{"id":277,"date":"2025-10-23T16:05:58","date_gmt":"2025-10-23T16:05:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/?p=277"},"modified":"2026-05-20T19:13:44","modified_gmt":"2026-05-20T19:13:44","slug":"era-specific-interpretations-of-shakespeares-saddest-comedy-in-latvian-theatre","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/era-specific-interpretations-of-shakespeares-saddest-comedy-in-latvian-theatre\/","title":{"rendered":"Era-Specific Interpretations of Shakespeare\u2019s \u201cSaddest Comedy\u201d in Latvian Theatre"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Vesma Levalde<\/strong>*<\/a> and Sigita Ignatjeva<\/strong>**<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

This study examines how the concept of time is manifested in various Latvian theatre productions of Shakespeare\u2019s comedy A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/font> during the 20th<\/sup> and 21st <\/sup>centuries. It focuses on how each creative team interpreted Shakespeare\u2019s original text and how the performance text resonates with the production\u2019s other sign systems. It aims to compare changes in the comedy\u2019s message and aesthetics by exploring the relationship between modifications to the text and other performance aspects, such as staging, acting and audience perception. Additionally, it evaluates the influence of the socio-political context during the production period on the production\u2019s message. This study examines two recent productions in detail, focusing on the significant role played by modifications to the verbal text in the staging, including the translation of the original play and the integration of new text. The authors conclude that references to social and political events and conditions were present even in the earliest productions of the comedy. Building on Marjorie Garber\u2019s interpretation of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/font> as a comedy intertwined with the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, the research demonstrates that heightened geopolitical tensions tend to give rise to a tragic undertone in contemporary stage productions. Directors seamlessly integrated modifications to the verbal text with other sign systems, such as visual, symbolic and performative ones, creating layered meanings that challenge the boundaries between comedy and tragedy.

Keywords<\/strong>: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/font>, Shakespeare, play interpretation, socio-political context, Latvian theatre<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The production of Shakespeare\u2019s A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> by stage director Viesturs Kairi\u0161s at the Dailes Theatre in Riga served as the inspiration for this essay. Dubbed \u201cthe saddest comedy,\u201d and structured as a war story, Kairi\u0161s\u2019 interpretation emphasises contemporary social and political realities. He explains:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Midsummer Night\u2019s<\/em> Dream<\/em> is, in my opinion, the funniest comedy about the end of the world. In this Dailes Theatre production, we wanted to speak both about the closest and most instinct-shattering monster of today \u2014 the chaos created by war \u2014 and at the same time tell the story of that invisible world which, from time to time, erupts from within us like a volcano.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, Viesturs Kairi\u0161s employs Shakespeare\u2019s play as a vehicle to communicate contemporary social and political realities. To adapt the original material to this message, playwright Mat\u012bss Gricmanis was involved in the production, making changes to the text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A few years earlier, in 2021, the director Elm\u0101rs Se\u0146kovs staged his interpretation of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream <\/em>at the Latvian National Theatre. This production featured a newly commissioned Latvian translation, with the creative team supplementing the original script with new writings. The verbal text thus became central for both directors, and perhaps the cornerstone of their conception of the production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although there are a relatively large number of studies on Shakespeare\u2019s plays staged in Latvia (the main one being Guna Zelti\u0146a\u2019s study \u201cShakespeare in Latvia\u201d), they are mainly case studies that do not connect the stage interpretation of the play with the socio-political situation at the time of the production and do not view the interpretations of a specific play in a historical perspective. Furthermore, in broader studies on Shakespeare in Central and Eastern Europe, there are only separate case studies or the situation in Latvia is not analyzed at all (for example, in Makaryk, Price; B\u017eochov\u00e1-Wild; St\u0159ibrn\u00fd; Sheen, Karremann).