Shakespeare and the Stage

The Fairleigh Dickinson University Press Series on Shakespeare and theStage publishes scholarly works on the theatrical dimensions of the plays ofShakespeare and his contemporaries. Both individual studies and collectionsof previously unpublished essays are welcome.

Series Editors: Peter Kanelos (Valparaiso University, peter.kanelos@valpo.edu) and Matthew Kozusko (Ursinus College, mkozusko@ursinus.edu).

Proposals may be directed to the series editors and to Harry Keyishian, Direc.tor of Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, at fdupress@fdu.edu.

Related PublicationsThtmder øt a Playhouse: Essagng Shnkespeare and the Earþ Modern Søge , ed-

ited by Peter Kanelos and Matt Kozusko. Selinsgrove, PA: SusquehannaUniversity Press, 2010.

Inside Shøkespeare: Essays on the Blackfriar's Stage by Paul Menzer. Selins-grove, PA: Susquehanna University Press, 2006.

Shakespeare ExpressedPage, Støge, md Classroom in

Shøkesp ear e and His C ontemþor aries

Edited by Kathryn M. MoncrielKathryn R. McPherson, Sarah Enloe

@@@

FI\IRIEIGH DICKINSON UNIVERSITY PRE SSMadison ¡ Teaneck

Published by Fairleigh Dickinson Universiry PressCo-published with The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.

lti Hi:j:ulward, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706

10 Thornbury Road, Plymouth PL6 iPP, United Kingdom

Copyright O 2013 by Rowman &- Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

All righes resero,ted. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by anyelectronic or mechanical means, including information storage and ¡etrieval systems,without written permission from the publisher, excepr by a reviewer who may quotepassages in a ¡eview.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available

Library of Congress Cataloging-in.Publication Data

Shakespeare expressed : page, stage, and classroom in Shakespeare and hiscontemporaries / edited by Kathryn M. Moncrief, Kathryn R. McPherson, Sa¡ah En1oe.

pages cm. - (Shakespeare and the Stage)ISBN 978- i -6 I I 47 -560 -9 (cloch : aLk. paper)-iSBN 97 8 - I - 61147 -5 61 -6 (ebook)

1. Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616-Study and teaching. 2. Shakespeare, !øilliam,I564-I6|6-Dramatic production. 3. Engiish drama-EarLy modern and Elizabethan,1500-1600-History and criticism. I. Moncrief, Kathryn M. II. McPherson, KathrynRead. III. Enloe, Sarah.

PRz987.S465 2013822.3'3-ðc73

7013018+47

ZlrM\47 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements ofAmerican Nationai Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paperfor Printed Library Materials, ANSIAJISO 239.48-1997.

Contents

List of lllustrations

Acknowledgments

Foreword: Lightning in a BottleRølph AlanCohen

lntroduction: Players and Playhouses-Embodied, Expressed, EnactedKatlnynM. Moncrief andKatfuyn R. McPherson

The Body of the Actor

Speaking in the Silence: Deaf Performanceat the Oregon Shakespeare FestivalLezhe C. Cross

"l Have Given Suck": The Maternal Bodyin Sarah Siddons's Lady MacbethChelsea Phillips

Competing Heights in Shakespeare's As You Lil<æ ItJentmø Alixl-euy

ix

x1

Chapter 1

Part IChapter 2

Chapter 3

x111

1

7

T9

Printed in the United States of Arne¡ica

Chapter 4 35

CHr\PTER TWO

Speaking in the SilenceDeaf Performance at the

Oregon Shnkespe&re F estíqtal

Lpzrtn C. Cnoss

Director Bill Rauch's choice to casr deaf actor Howie seago as the elderHamlet in his 2010 production of Hontletat the oregon Shakespeare Festival(osF) was an inregral part of his vision for the play. From the incorporationof American Sign Language (ASL) to the players performing as a hip.hoptroupe, Rauch's production boldly reenvisioned Shakespeare's language. Thedecision to cast a deaf actor in this particular role was especially poignantbecause it allowed Rauch to emphasize the themes of hearing, listening, andeavesdropping that were central to his concept for the production. In theplay, Hamlet is the only one to converse with the Ghost. In this produc-tion, the exclusivity of their communication was amplified, as there weretimes that the hearing audience did not know exactly what old Hamlet wassaying to his son. Like Horatio, Bernardo, and Marcellus, the audience sawthe Ghost, but rarely heard him. He returned to the mortal realm ro com-municate solely with Hamlet. \Øhat was heard by the audience, as well as theother characters, was what Hamlet chose to share.

