Synopsis Canterbury Tales is a bawdy classic written 700 years ago, it centres on a group of pilgrims who entertain one another with stories as they ride to Canterbury Cathedral. But despite the apparently holy purpose of their journey these travellers reveal themselves as sinners rather than saints. The pilgrims contrasting and colourful backgrounds offer many different stories, from the serious and moral to the farcical and bawdy, proving that like Shakespeare after him, Chaucer was ‘not for an age but for all time . Part I consists of The Knight, The Miller and Other Tales. The pilgrims' journey begins with the pageantry and spectacle of The Knight's Tale as chivalrous rivals compete for their love's affections. Later love is of a different vein in the shap of the bawdy Miller's Tale, before the farmyard chaos of the Nun's Priest's Tale as the vain cockerel Chaunticleer is abducted by the wily col-fox.
Mike Poulton’s two-part Royal Shakespeare Company adaptation of Geoffrey Chaucer’s medieval classic The Canterbury Tales transferred to the West End’s Gielgud Theatre last Thursday (13 July 2006), with Parts I and II playing in repertory (See News, 12 May 2006).
The productions formed part of the RSC’s non-Shakespeare season this past winter (ahead of the recently launched year-long Complete Works festival), running in Stratford-upon-Avon from 1 December 2005 to 4 February 2006 (previews from 16 November) before embarking on a UK tour and transferring to Washington DC’s Kennedy Center. A cast of 20 perform all 23 of Chaucer’s bawdy tales of pilgrims on the road to Canterbury, directed by Gregory Doran, Rebecca Gatward and Jonathan Munby (See News, 26 Apr 2005).
While overnight critics found faults in the epic undertaking, they also saw plenty to be impressed with, and came away with a (perhaps too) thorough knowledge of the bawdy shenanigans of Chaucer’s pilgrims. The two-part, six-hour performance left most wanting to applaud the audience – as well as the cast – for their sheer endurance.
Nicholas de Jongh in the Evening Standard - De Jongh enjoyed the “buoyant, comically propelled distillation” of Chaucer’s classic. “Adrian Lee's lovely score for a three-strong band and songs for many voices abounds with period pastiche. Mike Poulton's adaptation, replacing the dated, rhyming couplets of Nevill Coghill's version, comes with an easy, elegant turn of phrase and almost invariably resists the lure of contemporary, yob-speak. I came away delighted by this brilliant company's exuberant evocation of Chaucer's gleeful depiction of freelance sex without guilt and by the witty, stylised theatricality of the production.… Unfortunately there are glaring faults. All the fun comes in the first part, the second is a long let-down…. A three-hour selection of Canterbury Tales, in all their Chaucerian diversity, would better fit the theatrical bill.”
Paul Taylor in the Independent - “This two-part RSC version - skilfully adapted by Mike Poulton and now brought to London thanks to the good offices of the producers Thelma Holt and Bill Kenwright - certainly revels in the boisterous bawdy…. There's ‘swyving’ and cuckolding and bare butts galore…. But ribaldry is only part of the story, as is richly demonstrated by this show, which is presented in two full-length, largely self-contained sections and directed, with terrific verve and resourcefulness by Greg Doran, Rebecca Gatward, and Jonathan Munby…. A crack ensemble, packed with personality, fall on the material with gusto and finesse, relishing the opportunities provided both within the stories and between them, as the pilgrims on the way to Canterbury bicker and fight and use their self-revealing tales as sharp weapons in their feuds.”
Lyn Gardner in the Guardian - “The RSC's version of Chaucer's 14th-century poem arrives in London looking pretty sprightly, even if after six hours in its company you feel you are clapping your own endurance at having survived all those hairy bottoms, cucumber jokes, farts and couplets ending in ‘plucked’ as much as the cast's undoubted devotion to the task at hand. Mike Poulton's adaptation is good and true, and this is an ensemble piece in every sense with a delightful cast of 20…. I wish the directors had not gone quite so strongly down the heritage-theatre trail with the boisterous Ye Olde Merrie and Lusty Englande look and feel. But the show succeeds in creating a sense of the social diversity of those taking the journey to Canterbury.”
Sam Marlowe in The Times - “The RSC’s exuberant staging of Chaucer’s classic… has transferred to the West End in a riot of ribaldry and colour. Mike Poulton’s superb adaptation is both faithful and accessible, comfortably inhabiting the middle ground between Middle English and the modern vernacular…. The production… is not all buttocks, farts and fornication. There are tales that move, tales of chivalric grace and one that reveals the dark heart of its teller in a manner that, in the midst of so much warm good humour, chills the blood…. The ensemble playing is excellent, with Mark Hadfield’s Chaucer a wry observer and chronicler. There are occasions when the journey crawls rather than canters, and a Chaucerian rap number is toe-curling. Otherwise, this is English history and literature brought with irrepressible brio to rich and rambunctious life.”
Michael Coveney on Whatsonstage.com – “Mike Poulton’s six-hour saga… does not add any real dramatic value to the Chaucerian feast of language, bawdy, song and festival.… Much of the acting is suitably coarse and most of it, quite frankly, shockingly second-rate… The greatest weakness of the triple-credited direction is a failure to strike a contemporary chord of spirituality without resorting to medieval mugging and narrative incoherence.”
Unlike their fictional forebears in Chaucer, the band of pilgrims in the Royal Shakespeare Company’s adaptation of The Canterbury Tales does finally arrive at its destination. Though what happened to the competition to reward the best story remains anyone’s guess.
Mike Poulton’s six-hour saga, performed in two plays and thereby blocking out a summer’s day and night for all resilient epic fanciers, does not add any real dramatic value to the Chaucerian feast of language, bawdy, song and festival.
Once again, London theatregoers can only glean the vaguest idea of what characterises the RSC these days, as the West End presentation by Bill Kenwright and Thelma Holt - clearly does not reflect the sense of inclusive joy and high sprits that tumbled through the Swan (according to the reviews) in Stratford-upon-Avon at the end of last year. After a long tour, the show sits modestly, and not all that compellingly, in the stern proscenium of the Gielgud.
Every now and then the pilgrims jog up and down on their hobby horses. A bare bottom or two is meekly offered in the Miller’s Tale. The farcical bed-hopping climax of the Reeve’s Tale is a charming interlude. And the cockerel Chauntecleer and his paramour Pertelote are surprise refugees from Avenue Q, improvising a duet to the accompaniment of a puppet hen party.
But the most effective passages are the stillest, as in the patient unravelling of the beautiful Knight’s Tale, with a pair of best friends transformed to deadly amorous rivals, or the enchanting fable of the Franklin’s Tale, where a romance suspended over a long passage of time is magically resolved with the mystery of the disappearing rocks and the ardent imprecations of Anna Hewson’s love-starved Dorigen.
And in a gallimaufry of production styles where much of the acting is suitably coarse and most of it, quite frankly, shockingly second-rate, the sustained plea for poverty in love by Paola Dionisotti’s pious Prioress in the Wife of Bath’s tale is a beacon of expressive sincerity and technical execution. The greatest weakness of the triple-credited direction of Gregory Doran, Rebecca Gatward and Jonathan Munby is a failure to strike a contemporary chord of spirituality without resorting to medieval mugging and narrative incoherence.
For most of the show, we merely participate in a lot of rompish gadding about that would have just about passed muster in a provincial repertory company of the distant past, let alone the fitfully enterprising RSC of the muddled present.
- Michael Coveney
NOTE: The following FOUR-STAR review dates from December 2005 and this production's original run at Stratford-upon-Avon.
Mention Chaucer and most people come back with a knowing reference to medieval rudery, especially in the Miller’s Tale. That’s the one in which a young wife cuckolds her husband and then offers her bare bottom out of a window for an unwanted lover to kiss, only for him to wield a red hot poker at her paramour’s posterior. Well, the Miller’s Tale is here alright, treated with no-knickers gusto, and indeed there is swyving (Middle English for rumpypumpy) aplenty in Mike Poulton’s faithful script. But scatological matters are only part of the story.
The Canterbury Tales is a beautifully balanced and subtle work, full of contrasts. Playful, naughty and subversive, it can also be witty, philosophical, morally didactic, noble and inspiring. The Royal Shakespeare Company’s two-play version, directed by Gregory Doran (with Rebecca Gatward and Jonathan Munby) gives full rein to this glorious variety, including at least a mention of every tale and the revealing links between them.
As the pilgrims leave Southwark on their way to the shrine of the murdered Thomas à Becket in Canterbury, the host of the Tabard Inn sets a story-telling competition to while away the time. The travellers are lively characters ready to be given substance by actors and the 20-strong cast grab the opportunities offered both by their main parts and the roles within the tales.
The much-married Wife of Bath (a spendidly flirtatious and authoritative Claire Benedict), the camp Pardoner (Dylan Charles displaying lank blond locks and a lustful leer), the prissy Prioress with her French tags and her spoilt lapdog (Paola Dionisotti revelling in her disapproval), like their companions, tell stories revealing of themselves: respectively about women’s desire for mastery over men, about the inevitability of cheating Death - the Pardoner makes his living by selling pardons to the guilty - and about the murder of an innocent Christian child.