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 21st century in Latvian theatre, reflecting trends seen across much of Eastern Europe, is still increasingly characterized by postdramatic theatre, this essay focuses on the modifications made to the verbal text and its relationship with other performative elements. This analysis draws on Hans Thies Lehmann\u2019s assertion in Postdramatic Theatre<\/em> that \u201cthe text is considered only as one element, one layer, or as \u201cmaterial\u201d of scenic creation, not as its master\u201d (17).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By comparing these recent productions with earlier interpretations of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> in Latvia, spanning the 20th and 21st centuries, this study aims to explore how the socio-political context of each era influenced stage interpretation and the play\u2019s underlying message, including an analysis of the production\u2019s text\/translation, and highlights what Michael Dobson wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At its heart is the question of how we are to understand the relation between the publication and the performance of Shakespeare\u2019s works. Is a play\u2019s printed text to be seen as prior and superior to its theatrical embodiments, which if so are only belated, partial, and imperfect glosses upon an essentially literary artifact? Or is that text itself to be seen as only a belated, partial, and imperfect souvenir of a theatrical event, the incomplete written trace of a dramatic work which can only fully be realized in performance? (235)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A historical digression is necessary to investigate, through the analysis of a single dramatic text\u2019s interpretation, how theatre comments on the socio-political situation at the time of the production and with what artistic means of expression this comment is constructed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Pages to Stages: Historical Context of Shakespeare\u2019s Comedy<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Shakespeare wrote the comedy A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> around the same time as the tragedy Romeo and Juliet<\/em>. In her book Shakespeare After All<\/em>, Shakespeare scholar Marjorie Garber describes A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> as a \u201cturned-upside-down\u201d Romeo and Juliet<\/em>, transforming tragedy into comedy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In both plays there are strong central figures of authority who attempt to order the world \u2013 the Prince in Romeo and Juliet<\/em>; Theseus, Duke of Athens, in A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em>. In the two plays, there are fathers who want to choose their daughters\u2019 husbands \u2013 old Capulet wants Juliet to marry Paris, Egeus wants Hermia to marry Demetrius \u2013 and in both cases, the women refuse, choosing instead other lovers (Romeo, Lysander) and planning to run away with them. [..] Both plays strongly emphasize the difference between night, which transforms and changes, and day, which is rigid, inflexible, and associated with law. And both plays use similar images and tropes: the lark that rises at dawn, the nightingale that sings at evening, the lover\u2019s stereotypical cry \u201cAy, me!” \u2026 (213)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> is a play frequently performed all over the world. In Europe, it has been adapted for theatre, cinema, opera, and ballet. In 1959, the Czech puppet maker, illustrator, motion picture animator, and film director Ji\u0159\u00ed Trnka (1912\u20131969) even brought the story to life in a marionette film (Cerise 2013). The first production of Shakespeare\u2019s play in Latvia dates back to 1892. Initially, Latvian actor, poet, and translator J\u0101nis Esenber\u0123is-Hess (1862\u20131890) translated the play. Professional Latvian theatre was still in its infancy at that time. Although German and Russian were the main languages used in the Latvian education system, the modern Latvian literary language developed particularly rapidly at the turn of the century. This was fueled by the national awakening movement in literature, known as the \u201cNew Current,\u201d and by extensive translations of world classics, including those in the Latvian theatre repertoire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The annals of Latvian theatre history have been more meticulous in their documentation of productions that emerged during the 1920s and 1930s. This was a period after Latvia had gained independence and the literary language had stabilised. Nevertheless, theatres continued to use the translation of the comedy mentioned earlier. By analysing reviews published in the press and descriptions of these performances by theatre historians, some features of the era can be identified in the language of theatre. The production was particularly notable in 1922 when the modernist director Eduards