Prior to joining the company at OSF in 2009, Seago had only acted in oneof Shakespeare's works, playing Caliban in Robert \Toodruffs The Tempestat La lolla Repertory in 198?. Since his arrival at OSF, he has translated andperformed seven of Shakespeare's roles.l Often the only deaf performer in aspeaking ensemble, Seago's attention to language enables the entire cast tobecome more attuned to the intricacies of language use in the play. The com-pany must discover how sign language, verbal language, and silence can each

7

8

be used to greatest effect in the world of the play. \7hich characters, otherthan Seago's own, know and use sign language?2 \(/ho might provide a vocalaccompaniment to the signs, so that the hearing audience receives essentialinformation?3 As Seago relies upon visual cues from his fellow performers tofollow the action of the scene, gesture and movement become central ele-ments of the storytelling for the entire company.

Through his work at OSF, Seago has developed a method of translat-ing-one might even say transforming-the written text of Shakespeareinto kinetic rext. Seago's translations of Shakespeare are not simply literaltranslations of English into American Sign Language, but lyrical transfigu-rations of verbal poetry into kinetic poetry. His work taps into Artaud'sconception of theater as a "concrete physical place," which is inhabited byperformance. Artaud tells us that "there is a poetry of the senses as thereis a poetry of language and that this concrete physical language to whichI refer is truly theatrical only to the degree that the thoughts it expressesare beyond the reach of the spoken language."a This place beyond spokenlanguage is where Seago's translations reside: in a language that marriesthe textual, the verbal, the emotional, and the gestural. In creating hisinterpretation of this role, Seago reinscribed Shakespeare, transformingwritten text to physical expression. Through this process he creates what Iam calling kinetic textuality.

I am not the first to coin the term "kinetic textuality," but the first to useit in the context of deaf performance- Other scholars commonly use the termto describe the marriage of ianguage and movement in digital texts. In "Textas Loop: On Visual and Kinetic Textuality," Janez Strehovec uses the termto describe new forms of web-based poetry that make static text into a fluid,animated text. Using Java or Flash, the text-based poems have rhythm andmovement, like a film.5 Although this digital poetry has the added elementof action on a screen, the text remains two-dimensional. It may have mo.tion and depth, but it does not have the physical presence of bodies movingthrough space and time that is implied by the term "kinetic."

In Semlosis inthePostmodern Age, Floyd Merrell defines "kinetic textuality"as the very fabric of signification, the space that lies between the "text" and"textuality," the space where meaning resides.6 Through this definition, heindentified kinetic textuality as a liminal space where human interpretationacts as a mediator between the text and its meaning. A1l actors work in thissort of liminai space, serving as the intermediaries between Shakespeare'stext on the page and the audience, who visually and aurally receive the per-formance. Actors literally embody the word in action with their voices andbodies. But most actors primarily rely upon the vocal representation of the

Speaking in the Silence N 9

text to communicate with the audience. They do not develop meaning solelyvia kinetic textuality.

However, by removing the voice, the connection between the writrentext and the kinetic action of the actor becomes essential. It is in this waythat Howie Seago's translations of Shakespeare are truly an example of ki-netic textuality. His translations are no longer textual, are not simply verbaland are not mimed in a way that solely conveys the literal sense of the words.They are a combination and amplification of all of these forms of communi-cation. Seago's translations are meaning in motion, meaning characterizedby the very movemenrs of which it is made. They are kinetic textuality.

To prepare his translations of Shakespeare's texts, Seago begins with aside-by-side comparison of the text of the play, as it has been edited for pro-duction, and a modern English translation (often from the No Fear editionsof Shakespeare). Using this side-by-side text as a srarring point, he begins tocraft a translation from Shakespeare to sign. Seago refers to oSF dramaturgesand voice and text coaches as resources in his translation of shakespeare'stext. He uses their experrise in the underlying meaning and rþthm of thelanguage to discover "how to say the line in a different way," in a way thatmight ranslate to sign more fluidly.? He also uses a thesaurus ro give himmore word choices to play with, more ways to interpret the language visually.

Seago not only translates his own lines into sign, but also the language ofanyone in the company who uses sign language in the performance.s Oncethe translation is complete, Seago records a video of himself performing thetranslation for his fellow actors to enable them ro learn their signed parts.As in any ranslation process, Seago's translations change throughout the¡ehearsal process as he fits the word to the action. Seago's colleagues need tobe able to nimbly adapt to the new kinetic language they are given, as if theywere working with a linguistic choreographer.

In all of his translations, Seago srrives to creare a lexicon which marchesthe vocabulary and style of the signs with individual character rrairs, theworld of the play, and Shakespeare's language. For example, Seago inter-preted the Ghost as a military man of few words with a crisp, direct styleof communication. His translation of the role refiected the personality ofhis character. In his work with Shakespeare, he also endeavors to matchthe style, rþthm, and vocabulary of his kinetic poerry with Shakespeare'spoetry. He describes how he aiways rries "To find the most artisric imagerypossible, the most poetic way of representing the signs . . . trying to matchthe eloquence of Shakespeare."e

Seago's work with Shakespeare is particularly expressive because bothShakespeare's language and his sign language have similar metaphorical

Lezlie C. Cross

10 æ Lezlie C. Cross

underpinnings. Much like the rest of us, Seago describes his everydaylanguage as "baby words'-a basic, truncated vocabulary that is easy tocommunicate and understand.ro Shakespeare gives him the ability to use

a more eloquent form of sign language, to discover or invent new signs.

Dramaturge Alan Armstrong described Seago's kinetic language as being"related to metaphor and figurative language-different from the speakinglanguage."l1 This can be seen in Seago's translation of Shakespeare's im-age in Hamlet of "The serpent that did sting thy father's life / Now wearshis crown."lz Seago altered the standard signs found in ASL to create a

kinetic representation that evoked Shakespeare's image. The sign for theword "crown" in ASL is two hands joined in a circle, placed on the head'However, Seago changed the sign to four fingers placed on the forehead tomore perfectly create Shakespeare's image. \Øith his right hand, he placedthe four-fingered crown on his own head. \7ith his left hand, he mimed a

snake, which "bit" him in his right arm. He then moved the "crown" fromhis own head to that of the snake. The snake, now wearing the crown,wove its way into the face of young Hamlet, who was taken aback by it.Seago described how "hearing and deaf were both shocked" by the creationof this image.13 The shock in the hearing audience was a product of theimpact of seeing the physical imagery, powerfully evoked by Seago, in con'junction with hearing the verbal imagery, spoken by Donohue.

The pages of Seago's promptbook are littered with notations (see figure 2'1).Usual actor's notes conceming blocking and emotion are of course included.But the marginalia also reveal the way in which he has reworked the writtenrexr ro create his kinetic text. ln the left.hand margin are notations that in-dicate if the line is simply signed, or signed and also voiced by Dan Donohue,who played Hamlet. In the offstage world, two people signing would only voicetheir dialogue if there was a third person there who did not understand ASL'In the theater, that third person is the hearing audience. Accordingly, thedecision of what lines to voice is an essential part of building the performance.1ñ4rat informarion is critical for the audience? !Øhat information can be con-veyed solely in sign? \ü/-hen is a vocal accompaniment needed? W-hen mightvocalization be extraneous? ìV'hich character should voice each line?

Originally, projections of Shakespeare's text were designed to accompanySeago's performance in Hamlet. The audience would have followed Seago's

lines in ASL through the translations in the supertitles, so fewer lines wouldhave been needed to be voiced by Donohue. However, Seago recalls thatit "was really hard to fit the timing of my signing with the English on thewall," especially as the subtitles were behind him and he could not see theprojected words.14

f'tYTNIÉI.FIKE- þm rcuxr- í l it't't LL(e\ 5iN

11V@3

ØØ

Ott off evçD 'u th¿ blosm of my

Wiñ¡ll

oso¡¡r

rtt¿ È\'f I(\çYfrKfs S'rnY-ny impcrfætimCon ny bant

,,Àr'l-FoÞ. $ i\vø-

le"( tw*\ f tau't0 ,v( u.\;-.*i i-L ÉÍ,i^i*l.r;;r .iì

TF //AVEfl¡

¡(Y irsêÞ ¿ttKÉr-í' F/¡:." /.,,, :i.iÚ 62t rúü bsst orrm h ù€ê ùa¡r it Dcû, ,i ø¡ ¡nttt"l-

Figure 2.'f . Howie Seago, Hamlet Promptbooþ Oregon Shakespeare Festival, 201 0. Bypermission of Howie Seago.

