Dressing Shakespeare in Drag



“To drag or not to drag?” This fall, the Hyperion Shakespeare Company answered that long-provoking question affirmatively. The theatrical student ...



“To drag or not to drag?” This fall, the Hyperion Shakespeare Company answered that long-provoking question affirmatively. The theatrical student group will run a student-directed, all-female version of “Richard II” from October 21 to 24 in the Agassiz Theatre.

Historically, Shakespearean plays have only included male cast members, so HSC is truly breaking with tradition by giving “drag” a new meaning.

The lack of female roles in Shakespearean plays inspired Meryl H. Federman ’11, president of the HSC and the director of “Richard II”, to propose an all-female cast. “Richard II is very poetic,” says Federman. “The language is soaring and beautiful and...it fits with an all-female voice.”

But though the play lends itself to an all-female voice, cast member Emily B. Hecht ’11 says she underwent what she describes as “manliness training” before becoming one of the guys. Hecht, who plays Henry Bolingbroke, laughs while describing her preparation. “Every so often I’ll just glance and try to copy the stance of a man I see on the street,” she says, “without creeping them out.”

Clifford N. Murray ’10, president of the Hasty Pudding Theatricals, famous for their annual all-male show, cautions the women that performing across genders intensifies the acting experience. “You’re playing something totally different than what you’re used to,” says Murray.

Federman hesitates to overemphasize the sexual homogeneity of the play, “It’s not about gender,” she explains. “It’s not about the politics of gender, but the gender of politics.” While Federman denies that Richard II’s femininity lost him the crown, she likens him to Nixon and Blagojevich, attributing his fall to their misled self-righteousness.

HSC’s approach to the play is equally unique. Says Hecht, “[Our production] keeps a reverence for the material but also explodes it. And tears it open to look at with these new eyes.” We could be wrong, but isn’t that what (s)he said?