Smi\u013c\u0123is (1886\u20131966) staged a version at the newly established Dailes Theatre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dailes Theatre is the first theatre in Latvia to be founded with the aim of moving away from the tradition of realism that had dominated Latvian theatre until then and updating the aesthetic principles of modernism. (Rodi\u0146a 3)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In its 1920 manifesto published in the official newspaper Latvijas V\u0113stnesis<\/em>, the Dailes Theatre states that its goal is to achieve complete creative freedom and independence from any political influences (3). This goal was directly related to the newly established independent state of Latvia, previously incorporated into the Russian Empire and subjected to political and cultural dictates. The formulation of the theatre’s artistic goals reflects the desire to break away from previous traditions of realistic theatre and declare new aesthetic and creative objectives. Among other things, the manifesto represents the director as an author who offers their own interpretation of a literary work on stage rather than simply staging it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The principles put forward by Smi\u013c\u0123is demonstrate an aspiration to create a unified performance of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em>, in which all elements (set design, costumes, lighting, music, and acting) are integrated into a coherent aesthetic whole. The coexistence of the realistic and metaphysical or fantastic elements in modernism allows the manifestation of the artist\u2019s individual creative vision. This is evident in the choice of dramaturgy and, judging by historical evidence, in the staging, where stylisation principles are obvious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The syncretism of styles was created by mixing the \u201cclassical\u201d style of the scenes of Theseus\u2019s court, the fantastic atmosphere of the magical wood with dancing elves, and the romantic experiences of lovers, and the principles of commedia dell\u2019arte in the scenes with craftsmen. (Zelti\u0146a 28)<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> by Shakespeare. Premiered on April 20, 1922, at the Dailes Theatre in Riga. Stage direction: Eduards Smi\u013c\u0123is. Photo: Latvian Academy of Culture Eduards Smi\u013c\u0123is Theatre Museum<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Even more clearly, the era breaks through in the 1931 production. Ironically, the location of Theseus\u2019s court in the performance is the Latvian sports stadium, which was popular for amateur sports in the early 1930s. Athletes run and box in the woods, displaying their well-trained bodies. The press was shocked. Filma un Skatuve <\/em>(Film and Stage) magazine wrote, \u201cIf Shakespeare were to wake up from the dead and attend the premiere of the play, he would surely sue the Dailes Theatre for the illegal use of his name\u201d (568).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Smi\u013c\u0123is\u2019s avant-garde approach is contextually similar to another production of this comedy staged by director Juris Rijnieks at the Liep\u0101ja Theatre in 1992. At that time, Latvia had regained its independence for the second time, and various forms of artistic expression were flourishing rapidly. Rijnieks created the production as an exaggerated relationship drama with music by the renowned rock composer Juris Kulakovs and postmodern set design by Artis Bute. He deliberately disregarded established conventions, instead experimenting with theatrical techniques, a mixed psychological approach in actors\u2019 work and performative theatricality in mise-en-sc\u00e8ne. A significant part of the play\u2019s text Rijnieks deleted to shorten the verbal content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This drive to experiment in art marked a departure from the canon of socialist realism imposed by the Soviet occupation regime in Latvia (1945\u20131990). For 50 years, directors could only express messages directed at the occupation regime by using the language of Aesop. A striking example of Aesop\u2019s language or subtext is K\u0101rlis Au\u0161k\u0101ps\u2019s production of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> at the Dailes Theatre in 1977. Designed as a physical theatre performance with elements of acrobatics and emphasising the sexuality of the characters, it was a provocative approach in the Soviet cultural sphere. \u201cThis production brought a new wave of energy, dynamics and theatricality into overall landscape of the Latvian theatre\u201d (Zelti\u0146a 31).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Au\u0161k\u0101ps based his production on Valija Brut\u0101ne\u2019s (1911\u20131990) 1950s translation, which had been approved by Soviet censors. This translation possesses a distinctively lyrical quality and captures the pathos typical of Soviet-era texts. Brut\u0101ne also translated the names of most of the play\u2019s characters into Latvian according to the meaning of the names as common names (usually, person names are transcribed). Rather than basing the production on the text, the director created an acrobatic physical performance, in which body movements and their interplay expressed something different from words. This approach to world classics was a novel concept in Soviet Latvian theatre. While a stage without realistic scenery and historical costumes has previously shocked Soviet critics, the style of acting has always been realistic and psychological. Au\u0161k\u0101ps broke with this tradition, reminding the audience of the artistic freedom that existed in pre-war Latvia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reverse the Genre<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

In 2021, director Elm\u0101rs Se\u0146kovs staged Shakespeare\u2019s comedy A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream <\/em>at the Latvian National Theatre. The poet and translator J\u0101nis Elsbergs had created a new translation of the play, specially commissioned by the theatre. The production emerged from the pandemic situation and told the story of theatre, which was under threat at the time. The pandemic posed many challenges for theatres. The theatres in Latvia were closed for a long time. Many productions that had already been prepared did not reach the stage. The creation of many virtual theatrical projects raised the question of whether audiences would ever return to live performances. Institutional theatres suffered huge losses, and there was serious speculation that the theatre would never be the same again. From 2021 to 2023, existential self-reflection was a recurring theme in theatre productions, and metatheatre gained relevance in theoretical research, with researchers concluding that this trend stemmed from the cultural crisis during the pandemic (Levalde 16\u201327).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the programme, Se\u0146kovs stated that the production was a tribute to the \u201cblack box of theatre\u201d, falling into the category of metatheatre or theatrical self-reflexivity. This production featured Romeo and Juliet instead of the story of Pyramus and Thisbe, which amateur actors perform in Shakespeare\u2019s play. Se\u0146kovs justified his choice based on Romeo and Juliet\u2019s much wider recognition, as well as the context of the postmodern world \u2014 Shakespeare\u2019s play A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> includes another of Shakespeare\u2019s works. The director also mentioned the eternal dream of theatre: everyone wanted to play the lovers and be Romeo; everyone had an opinion on how this role should be played.[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This comment by the stage director also justified the changes made to the text by actor and assistant director Mat\u012bss Budovskis. In episodes where amateurs performed Romeo and Juliet, he incorporated texts from everyday life at the National Theatre, such as discussions from rehearsals of other productions in which actors discussed their roles. The amateurs addressed the production of the play, the art of theatre, and the realities of theatre at length. For example, Snout would not be at the last rehearsal because he received an offer of an \u201cextra job.\u201d The comparison of the text with the original reveals a shift in genre, introducing a sombre mood into the comedy. The modernisation of the language was significant for interpretation. Creators have heavily abridged the original text and the order of the fragments in many places. In some scenes, lower-level vocabulary was used, whereas in others, the text was more faithful to the original than in previous translations.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> by Shakespeare. Premiered on May 13, 2021, at the National Theatre in Riga. Stage direction: Elm\u0101rs Se\u0146kovs. Arturs Kr\u016bzkops as Puck. Photo: Kristaps Kalns<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

In the National Theatre\u2019s production, Shakespeare\u2019s five acts are condensed into a single act lasting less than two hours, with the Theseus and Hippolyta storyline completely abandoned. The opposition between civilisation and primal nature was replaced by the duality of theatrical nature: fascinating art and amusing, irreverent, yet endlessly exciting amateurism. The true ruler of both worlds in the production was Puck, played by Arturs Kr\u016bzkops as an unmistakable force of darkness. He was a chameleon snake with an albino face and green tongue who deliberately smeared magic potion into the wrong eyes and ruthlessly sexually exploited fairies and people who wandered into the forest. Costumes, lighting, a sound score featuring recordings by the Latvian Academic Choir, choreography, and mise-en-sc\u00e8ne all came together to create a fascinating, yet cruel, theatrical world. This contrasted with the emphatically profane line of amateur actors. Modern-day policemen, undertakers, and builders have replaced Shakespeare\u2019s time occupations. Meanwhile, the traditionally Latvian names of the characters were retained in the English version, i.e., transcribed. Presumably, the director was also pointing to the dissolution of the Latvian cultural environment, given that an increasing number of young people were communicating with each other in English, using a strange mixture of Latvian and English words in their everyday language. Although the programme described the play as a \u201ccomedy,\u201d it was more of a tragicomedy with a touch of existential self-irony. A sense of doom distanced the play from comedy, accurately describing the mood in society during the pandemic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

War and Chaos<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Director Viesturs Kairi\u0161s\u2019 interpretation of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> as a grotesque dystopia aligns perfectly with Garber\u2019s analysis of the play\u2019s transformation from tragedy to comedy. Kairi\u0161s reflects the social mood of 2025, symbolically inverting the story by giving the comedy the characteristics of a tragedy. While it is possible to analyse this performance using both postmodern and digimodern paradigms, we believe that the relationship between verbal expression and the performative elements most clearly illuminates the era\u2019s features. These features are not contextual for the director but rather serve as the architectural framework of the performance. The 2025 production uses the Soviet-era translation, a choice that playwright Mat\u012bss Gricmanis justifies by pointing out that it creates an opportunity to contrast the action with the verbal narrative. \u201cIt was important to us that the translation retained a certain innocence and pathos to peel back and play with, and to look for irony in.\u201d[2]<\/sup><\/a> Although they are separated by almost half a century and differ in terms of their aesthetics, message and overall staging, the 1977 and 2025 productions have one thing in common: they both break the ‘surface’ of the text in order to satirise their respective eras through the paradoxical relationship between the visual and the verbal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the production programme, Viesturs Kairi\u0161s discusses the relevance of the era in which Shakespeare\u2019s works are set \u2014 war. The director views war as the primary destructive force of the modern world, as the monster.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026 a father wishes his daughter dead because she disobeys him. He invokes the law that protects such rights. The law is as cruel as a monster: do as I say or die! There is only one such monster in the world: war.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The themes and setting of the war undergo changes throughout the play\u2019s text. These changes mainly consist of the addition of notes and minor alterations to Valija Brut\u0101ne\u2019s translation. Although Shakespeare\u2019s play is about a \u201cwar\u201d between the sexes, the word \u201cwar\u201d only appears in the text a few times, and then only in reference to a possible human life experience, or about the recent past for Theseus and Hippolyta. War is not present in the play\u2019s space-time. In Kairi\u0161s\u2019 production, however, the war is very real and, while Shakespeare\u2019s text remains largely the same, the semantics change. The themes and atmosphere of war permeate the play from the very beginning. Even before the text, in the prologue, there are flesh-coloured characters in leotards, visually referencing the eroticised, romantic performance in the Dailes Theatre of 1977. However, what takes place here is not lovemaking, but combat training. The sound, marked by sharp, dissonant noise music, signifies brutality and violence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shakespeare\u2019s play is set in Athens and the surrounding woods, and the city\u2019s name is retained in Kairi\u0161s\u2019 production. However, the law invoked by the director is not that of ancient, mythical Athens, but that of war and the army. The words \u201cwar\u201d and \u201carmy\u201d often replace the name \u201cAthens\u201d in the performance\u2019s text. The positions of the characters have also changed: army ranks are introduced into the text, and the characters hold different ranks within it. The difference in ranking between the two lovers replaces the difference in status outlined by Shakespeare. Theseus has transitioned from being a duke and ruler to a general and commander-in-chief. Similarly, the artisans are no longer carpenters, weavers or joiners, but rather noble soldiers, enlisted men and liaison officers. The four lovers, who are all very similar, are also soldiers. In Kairi\u0161s\u2019 staging, Shakespeare\u2019s fairies represent groups of civilians caught up in the action on stage. In some scenes, they are depicted as \u201ccollateral damage.\u201d Awakened as he Shakespeare\u2019s fairy songs transform into visual metaphors on stage \u2014 glass terrariums containing worms, cockroaches, and snails. The object of Titania\u2019s affection \u2014 a boy \u2014 is portrayed as a South Asian immigrant and bicycle courier with a python in his terrarium instead of a food carrier bag.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although Shakespeare\u2019s play is not set during a war, the source text is not lacking in brutality. Given Theseus\u2019s understanding of relationship building, it is questionable whether the forthcoming wedding of Theseus and Hippolyta is truly a joyous occasion. The events on stage exacerbate the violence, even the violence associated with love in Shakespeare\u2019s works. Theseus ties up Hippolyta and wraps her in a sack like a prisoner on stage, and instead of a wedding limousine, a black catafalque appears. Nevertheless, Theseus and the other soldiers view the wedding as a joyous occasion, and even such a forced marriage leads to the desired goal of peace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Shakespeare\u2019s text, the quarrel between the spouses Oberon and Titania causes natural disasters and human suffering, but their reconciliation and the resolution of the other lovers\u2019 disputes lead to a successful final and a return to everyday life. In the Dailes Theatre\u2019s interpretation, Theseus sees the wedding as an opportunity to make peace and thus end the wartime laws he recently defended. However, peace, as he imagines it, proves to be an illusion as seemingly innocuous forces influence the fate of the world more than the army commander-in-chief does. The verbal changes in the performance are organically harmonised with the other sign systems present in the production.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream <\/em>by Shakespeare premiered on January 31, 2025, at the Dailes Theatre in Riga. Stage direction: Viesturs Kairi\u0161s. Ilze \u0136uzule-Skrasti\u0146a as Robin, Art\u016brs Kr\u016bzkops as Oberon. Photo: Marko Rass<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The production deliberately reinterprets Puck (Robin Goodfellow), in Latvian \u2014 Paks, in the performance referred to as Pasks, with only minor textual modification, an addition of an -s. These changes serve as symbols that emphasise Pasks\u2019s ability to intervene, contrasting with his actual actions. They highlight how power and resources are present and accessible but deliberately left unused to help others. This reinterpretation also underscores the play\u2019s modern relevance, with Pasks\u2019s speed likened to that of ballistic missiles (not Shakespeare\u2019s forty minutes<\/em>). The director emphasises this message through modifications to the character\u2019s name and the use of performative elements. Pasks\u2019s visual portrayal draws inspiration from Elon Musk (in Latvian \u2014 Masks, which explains the changes in Robin\u2019s name), featuring a wig, distinctive attire, and a souvenir cap from the social media platform X. Although Oberon perceives himself as the ultimate ruler, in reality, the mischievous Pasks dictates the course of events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the production, the character does not take on the appearance of Robin Goodfellow, but of singer Taylor Swift. This approach highlights the duality of the character, as in Shakespeare\u2019s original work. Here, Swift\u2019s activism against Donald Trump before the presidential elections contrasts with Musk\u2019s alliance with him. Most of the textual alterations are evident in scenes where the soldiers stage the wedding of Theseus. These modifications not only embody Kairi\u0161s\u2019 vision of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> as a cosmic satire of the world\u2019s end but also amplify its comedic aspects, which may be less immediately accessible to contemporary audiences due to their ironic tone. A particular focus falls on Bottom, in Latvian called Dib\u0113ns.[3]<\/sup><\/a> In Shakespeare\u2019s original, Bottom \u2014 an artisan \u2014 transforms into an ass-headed figure through Oberon and Puck\u2019s manipulation. In Kairi\u0161s\u2019 staging, Dib\u0113ns appears as a bloody, faceless monster. When Oberon orders Puck\/Pasks to revert Dib\u0113ns to his original form, the wordplay used in the source text permits imagining both the physical return to human form and the killing:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And, gentle Puck, take this transformed scalp
From off the head of this Athenian swain,
That he, awaking when the other do,
