JMBarrie
JMBarrie => Peter Pan => Topic started by: smarcus88 on September 24, 2009, 06:18:30 PM
-
Hi Everyone,
I'm a senior at the University of Pennsylvania writing a senior honors thesis for the English department on cross-dressing in Peter Pan. I'm focusing on the root of this choice, how it was grounded in theatrical traditions of the time (like pantomime), how it relates to Barrie's life, and how it effects the gender relations in the text of the play itself. I'm using the original play and the Mary Martin musical as my main sources.
I've been doing a lot of research and was especially curious about our moderator's opinion the topic due to his relationship with the Mia Farrow movie and the Royal Shakespeare production in 1982. Could you tell us a little bit about the decision to have a male Peter and if/how that changed the show or the character? I can send more specific questions if you like, but specifically I'm interested in possibly using this production as a kind of counter-example.
Thank you so much for any help you can give me!!!
-
The idea of having an adult male play Peter in the RSC production was Trevor Nunn's, not mine! In fact I put up quite an argument in favour of casting a boy - an idea that Trevor liked, but in the end it was thrown out for logistical reasons. If Peter was played boy (say 12), then John, Michael, Wendy and all the lost boys would also have to be played by children. But the RSC like to draw from their own pool of stock actors, so what would have become of them? In the event, all the children were played by the resident RSC company.
An additonal problem would have been the flying, which is physically very demanding (ask anyone who has ever played Peter on stage!) and beyond the capability of most children, especially with frequent matinees. It is really for this latter reason that Peter has rarely if ever been played by a real boy on the English stage.
As for the dreadful Mia Farrow/Danny Kaye musical, the costumes were - to the best of my recollection - fairly traditional. Speaking as an Englishman who only ever got to see the Mary Martin TV late in life, I found it even more toe-curlingly execrable. Talk about butch!
-
I'd love to see an older boy play peter pan but someone who hasn't really become...manly yet if you get my meaning..perhaps someone 15-20 years of age could pull it off nicely?
-
I'd love to see an older boy play peter pan but someone who hasn't really become...manly yet if you get my meaning..perhaps someone 15-20 years of age could pull it off nicely?
Didn't a mature male play Peter Pan in the Kensington Gardens production?
-
I'd love to see an older boy play peter pan but someone who hasn't really become...manly yet if you get my meaning..perhaps someone 15-20 years of age could pull it off nicely?
Didn't a mature male play Peter Pan in the Kensington Gardens production?
Apparently but I saw clips of this and something about a Peter with a hairy chest disturbs me...had it been a traditional costume it wouldn't have mattered..however it wasn't lol Kinda why I think someone who is an older teen may be able to do it because the hair may still be pretty thin by comparison.
-
Apparently but I saw clips of this and something about a Peter with a hairy chest disturbs me...had it been a traditional costume it wouldn't have mattered..however it wasn't lol Kinda why I think someone who is an older teen may be able to do it because the hair may still be pretty thin by comparison.
I guess it went with the spirit of the thing. Tiger Lily was even more *cough* mature...
Never thought anyone would be slutting it up in a "for all ages" Peter Pan performance.
-
Apparently but I saw clips of this and something about a Peter with a hairy chest disturbs me...had it been a traditional costume it wouldn't have mattered..however it wasn't lol Kinda why I think someone who is an older teen may be able to do it because the hair may still be pretty thin by comparison.
I guess it went with the spirit of the thing. Tiger Lily was even more *cough* mature...
Never thought anyone would be slutting it up in a "for all ages" Peter Pan performance.
Well i still give them kudos for the cool flying sequence thingly.... but certain things, as you know, made me go "whhaaaaa????" lol
-
Ciaran Kellgren, the actor playing Peter Pan, is 24 - hardly what I would call mature - he does look younger but I admit he is at least 10 years older than what one would expect Peter to be! Wendy - you'll be relieved to hear he (apparently) shaved his chest for the part ;D... but I'm not sure what is meant by 'traditional costume'. For the show in KG, it was made out of 'leaves', closer to what Barrie visualised than Disney's Robin Hood-like costume with its jaunty little feathered hat! Having said that, Ciaran was actually quite good and you could believe he was the boy who would not grow up.
I totally agree that Tiger Lily's scene in this production was somewhat inappropriate and made my toes curl....
-
Ciaran Kellgren, the actor playing Peter Pan, is 24 - hardly what I would call mature - he does look younger but I admit he is at least 10 years older than what one would expect Peter to be! Wendy - you'll be relieved to hear he (apparently) shaved his chest for the part ;D... but I'm not sure what is meant by 'traditional costume'. For the show in KG, it was made out of 'leaves', closer to what Barrie visualised than Disney's Robin Hood-like costume with its jaunty little feathered hat! Having said that, Ciaran was actually quite good and you could believe he was the boy who would not grow up.
I totally agree that Tiger Lily's scene in this production was somewhat inappropriate and made my toes curl....
Oh I prefer the leaves thing to the traditional one any day..I was thinking more along the lines of what i've seen in earlier pictures of the original play. Either way I always preferred the leafy look...kinda like Jeremy Sumpter's in the 2003 movie....but I'm glad to hear the current guy shaved his chest haha I dream of playing Wendy and i'm 26...people say I'm much younger looking though so I dunno (example: me and 'Peter Pan' with Stitch in Disneyworld http://i614.photobucket.com/albums/tt221/pans_wendybird/mechrisstitchpolynesian.jpg I dunno if it's true but that's what people tell me lol ). I guess it all depends on if you can pull it off..which is why i felt someone in their late teens or early twenties with the right build might be able to do it. I'd really like to see some talented young men pull off playing a boy instead of only girls. It would be interesting and quite and acting challenge!
-
The problem with any "normal" teenager/man playing Peter is that he has his voice broken, testicles dangling and testosterone firing on all cylinders, in other words the very antethesis of a "the boy who would not grow up" in any physical sense. Of course a truly brilliant actor might bewitch us into thinking he's still a boy, but thus far I've never seen one.
I thought a golden opportunity was missed with the 2003 movie. The fact that J S spoke with a Texan accent couldn't have mattered less in my view, but what did matter was that his voice had broken and was so clearly an adolescent. I guess the makers were trying to catch a teenage audience.... and falling between two stools in the process.
The boy in ET would have been the right age (but too soft to play PP), ditto the boy in "Where the Wild Things Are" - the only film I'm really, really dying to see! (Sendak asked me to write it for Disney back in 1983 - I turned it down as I was sure Disney would f**k it up.... So glad he waited for Spike J!)
-
The problem with any "normal" teenager/man playing Peter is that he has his voice broken, testicles dangling and testosterone firing on all cylinders, in other words the very antethesis of a "the boy who would not grow up" in any physical sense. Of course a truly brilliant actor might bewitch us into thinking he's still a boy, but thus far I've never seen one.
I thought a golden opportunity was missed with the 2003 movie. The fact that J S spoke with a Texan accent couldn't have mattered less in my view, but what did matter was that his voice had broken and was so clearly an adolescent. I guess the makers were trying to catch a teenage audience.... and falling between two stools in the process.
The boy in ET would have been the right age (but too soft to play PP), ditto the boy in "Where the Wild Things Are" - the only film I'm really, really dying to see! (Sendak asked me to write it for Disney back in 1983 - I turned it down as I was sure Disney would f**k it up.... So glad he waited for Spike J!)
You make very valid points especially on the voice...thats why if they do it i'd want to see the right person...i've witnessed alot of adults with very child like voices.
EDIT: Just looked up "Where the Wild Things Are"..I have to agree I can totally see that kid as Peter.
-
Yes, but male adults with child-like/high-pitched voices tend to be rather creepy!
-
Yes, you are right about the voice - Ciaran Kellgren sounded like a teenager, not a child. Unfortunately, it seems the 2003 movie has set the tone for putting more emphasis on first love/sexual tension between Peter and Wendy in any interpretation. Peter is hardly ever now portrayed as a naughty, selfish, impetuous - but brave - boy, but more like a cocky adolescent.
Going back to Peter's costume, I was intrigued to find that it's quite possible he was dressed in red (complete with red tights) in the early productions, rather than green. Of course, you can't see it from the b&w photographs, but the first picture books published in colour always showed him in red: the 1914 edition illustrated by Alice Woodward, Flora White's ABC in 1914. There's also a beautiful wax figurine of Jean Forbes-Robertson as PP from the 1920s in a red costume. Mabel Lucie Attwell seems to be the first one to illustrate him in green in a book, followed by Gwynedd Hudson's glorious illustrations of the 30s. Does anyone have any information on this? Are there any contemporaneous reviews that mention colour?
