“In Fair Verona”

Media, Spectacle, and Performance in William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet
  • Peter S. Donaldson


Shakespeare’s plays are endlessly metatheatrical, commenting on the theater and its practices often and in many different ways. There are plays within plays, explicit comparisons of life to the stage, scenes in which playhouse audience and players onstage seem to merge, and perhaps thousands of more fleeting moments that refer directly or through metaphor or double meaning to stagecraft or performance. But if, as Michael Goldman once wrote, there is always a play within a play in Shakespeare (Goldman 1972), it is nonetheless true that some plays reflect on their medium in such a sustained way that they can be read as allegories of theater, exploring the paradoxes of performance and representation as in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, calling attention to historical change in theater practices (as Hamlet does when he laments the success of the new all-boys companies), and even, as in The Tempest, imagining the end of all theater, when something called “the … globe,” at once playhouse and cosmos, will dissolve without a trace.


False Consciousness Sacred Heart Death Scene Distant Sight Final Scene 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Works Cited

  1. Anon. 1997. “Interview with Baz Luhrmann.” Mogul [on-line magazine, http://mogulco.nz/stories/romeo/romeo/html], consulted May 26, 1997.
  2. Baudrillard, Jean. [1981]1983. Simulations. Trans, by Paul Foss, Paul Patton, and Philip Beitchman. New York: Semiotext[e].Google Scholar
  3. —. 1993. “Hyperreal America.” Trans, by David Macey Economy and Society. (May) 22(2):243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benjamin, Walter. [1936] 1969. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” In Illuminations. Ed. by Hanna Arendt. Trans, by Harry Zohn. New York: Schocken, 217–52.Google Scholar
  5. Brook, Peter, Sir Peter Hall, Richard Loncraine, et al. 1998. “Shakespeare in the Cinema: A Film Directors’ Symposium.” Cineaste. 24 (1), 48–55.Google Scholar
  6. Bziorak, Andy. 1995. Priscilla and the Pink Dollar. Australian Professional Marketing. February.Google Scholar
  7. Crary, Jonathan. 1989. “Spectacle, Attention, Counter-Memory” October. 50, 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Da Porto, Luigi. [1530] 1831. Giuletta e Romeo [Istoria dei due nobilissimi amanti]. Pisa: Fratelli.Google Scholar
  9. Debord, Guy. [1967] 1994. The Society of the Spectacle. Trans, by Donald Nicholson-Smith. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  10. Debord, Guy and Asger Jorn. 1959. Mémoires. Paris, Internationnale situationniste.Google Scholar
  11. Donaldson, Peter S. 1997. “Shakespeare in the Age of Post-Mechanical Reproduction: Sexual and Electronic Magic in Prosperou’s Books. ” In Shakespeare, the Movie: Popularizing the Plays on Film, T. V, and Video. Ed. by Lynda Boose and Richard Burt. London, Routledge, 169–185.Google Scholar
  12. —. 1998. “Digital Archives and Sibylline Sentences: The Tempest and the ‘End of Books.’” Postmodern Culture 8.2 [on-line journal at http://muse.jhu.edu/jour-nals/postmodern_culture/].
  13. —. 1999. “‘All which it inherit’: Shakespeare, Globes, and Global Media.” Shakespeare Survey 52: 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hebdige, Dick 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London, Methuen.Google Scholar
  15. Hodgdon, Barbara. 1999. “Wiliam Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet: Everything’s Nice in America?” Shakespeare Survey 52: 88–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Holding, Peter. 1992. Romeo and Juliet: Text and Performance. London: McMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hull, Geoffrey. 1995. Building the Kingdom: Mary McKillop and Social Justice. North Blackburn, Australia: Dove/Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  18. Internationanal situationniste. 1963. Internationale Situationniste 8. Paris, Internationale situationniste.Google Scholar
  19. Jones, Glynis, Judith O’Callaghan, and Robert Sweica. 1997. Absolutely Mardi Gras: Costume and Design of the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras. Haymarket, Australia: Powerhouse Publishing.Google Scholar
  20. Marcus, Greil. 1989. Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  21. Modenessi, Alfredo Michel. 1998. “(Un)-Doing the Book ‘by the book’: Notes From the Receiving End of Baz Luhrmann’s William Shakespeares Romeo + Juliet.” Poligrafia: Revista de Literatura Comparada 2 (Mexico, D.E), 191–227.Google Scholar
  22. Mullaney, Steven. 1988. The Place of the Stage: License, Play and Power in Renaissance England. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Murray, Timothy. 1997. Drama Trauma: Specters of Race and Sexuality in Performance, Video and Art. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Perry, Nick. 1998. Hyperreality and Global Culture. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quinn, Karl. 1994. “Drag, Drags, and the Suburban Surreal.” Metro. [Melbourne], Summer.Google Scholar
  26. Sadler, Simon. 1998. The Situationist City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Searle, Samantha. 1997. “Queering the Screen: Sexuality and Australian Film and Television”. Australian Teachers of Media [ATOM], St. Kilda, Australia. Published as No. 5 of The Moving Image series.Google Scholar
  28. Shakespeare, William. 1597. Romeo and Juliet [First Quarto]. London.Google Scholar
  29. Shakespeare, William. 1599. Romeo and Juliet [Second Quarto]. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shakespeare, William. 1623. Comedies, Histories, Tragedies [First Folio]. London: Jaggard.Google Scholar
  31. Thorpe, Osmunde. 1994. Mary McKillop. 3d ed. North Sydney, Australia, Sisters of Saint Joseph of the Sacred Heart.Google Scholar
  32. Wells, Stanley. 1996. “The Challenges of Romeo and Juliet.” Shakespeare Survey 49: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Worthen, W B. 1998. “Drama, Performativity and Performance.” PMLA 113: 1093–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Films Cited

  1. Almereyda, Michael, dir. 1999. Hamlet. Miramax. Sound, col. 113 mins.Google Scholar
  2. Elliot. Stephan, dir. 1994. The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. United States/Australia. MGM. Sound, col., 104 mins.Google Scholar
  3. Godard, Jean-Luc, dir. 1987. King Lear. USA. Cannon. Sound, col., 104 mins.Google Scholar
  4. Greenaway, Peter, dir. 1994. Prosperou’s Books. Twentieth Century Fox. Netherlands/France/Italy. Sound, col. 126 mins.Google Scholar
  5. Loncraine, Richard, dir. 1996. Richard III. USA. MGM/UA. Sound, col. 104 mins.Google Scholar
  6. Luhrmann, Baz, dir. 1996. William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet. Bazmark Productions. USA. Twentieth Century Fox. Sound, col., 120 mins. Video laserdisc.Google Scholar
  7. Olivier, Laurence, dir. 1944. Henry V. U.K. Sound, col., 134 mins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Richard Burt 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter S. Donaldson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations