It has been more than a year now that I have lived and worked with the knowledge that I was to direct Chamber Macbeth, which is not, by the way, the title character’s first name (I’ll return to the Chamber concept at the end of this “note”). For now, permit me to dwell on the circumstances of the play – the stuff that happens before the lights come up. The Bard is said to have based the plot on Raphael Holinshed’s Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, first published in 1577. Of course, no one really knows if this was the case, having not lurked around Bill’s Stratford cottage during his reading hours. The problem with Holinshed is that he archives King Macbeth from the English perspective. A very different historical portrait emerges from Scottish chronicles predating Holinshed.

 

To wit – Lady Macbeth, “Gruoch” prior to her marriage, was the princess of the Picti tribe, the dominant power in northern Britain for more than 500 years and the presumed builders of Stonehenge. The Pictis were so named because of the intricate tattooing of their bodies, performed with needles and the sap of indigenous plants. According to tradition, Gruoch was to marry the son of the King of the rival Scoti tribe (Duncan), and her father was to provide her and her betrothed a large dowry of land, servants, livestock and other possessions, thereby preserving peace between the tribes. Unfortunately, Gruoch’s mother died young, and her father, now remarried, reneges on this longstanding arrangement.

 

Gruoch subsequently marries another fellow and bears a son by him – an event Holinshed, by the way, also chronicles. Duncan retaliates against this royal slight, killing Gruoch’s father, husband and son. She flees to the safety of her late husband’s cousin Macbeth, whom she eventually marries. The play begins seven years later.

 

Thus, in the Scottish version of things, Lady Macbeth has ample reason to desire the throne and avenge her losses.

 

For this production, the design team, dramaturg and I studied ancient (and not so ancient) shamanistic rituals in many countries, including Scotland, Spain, India, Romania, and Central America. We were fascinated by the similarities of these rituals and drew extensively from them, especially pre-Colombian forms, in creating and integrating the design elements. We also were struck by the frequent mention of birds in the play – more than 20 references in all – and the importance birds were given in the rituals we examined.

 

This production is the company’s third Chamber version of a Shakespeare play. I had the privilege to collaborate with Artistic Director Stephanie Shine in defining the Chamber concept for Othello two seasons past. We sought to adapt the plays to make them more intimate, urgent and available to contemporary audiences attuned to the quicker plotting of modern film and theatre. In the case of Macbeth, scholars already believe that parts of the play, such as the witches’ incantations and the brief introduction of the goddess Hecate, were written by others, hence their significant paring in this production.

 

Deconstructing Macbeth further freed us to set it in no particular place or time, believing the work timeless in its treatment of the human condition. Finally, the Chamber format challenges the actors, who are tasked to play a variety of characters (please note that in this version, two characters, Rosse and Seyton the Porter, are a pastiche of several supporting roles). As with chamber music, our overall objective is to distill Shakespeare’s plays without diminishing their emotional or intellectual resonance, and, perhaps, enlarging their impact.

 

So for the Shakespearean scholars in attendance – a hearty mea culpa. Perhaps, someday I’ll direct what the First Folio intended – Hecate and all.

 

Russ Banham
Director