-
Nina Boucicault's original PP costume is (or was) on display in Barrie's Birthplace cottage in Kirriemuir. I bought Zena Dare's 1905 costume from Jack's widow Gerrie - gave it away to GOSH who sold it to God knows who so I can't check, but from memory the boots were faded green leather, the blouse (with hole in the back for the wire) was burgundy red, the tights were sepia/green, and the shorts/pants were also greenish. There's a colour photo of it in the Sotheby's sale catalogue but I'm in France so can't check that either.... I'm sure whoever runs the birthplace (for the National Trust of Scotland) could enlighten you as to Nina's costume, albeit faded.
-
Yes, you are right about the voice - Ciaran Kellgren sounded like a teenager, not a child. Unfortunately, it seems the 2003 movie has set the tone for putting more emphasis on first love/sexual tension between Peter and Wendy in any interpretation. Peter is hardly ever now portrayed as a naughty, selfish, impetuous - but brave - boy, but more like a cocky adolescent.
Going back to Peter's costume, I was intrigued to find that it's quite possible he was dressed in red (complete with red tights) in the early productions, rather than green. Of course, you can't see it from the b&w photographs, but the first picture books published in colour always showed him in red: the 1914 edition illustrated by Alice Woodward, Flora White's ABC in 1914. There's also a beautiful wax figurine of Jean Forbes-Robertson as PP from the 1920s in a red costume. Mabel Lucie Attwell seems to be the first one to illustrate him in green in a book, followed by Gwynedd Hudson's glorious illustrations of the 30s. Does anyone have any information on this? Are there any contemporaneous reviews that mention colour?
Hmm... well this perhaps might be more suited for a separate thread, but this is something me and my g/f have been mulling over for a couple months... the ignored -- until recently -- romantic aspect of the Peter Pan story. Barrie really didn't focus on it at all, but there are subtle hints of it throughout. To ignore it in storytelling seems like a missed opportunity to me. The voice is one thing, but to say that "tension" between Peter and Wendy means that Peter is being portrayed as a teenager is just plain nearsightedness. It's obviously not common, but it is completely possible for children to fall in love with one another, even before puberty. I think this is a reality that many people can't accept though, because it messes with a lot of preconceptions about children.
If Peter was really more often depicted in red, that just makes this dilemma chuckle-worthy, because... unless the meanings were different in the previous century, the color red symbolizes passion.
-
Yes, you are right about the voice - Ciaran Kellgren sounded like a teenager, not a child. Unfortunately, it seems the 2003 movie has set the tone for putting more emphasis on first love/sexual tension between Peter and Wendy in any interpretation. Peter is hardly ever now portrayed as a naughty, selfish, impetuous - but brave - boy, but more like a cocky adolescent.
Going back to Peter's costume, I was intrigued to find that it's quite possible he was dressed in red (complete with red tights) in the early productions, rather than green. Of course, you can't see it from the b&w photographs, but the first picture books published in colour always showed him in red: the 1914 edition illustrated by Alice Woodward, Flora White's ABC in 1914. There's also a beautiful wax figurine of Jean Forbes-Robertson as PP from the 1920s in a red costume. Mabel Lucie Attwell seems to be the first one to illustrate him in green in a book, followed by Gwynedd Hudson's glorious illustrations of the 30s. Does anyone have any information on this? Are there any contemporaneous reviews that mention colour?
Hmm... well this perhaps might be more suited for a separate thread, but this is something me and my g/f have been mulling over for a couple months... the ignored -- until recently -- romantic aspect of the Peter Pan story. Barrie really didn't focus on it at all, but there are subtle hints of it throughout. To ignore it in storytelling seems like a missed opportunity to me. The voice is one thing, but to say that "tension" between Peter and Wendy means that Peter is being portrayed as a teenager is just plain nearsightedness. It's obviously not common, but it is completely possible for children to fall in love with one another, even before puberty. I think this is a reality that many people can't accept though, because it messes with a lot of preconceptions about children.
If Peter was really more often depicted in red, that just makes this dilemma chuckle-worthy, because... unless the meanings were different in the previous century, the color red symbolizes passion.
What about Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens? There, a week-old BABY asks a four-year-old girl to MARRY him and she's inclined to accept at first. I'll grant you that children that young are scarcely likely to understand the full implications of marriage, but imagine how that sounds to modern (adult) ears....
I don't know anything about the color, but I remember that in Finding Neverland the costume was NOT green. Anyway, Hook's costume IS traditionally red, is it not?
-
Yes, you are right about the voice - Ciaran Kellgren sounded like a teenager, not a child. Unfortunately, it seems the 2003 movie has set the tone for putting more emphasis on first love/sexual tension between Peter and Wendy in any interpretation. Peter is hardly ever now portrayed as a naughty, selfish, impetuous - but brave - boy, but more like a cocky adolescent.
Going back to Peter's costume, I was intrigued to find that it's quite possible he was dressed in red (complete with red tights) in the early productions, rather than green. Of course, you can't see it from the b&w photographs, but the first picture books published in colour always showed him in red: the 1914 edition illustrated by Alice Woodward, Flora White's ABC in 1914. There's also a beautiful wax figurine of Jean Forbes-Robertson as PP from the 1920s in a red costume. Mabel Lucie Attwell seems to be the first one to illustrate him in green in a book, followed by Gwynedd Hudson's glorious illustrations of the 30s. Does anyone have any information on this? Are there any contemporaneous reviews that mention colour?
Hmm... well this perhaps might be more suited for a separate thread, but this is something me and my g/f have been mulling over for a couple months... the ignored -- until recently -- romantic aspect of the Peter Pan story. Barrie really didn't focus on it at all, but there are subtle hints of it throughout. To ignore it in storytelling seems like a missed opportunity to me. The voice is one thing, but to say that "tension" between Peter and Wendy means that Peter is being portrayed as a teenager is just plain nearsightedness. It's obviously not common, but it is completely possible for children to fall in love with one another, even before puberty. I think this is a reality that many people can't accept though, because it messes with a lot of preconceptions about children.
If Peter was really more often depicted in red, that just makes this dilemma chuckle-worthy, because... unless the meanings were different in the previous century, the color red symbolizes passion.
What about Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens? There, a week-old BABY asks a four-year-old girl to MARRY him and she's inclined to accept at first. I'll grant you that children that young are scarcely likely to understand the full implications of marriage, but imagine how that sounds to modern (adult) ears....
I don't know anything about the color, but I remember that in Finding Neverland the costume was NOT green. Anyway, Hook's costume IS traditionally red, is it not?
I just love that scene between Peter and Maimie in Little White Bird/Peter Pan in Kensington gardens...it's sooooo adorable! And she was the forerunner to who Wendy was..so it makes perfect sense. I'd love to see this explored in a version of Peter Pan..i think the 2003 movie showed it well with that Fairy Dance for sure ..I don't care what any of you say that scene is pure gold...I just think it was adorable even if you are a complete purist there's nothing wrong with it for sure. So so so cute!
Anyhow the 2003 movie had something kinda like that (like the Little White Bird) but a bit more erm....as was said..sexual tension stuff. Then again I dunno if you have to be a teen even for sexual tension. We're born sexual creatures so...all those impish grins Jeremy Sumpter gave Rachel Hurd Wood..even if they had been younger...prably wouldn't shock me. Had they acted on it sexually I might have wondered what the directors real intentions were lol I will say one thing I wished Jeremy Sumpter had done is to learn to speak like a brit. I absolutely love the accent and want to hear a Peter that talks that way.
I've heard that PJ Hogan and his wife worked on that movie together and that they were kind of the resident real life "peter & wendy"...and I can't remember i think it might have been Lynn Redgrave who said this..I can't remember who was being interviewed but someone said something about it being their love you see up there on screen between peter & wendy..i absolutely love it that they explored that way HOWEVER wish there had been more mother issue type of stuff in it as well. I wanted to see Wendy comforting Peter with his nightmares etc
-
In the PETER PAN that I am currently co-directing Peter is played by a boy in 5th grade, so he is about ten years old. I have not told the Flying by Foy people that yet so I hope they can still fly him. And it is only for one week. Then again, look at the stamina of those BILLY ELLIOT boys! They do their own flying, though they don't do 8 shows a week. Perhaps the only way to do a boy as Peter on stage for a long run is to go the BILLY ELLIOT route and cast 3 or 4 boys to alternate.
-
In the PETER PAN that I am currently co-directing Peter is played by a boy in 5th grade, so he is about ten years old. I have not told the Flying by Foy people that yet so I hope they can still fly him. And it is only for one week. Then again, look at the stamina of those BILLY ELLIOT boys! They do their own flying, though they don't do 8 shows a week. Perhaps the only way to do a boy as Peter on stage for a long run is to go the BILLY ELLIOT route and cast 3 or 4 boys to alternate.
Good idea! I think that works!
-
Thank you all so much for your thoughts and commentary. I may post more questions to gather more insight as I continue my research and writing!!