t\

ú æ Lezlie C. Cross

During previews, the artistic team decided that the supertitles split the au-dience's focus; the audience watched the words, not the actors. Director BillRauch recognized that "in the rehearsal room, where we had no projections,everybody was moved by the emotional connection between Dan lDonohue]and Howie [Seago]. And I just realized that what matters here is actually thisconnection between father and son."15 \(/ith the team not wanting to detractfrom the intimate relationship between Hamlet and his father, the choicewas made to femove the supertitles. However, this last.minute alterationneces6itated changes in what language was voiced by Donohue. \Øith theprojections, fewer of the signs needed to be voiced in order to be understoodby a hearing audience. When the supertitles were removed, the team had toreassess how to communicate with a hearing audience while using sign'

An easy solution to the elimination of the supertitles would have been tosimply voice all of the lines, in the name of clarity. However, the entire teamhad been moved by the power-ful moments of silence filled with Seago's im'passioned signing. Dramaturge Gina Pisasale, who worked closely with Seago

and Donohue during rehearsals, expressed "a vely strong opinion that less is

more" when determining how much of the signed dialogue should be voicedby Donohue.l6 For instance, when the Ghost signed the story of his murderby Ciaudius, Hamlet only spoke two words: "Poison . . . poisoned,"17 the firstword while Seago mimed a vial being poured in his ear and the second whilehe signed that he was sleeping. The audience, ratheï than hearing Hamietrepeat verbatim what his father was communicating, witnessed a pantomimeof the murder as well as Hamlet wrestling to comprehend his father's death.Hamlet and the audience were on a shared joumey of discovery' However'the important information, that Hamlet senior had been poisoned, was

clearly communicated to the audience. Rauch describes how "the intimacylof the moment] was heightened because you're actually shut out of the ac-

tual meaning of the words. Yet the emotionai stakes are communicated inthe intensity of the signing and the actor's expressions."ls

The choice to voice or not to voice certain lines offers other opportunitiesto explore character in addition to communicating the expository informa'tion of the scene. \X/hile Seago performs primarily in sign, he is a bilinguaiactor able to use both spoken English and ASL. By using his voice in ad-dition to the sign, Seago can add a special emphasis, either of emotion orimport, to the line. In his performance of the Ghost, he used his voice inaddition to sign in the line "horrible, horrible, most horrible."le Leading upto this line, Seago's performance of the signs became larger, more emphatic,as Seago strode angrily across the stage. By the time he reached "horrible,horrible," the emotion was so great that the sound seemed to explode from

Speaking in the Silence .-- 13

hls body- An acting nore in seago's script indicared that the lines were ro beperformed in a low growl that grew through the repetition.2o Rauch remem-bers "feeling that there was something so emotional and not rational aboutthose words and that having the added expression of voice in addition to signwould just make sense. It was the right choice emotionally."zl

In the "Ghosr's appearance in the closer" scene (act 3, scene 4), Gertrude'scharacter was developed and expressed through her refusal to use sign language.\7hen Hamlet saw the Ghost and began signing to him, Gertrude lamented"alas, he's mad,"z/ covered her eyes, and tumed her back on Hamlet and theghost of his father. For a deaf person, tuming away from a conversation is an in-credibly insulting act, a refusal ro see what is being said. From the instant thatHamlet began to sign, Gertrude must have known Hamlet was (or thought hewas) communicating with her deaf husband. But her acrion of tuming awayrejected the existence of the Ghost by her refusai to see what was said. For thenext two lines, several silent stage moments, Hamlet and his father interactedsolely through signs. Hamlet did not voice the words for Gertrude, who, in theworld of this production, would have known ASL. She had the choice to turnand see what was being said, but she did not. Once Hamlet began to speakto Gettrude, he also signed for the Ghost, as any child of a deaf parent woulddo to include everyone in the conversation. Gertrude, however, never signedduring this scene or at any point in the production. Her refusal to use her deadhusband's language clearly indicated her shift in allegiance to Claudius.

Gertrude's breach of deaf etiquette in the closet scene suggests how theuse of sign in the production revealed the complex familial relationshipsin the play. For instance, Jeffrey King, who played Claudius, chose to sign"brother murder" during his "O my offence is rank" speech in act 3, scene 3.For King, the addition of sign in this momenr "felt so deep and almost like anunconscious movement. A1so, it connected me to my brother so directly."23The use of sign not only tied Claudius to his deceased brother, but was also akinetic admission of his guilt, which reinforced his verbal confession.

Throughout the production, Hamler's use of sign showed him to be a duti-ful son to his deaf father. Following the passage where the Ghost describedthe torments he underwent in hell, Hamlet covered his eyes in despair. Atthis point, the Ghost would usually entreat Hamlet to "Lisr, list, O list,"However, Seago aitered this line to demonstrate the relationship betweenthis particular father and son. \7hen Hamlet looked up, the Ghost signed"Look at me" wirh his right hand, "Look at me," with his left hand, and then"LOOK AT ME," with both hands.za For a deaf father, conrinued eye conractequates active listening. From that moment on, Hamlet never removed hiseyes from his father for the remainder of the scene.

14 æ Lezlie C. Cross

Throughout the production, the shared signing illustrated the deep bondbetween the two Hamlets. Seago describes the two characters as "Twowounded souls wandering who come together. Sharing their pain and angertogether."z5 In the line "O wicked wit and gifts that have the power / so toseducel"26 both Seago and Donohue signed the line together while Donohuevoiced the words. The perfect symmetry of the two men signing this senti-ment simultaneously suggested that it might have been a familiar maxim thatHamlet senior often repeated to his son. The two men almost danced the linetogether, as they locked eyes and completed a full circle on stage while sign'ing the line in unison, performing a moment of kinetic textuality-

Another way in which Seago's translations transform Shakespeare'slanguage into a kinetic language is through the substitution of words orphrases with gestural and mimetic symbols. Instead of creating a literaltransiation, he finds the most elegant way to communicate kinetically withboth hearing and deaf audiences. Seago's translation of the Ghost's line"l find thee apt" is a telling example. There is no direct ASL sign for theterm "apt," and finger spelling a-p-t actually means apartment' However,Seago could have signed the words "eager," "tight," or "fit" in the piace of"apt." lnstead, he chose a symbolic gesture that communicates the emo-tion of "i find thee apt" when he simply applauded Hamlet's commitmentto "revenge." For Seago, the symbolic choice of applause was a naturalreflex. The universal sign of applause, in this moment, expressed "Good foryou, son. I am so proud."2? Seago saw Hamlet senior as a brusque, direct,militaristic man of few words. His interpretation of the character was com-municated through his decision to use one strong sign, whlch simplifies theemotion of the moment down to an essential gesture.

Seago, in a Shakespearean manner) also coins new signs by compoundingexisting ASL words. In attempting to translate Shakespeare's line "Ay, thatincestuous, that adulterate beast," Seago had many options. In ASL, "incest"is a word that is finger speiled. To be clear to a deaf audience, Seago mighthave chosen that literal translation of the line. Yet, technically, Claudiusdoes not commit incest, so that option might not have accurately conveyedthe meaning of the line. Finger spelling also takes time. Pacing is also a con'sideration in how Seago chooses to translate his text. Often, it takes moretime to say something in sign than in speech, so Seago finds a new way toexpress the same thought, Moreover, even if finger spelling was the rightchoice for meaning and pacing, it is a challenge to read a sign that small ina six-hundred-seat theater. Given all of these considerations, Seago choseto join together a number of different signs to create the meaning of Shake-speare's line. The literal English gloss of Seago's signs for his line is "Yes,

Speaking in the Silence æ 15

your my group, hump blood same, that affair besrial."2s W"hile the Enghshretranslation seems inelegant, what Seago performed on stage was not. Itwas a kinetic compound which embodied the Ghost's visceraliy emotionalreaction to Claudius's acrions.

Howie Seago's kineric interpretations of Shakespeare's texr go beyondmere translation. He is not simply shifting from one language (English)to another language (ASL), but transforming one medium into anothermedium. The texts of shakespeare are traditionally converted from rexr rospeech by actors, yet these linguistic equivalents are inevitably intertwined.Shakespeare's literary text was meant to be performed as verbal text. Throughhis combination of ASL, invented and compounded signs, and mimetic andsymbolic gestures Seago transforms literary, verbal text into kinetic text. Hisprocess of translation and performance creates kinetic textuality.

