What Bloody Man Is That by Simon Brett Read Free Book Online

excitement.
    â€˜Now, as I see it,
Macbeth
is the tragedy of a man without imagination, whose life is suddenly shaken to the core by the introduction of an imaginative dimension.’
    â€˜Ah,’ said George Birkitt blankly. ‘That sounds very interesting.’
    Encouraged, Gavin went on, ‘Lady Macbeth, of course, from the start, has had this imaginative dimension. She is the more intuitive of the pair. She reacts instinctively, whereas Macbeth’s reactions are more intellectual . . .’
    â€˜But surely,’ objected the deeply vibrant voice of Felicia Chatterton, ‘hers is the intellectual approach. I mean, she has the detachment, the cold-bloodedness if you like, to take an overall view, while Macbeth only responds minute by minute.’
    â€˜Erm . . .’ said the director.
    â€˜I mean, the first time we see Lady Macbeth, when she’s reading the letter, she refers back to conversations about Macbeth’s chances of becoming King . . .’
    â€˜Yes, yes . . . but –’
    â€˜So she is the one who’s doing the long-term planning. She is the one who thinks things out intellectually. It’s only when Macbeth becomes King that he starts doing things off his own bat.’
    â€˜Erm . . .’
    â€˜You know, the murder of Banquo, the massacre of the Macduff family . . .’
    â€˜Yah . . . but –’
    â€˜But he’s still only reacting minute by minute. Like an animal, covering his tracks. He doesn’t think the murder through. Each crime is just a cover-up for the previous one. I think there are very valid parallels with Watergate, you know.’
    â€˜Yes, yes, I’m sure. But if you could just let me spell out in a bit more detail the way I see the play . . .’
    â€˜But I do think it’s important that we all see the play the same way. I mean, we really should find its intellectual pivot before we get into rehearsals.’
    â€˜Oh, I do agree, Felicia. I do agree. But I think what we’ve got to –’
    â€˜Oh, for Christ’s sake,’ boomed Warnock Belvedere. ‘Let’s just bloody get on with it. Acting’s nothing to do with bloody talking about the words, it’s just standing still, being audible and not bumping into the furniture.’
    This paraphrase of another of the late Sir Ralph Richardson’s dicta was greeted by relieved laughter, and Gavin Scholes took the opportunity to redirect the conversation. ‘Look, actually, Felicia, I think you’ve raised some very valid points there, which we certainly must discuss . . . if we have time. But I think if I could start by giving you all my views on the play, and, you know, if you could hear me out, then we could make the discussion more general once I’ve finished. How do you feel about that?’
    â€˜Absolutely fine,’ Felicia Chatterton agreed very reasonably. ‘I hope you don’t mind if I take notes . . .?’
    â€˜Erm, no, no.’ Gavin cleared his throat. ‘Well, er . . . Macbeth, as I say, is a play about imagination – or rather, perhaps I should say, it’s a play about lack of imagination. Or perhaps both imagination and the lack of it . . .’
    Mentally, Charles switched off again. In his experience, directors’ theories of plays soon got abandoned in the face of the purely logistical problems of rehearsal. Getting the cast on and off stage quickly took priority over the overall concept of the piece.
    He’d only been in one production in his life where a director had followed a single interpretation through from first read-through to first night, and that had been a disaster.
    The director in question had seen
The Tempest
as a fantasy taking place inside Prospero’s mind. There was nothing wrong with the idea itself; indeed many directors have moved towards that kind of interpretation. Nor was there anything inherently wrong with having a set in the shape of a