Shakespeare's Animal: Caged in a Production Ghetto

Abstract

When Roland Barthes discussed myths in this way he opened issues that problematized Shakespeare. How does one stage Shakespeare in an era where traditional myths and rituals have lost their meaning? How does one revive the primitive archaic power of Shakespeare when our society has enveloped itself in a think but impenetrable veneer of civility? What does the mythic nature of Shakespeare mean to us now? In Mythologies, Roland Barthes explained that the first or original sign becomes a signifier of another or new sign that is then attached or associated with a new concept or signified. Thus, understanding the notion of myth is rooted in sign systems and cultural significances. In Barthes’ logic, if one could strip away the layers of signs, an object could be clarified. But Laurence Coupe argued that Barthes’ work was impossible, that a cultural icon like Shakespeare is inseparable from associated myth systems. “Barthes is implicitly claiming to be able to demystify the forces which hold others in thrall and so, presumable, transcend them.”²