By the end of the 2010 OSF productton of Hamler, neither Hamlet norhis father could hear the drums of Fortinbras as he approached Elsinore. Thefinal words of Hamlet's famous last line were signed, not spoken. In the clos-ing moment of the play, the Ghost rushed onro stage, ran roward Hamlet,and grasped his dead son in his arms (see fígwe 7.2).ze A soundless yet volu.minous keening filled the theater. The Ghost's revenge was played our, yerin a way he never intended. Both Hamlets had become deaf to the concernsof Denmark. And the rest is silence.

Notes1. In addition to playing the Ghost in Hamlet, Seago has also performed in

Shakespeare's works as Exeter in HernyV, Duke Senior in As You Like I¿, Ned Poinsin Henry IV, Part One and Henry IV, Part Two, Tubal in The Merchant of Venice,and Griffith in Henry VIII. In 2013 he wili be performing the title role in Cymbe-line. Since Seago joined the company, there has been an invesrmenr in making allth¡ee theaters at OSF more accessible to deaf patrons. In this last season there werenine scheduled sign-interpreted performances (some signed by Seago's brother Billy,who is a professional interpreter) and twenty-two scheduled open-captioned per-formances. Before Seago was at OSF, there were perhaps five to ten deaf patrons ofthe festival. In 2011, seventy deaf patrons came ro see him ínToKíIIaMockíngbírdalone. Also in201l, OSF Access Coordinator Jim Amberg and Audience ServicesManager Radawna Wallace received a John F. Kennedy Center for the PerformingArts Leadership Exchange in Arts and Disability (LEAD) Award for their work inmaking OSF more accessible to all audiences. If you are interesred in learning moreabout accessibility at OSF, go to htç://www.osfashland.org/plays/access.aspx.

Z. InHamlet, Rauch and his actors decided that both Hamlets (elder and junior),Gertrude, Claudius, and Ophelia all knew sign.

Speaking in the Silence æ I7

3. For this production, Hamlet v/as rhe only one to voice for the Ghost, otherthan the two lines the Ghost voiced for himself.

4. Antonin Artaud, Th¿ Theater andks Doøble (New York: Grove Press, 1958), 37.5. lanez Strehovec, "Text As Loop: on Visual and Kinetic Texruality," Afterim-

age 31, no. 1 (2003): 8-9.6. Floyd Merrell, Semiosis in the Postmodern Age (!íest Lafayette, IN: Purdue

University Press, 1995), 41.7. Howie Seago, phone interview with the aurhor, May 8, 2011.8. Many members of the OSF Company are becoming proficient in sign language

as a result of working with Seago.9. Howie Seago, phone interview with the author, May 8, 2011.

10. Howie Seago, interview with the author, December 13, Z0lI.11. Alan Armstrong, phone interview with the author, September 16,2011.12. William Shakespeare and Howie Seago,HamLet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare Festival, 2010), 25b.13. Howie Seago, phone interview with the author, May 8, 2011.14. Howie Seago, phone interview with the author, May 8, 2011.15. Bill Rauch, phone interview with the author, January 3,2012.16. Gina Pisasale, e-mail message to the author, December 10, 2011.17- William Shakespeare and Howie Seago,HamLet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare FestivaI, Z0l0), 76a.18. Bill Rauch, phone interview with the author, January 3,2072.19. !Øilliam Shakespeare and Howie Seago,Hamlet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare Festival, 2010), 26a.20. William Shakespeare and Howie Seago, Hamlet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare FestivaI, Z0I0), 25a.21. Bill Rauch, phone interview with the author, January 3,Z0lZ.22. William Shakespeare and Howie Seago, Hamlet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare Festival, 2010), 76.23. Jeffery King, e-mail message to the author, January 18, Z0lZ.24. William Shakespeare and Howie Seago,Hamlet (promptbook, Oregon Shake-

speare Festival, 7010), 25a.25. Howie Seago, interview with the author, December ß,2AÍ.26. The literal translation of this line in ASL was "Evil magic gifts, gifts, flatter,

flatter, hook." William Shakespeare and Howie Seago,Hamlet (promptbook, OregonShakespeare Festivai, 2010), 75b.

27. Howie Seago, interview with the author, December 13, 2011.28. lØilliam Shakespeare, Howie Seago, and Gina Pisasale, Hcnnlet ASL Glosses

for Ghost, (promptbook, Oregon Shakespeare Festival, 2010),25a.

Figure 2.2, Hamlet, The Oregon Shakespeare Festival, 20'l 0, Dan Donohue as Hamletand Howie Seago as the Chost. Director: Bill Rauch. Photo by David Cooper. Used bypermission of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival.