that Macbeth is great – even though he obviously is NOT!

As to CHARACTER: All I wished to see was a REAL (and contemporary) human being which would convince me that Macbeth was actually THERE. And THIS I already knew would happen when Chris Eccleston would play him. I think he is an actor who couldn’t come on the stage without already BEING Macbeth, and, of course, I was right about this. Maybe this sounds stupid because we usually take it for granted, but it often doesn’t happen for me, and never happened with Macbeth. Now, for the first time, it did! As I wrote: I hadn’t doubted him, the only thing I had feared was that he might not be “loud” and “obvious” enough to get through to the audience, but there really was no need to worry about that! This was a really powerful performance. Of course he might still have been totally wrong about WHO Macbeth is. This danger he avoided by not making him very detailed and special, not giving him any quirks or distinct character traits. This doesn’t sound so good in the first place but it turned out to be a good thing. It isn’t a distinct, “readable” character we need for understanding Macbeth – to fill the blanks in the character, which I had hoped for. Now I understood that this would only distract me from the “core action”. To understand the relationship that Macbeth has with himself is much more important, and this depends on the strength of the relationship the actor strikes with his character which obviously WAS very strong.

In my opinion, the crucial thing about playing Macbeth is that the character has to undergo a number of changes which, I believe, is extremely difficult even to figure out, let alone play!, because there is NO TIME for it. This was another thing I only understood after having seen THIS production where the actors had even less time than usual, or appeared to have, because the clock was ticking … literally. We could SEE that there were only two hours for an action that stretches out over at least a few years. And for the first time I understood how historical time REALLY doesn’t matter, not only because there are just a few hours for all this change on the stage anyway, but because what matters is the INNER time, the way TIME is experienced by us. And this URGENCY – as if EVERYBODY was in a position of pressure where nothing that happens can be random but HAS to happen - made the events FEEL consistent for me for the first time. I kind of knew that, even though, on the surface, “Macbeth” appears so obvious in every respect, it isn’t really BECAUSE I had no questions. Now I had this feeling that loads of questions I couldn’t ask just got answered. Maybe I mostly enjoyed this performance because, for some reason, I enjoy logic and text consistency as part of texts being “poetic” instead of boring - as real life usually is. As some kind of break from the same things happening all over again.

The happiest moment, though, was when I actually FELT THE CHANGE … It was very subtle and “authentic” – a real break from any “antics”, or losing it in spectacular way, or breaking down which, I think, is what Macbeth wants to avoid AT ALL COSTS. What Chris Eccleston did felt very intimate and might have something to do with the issue I had with arrogance. I think it was just that I suddenly KNEW that I didn’t LIKE Macbeth anymore …

So, these were just the initial “wonders and praises”. There will be more about the production and about Macbeth, about what I understood and didn’t understand, what I did and didn’t like, in my next post(s).