Styles change with content. If the Miller’s and the answering Reeve’s Tale (each about the cuckolding of a member of the other’s profession) are blue-joke farce, the Knight’s Tale is one of courtly love, the Clerk of Oxenford’s Tale (in which patient Grisilde bears unbearable loss and humiliation) is a Christian parable of reward for goodness with something of the medieval mystery play about it. There is sometimes a problem knowing exactly whose story is which, though, as characters tumble out of one tale into road-side rivalry and then into the next; more obvious introductions wouldn’t go amiss.
Chaucer himself is along for the ride (on hobby horses, that is). Mark Hadfield is good at playing the sardonic observer and is sometimes hilarious, but it isn’t easy to believe in him as the brilliant courtier, poet, diplomat and composer of this cornucopia of characters and stories. When he tells his own, the Tale of Sir Thopas, he breaks into a spirited rap which is gleefully taken up by the rest of the company. This is fun, but as everyone is enjoying themselves so much, the irony of Chaucer’s own creations telling him to shut up because his contribution isn’t up to snuff rather goes by the board.
Michael Vale’s design, on a greensward stage, with a single tree and a versatile wooden structure - prison, windmill, cottage - is simple enough for the long tour ahead, while Adrian Lee’s medieval-style music deftly sets the changing moods. The last candle-lit moments are beautifully contemplative as the raggle-taggle company sing a sacred song. Peace at last.
Seeing both three-hour plays in a day may sound like the equivalent of overdosing on wild boar and mead, but the language is easily accessible and pronunciation moves within minutes from medieval to modern. And those rude, hypocritical, greedy, know-it-all, sexy, pious pilgrims would be just as at home on a 21st-century package tour. We know them all.
When it was good it was very ,very good and when it was bad it was still the RSC and better than the average. I saw part one And the funny tales worked better than the more serious ones -since more of the tales were funny this proved to be fortunate. And The staging was clever and fast paced - 207.126.221.65)
27 Sep 06
When my companion declared we were to see the RSC give their rendition of Chaucer's infamous tales, I will admit gentle readers that an inward groan preceded over me. I did not look forward to two hours of classical actors rolling their precious, trained tounges around Chaucerian verse. But as ye olde ancient saying goes, never judge a book by it's cover, and the director's know that the opinion I have just omitted is probably the general consensus for they start their show with an unintelligeble chaucerian prolougue, I could feel the moans from the stalls. However the modern verse kicked in and everything was at ease. What I encountered was a lively, inventive and intelligent take on the tales. However some tales are more succesful than others, I found that the knights tale tended to drag and certain jokes were used over and over again, I think the RSC have managed to find every word that could rhyme with the f word, which I cannot write here for obvious reasons. They used the old joke of nearly saying the rhyme and then being interrupted about 40 times, which was tedious to say the least. These quips aside the production had tonnes of spirit and the audience were held captivated by the energy of this lively production. - 80.225.112.151)
31 Aug 06
Sporadically quite entertaining, but often listless and repetitive. The coarseness and bigotry is certainly true to Chaucer's stories, but the same points could have been made in a lot less time. I saw the first half, and I couldn't imagine sitting through another three hours. - 207.200.116.199)
24 Jul 06
Saw the two parts on the same day - tremendous!!!! Superb ensemble acting and in two brilliant productions. - 81.131.23.178)
24 Jul 06
This is an absolutely amazing theatrical experience, an uplifting evening at the theatre with brilliant visual storytelling. I wonder if Michael Coveney watched the same show as I did. I, my friends, and the audience around us were absolutely entranced by this wonderfully witty adaptation of this literary classic. - 172.189.144.14)
Originally opened 27Dec 1906 as The Hicks Theatre. Formerly The Globe, renamed in 1994 in part in tribute to Sam Wanamaker, so that his dream of a new Shakespeare Globe would be the only Globe in London. 983 seats. Society of London Theatre member. In 1999 Delfont Mackintosh Theatres Limited acquired the freehold of the Queen s and the Gielgud Theatres from Christ s Hospital, Horsham. The lease of the Gielgud Theatre will revert back from Really Useful Theatres to Delfont Mackintosh Theatres in March 2006 after which there are plans to refurbish both venues and to build a 500-seat theatre, The Sondheim, above the Queen s. This will be the first new theatre in Shaftesbury Avenue since 1931.
Whatsonstage.com - Discount London theatre tickets, theatre news and reviews, Theatre videos, Theatre discussion, National Theatre Listings. Covering London's West End, all of Theatreland and all UK theatre. The best
for London Theatre Ticket Discounts.