May all to Athens back again repair. (Shakespeare\u00a04.1)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Latvian Soviet translation, Oberon\u2019s order is phrased as \u201cremoving the mask.\u201d In Kairi\u0161s\u2019 version, Pasks decides, \u201cthe idiot must be awakened as he was before.\u201d Through this, the director highlights that war is not about humanity, but stupidity. Kairi\u0161s has added a further task to Dib\u0113ns: his actions (not present in Shakespeare\u2019s text) lead to a different finale, where not only Pyramus and Thisbe but also almost all characters die. The wedding gift that Pasks gives to Theseus \u2013 a suitcase with a \u201cred button\u201d \u2013 symbolises both the power of the billionaire and the dependence of the entire civilisation on a few individuals worldwide. In the performance, Pyramus fakes suicide with a grenade. Frightened by his own performance, he throws the grenade away, causing a nuclear explosion \u2014 a metaphor for the \u201ca monkey with a grenade,\u201d or a stupid person with dangerous power. At the final episode, the stage is full of corpses, reminiscent of Shakespeare\u2019s tragedies. After the explosion, Pasks emerges from the burnt-out catafalque, laughing, and walks over the corpses with a suitcase in his hand. Gold-clad Oberon and Titania survive, and the performance ends on this apocalyptic note. A courier on a bicycle is also alive and present, which raises the question: does the director only envision the end of Western civilisation?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The evolution of Shakespeare\u2019s A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> in Latvian theatre vividly reflects the broader historical and socio-political shifts that Latvia experienced throughout the 20th century. Early productions, such as Smi\u013c\u0123is\u2019s modernist staging in the 1920s, embodied Latvia\u2019s aspirations for artistic independence and embraced new aesthetic principles, breaking away from traditional realism. Later adaptations, including Rijnieks\u2019s avant-garde reinterpretation in the 1990s, exemplify a more experimental approach driven by Latvia\u2019s renewed independence and artistic flourishing. During the Soviet era, productions like Au\u0161k\u0101ps\u2019s provocative 1977 performance employed physical theatre and symbolic language \u2014 akin to \u201cAesop\u2019s language\u201d \u2014 to subtly critique and navigate the restrictions of socialist realism. Overall, these interpretations demonstrate how Latvia\u2019s changing political realities and cultural identity have continuously shaped the staging, language, and symbolism of Shakespeare\u2019s comedy, transforming it into a mirror that reflects the nation\u2019s struggles, aspirations, and artistic resilience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Historically, on the one hand, changes to the verbal expression in Shakespeare\u2019s comedy A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> have primarily resulted from translation choices and their interpretations. On the other hand, directors include performative elements to reflect theatrical conventions or experimental approaches, in line with current performative art processes. Events in global and local life always influence the director\u2019s conception, but the signs of the times manifest differently in each interpretation. Radical changes to the text of the play are evident in 21st<\/sup>-century productions, where Shakespeare\u2019s text has been revised and modern texts have been written specifically for the productions and integrated into them. This suggests that, in practice, directors do not always adhere to the post-dramatic theatre thesis that the verbal text is becoming less important in contemporary theatre. Perhaps the directors\u2019 increased attention to interpreting the classic text is related to their desire to convey the current sense of the era to the audience as accurately as possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em>, Se\u0146kovs deconstructs and transforms Shakespeare’s comedy within the framework of contemporary metatheatre. This staging is part of a growing trend in Latvian theatre that has emerged in the context of the pandemic. It is a reaction to the threat to culture, and especially to the “live” art of the stage. Through the integration of modern language, symbolic staging and reinterpreted characters, the production challenges traditional genre boundaries and reflects on contemporary societal issues such as cultural identity and the impact of globalisation. This approach highlights the evolving relationship between classical texts and modern theatrical expression, demonstrating how contemporary directors can transform timeless works into influential commentaries on the human condition and societal change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the 2025 production, Valija Brut\u0101ne\u2019s lyrical and somewhat old-fashioned Soviet-time translation contrasts sharply with performative elements, creating a grotesque effect and revealing the \u201cpeeling\u201d of the text\u2019s surface. Viesturs Kairi\u0161s\u2019 performance offers a visionary perspective on the geopolitical situation, warning society and offering glimpses of a probable future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both recent Latvian productions of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream <\/em>adapt the original more radically, often adding modern, colloquial styles. Instead of expressing causal relationships through a linear narrative, directors use metaphors and symbols rooted in the performative aspects of the production and their interaction with the verbal text. Directors seamlessly integrated modifications to the verbal text with other sign systems, such as visual, symbolic and performative ones, creating layered meanings that challenge the boundaries between comedy and tragedy.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

During relatively stable periods, there are more experiments with artistic form, whereas in heightened geopolitical conditions, directing primarily focuses on delivering a message, with form subordinated to it. Moreover, the last two productions of A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> indicate that verbal expression is the core of the performance. However, this does not imply logocentrism, as words derive their meaning only in relation to other elements of the production, including visual sign systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study\u2019s authors believe that the analysis of one play\u2019s interpretations in a historical perspective reflects the interrelation between art and the socio-political situation: the stagings of Shakespeare\u2019s play A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em> on the Latvian stage show that, under the conditions of an independent Latvia, the production\u2019s message is constructed within the coordinates of current European and global processes, whereas under conditions of occupation, the only means of expression for theatre outside of frozen canons is the weaving of subtext into the production\u2019s form.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
Endnotes<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a> Elm\u0101rs Se\u0146kovs, email to the authors, 27 Feb. 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a> Mat\u012bss Gricmanis, email to the authors, 26 Feb. 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/sup><\/a> “Dib\u0113ns” (a name that puns on the Latvian word for “bottom” or “ass,” adding an ironic layer to the character\u2019s role).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bibliography<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

B\u017eochov\u00e1-Wild, Jana, editor. \u201cIn Double Trust.\u201d Shakespeare in Central Europe<\/em>. Academy of Performing Arts, 2014.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cerise, Howard. \u201cThe Passion of the Peasant Poet: Ji\u0159\u00ed Trnka, A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em>, and The Hand<\/em><\/a>.\u201d Senses of Cinema<\/em>, no. 66, 2013.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dailes te\u0101tra direkcija. \u201cDailes te\u0101tra m\u0113r\u0137i.\u201d Latvijas V\u0113stnesis<\/em>, 19 Nov. 1920, p. 3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dobson, Michael. \u201cShakespeare on the Page and on the Stage.\u201d The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare<\/em>, edited by Margareta De Grazia and Stanley Wells, Cambridge UP, 2001, pp. 235\u201351.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Garber, Marjorie. Shakespeare After All<\/em>. Anchor Books, 2005.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kairi\u0161s, Viesturs. \u201cStage Director\u2019s Annotation.\u201d Performance Program<\/em>, Dailes Theatre, 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lehmann, Hans-Thies. Postdramatic Theatre<\/em>. Translated by Karen J\u00fcrs-Munby, Routledge, 2006.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Levalde, Vesma. \u201cMetatheatre and Its Manifestations in the Time of Cultural Crisis.\u201d Current Issues in Research of Literature and Culture<\/em>, no. 28, Liepaja University, 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Makaryk, Irena R., and Joseph G. Price, editors. Shakespeare in the Worlds of Communism and Socialism<\/em>. U of Toronto P, 2006.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rodi\u0146a, Ieva. Eduarda Smi\u013c\u0123a re\u017eija un modernisms (1920\u20131945)<\/em>. Doctoral thesis, University of Latvia, 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSapnis vasaras nakt\u012b Dailes te\u0101tr\u012b.\u201d Filma un Skatuve<\/em>, no. 56, 26 Sept. 1931, p. 568.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sheen, Erica, and Isabel Karremann, editors. Shakespeare in Cold War Europe: Conflict, Commemoration, Celebration<\/em>. Palgrave Pivot, 2016.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

St\u0159ibrn\u00fd, Zden\u011bk. Shakespeare & Eastern Europe<\/em>. Oxford UP, 2000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Zelti\u0146a, Guna, M\u0101ris Peters, and Ramun\u0117 Marcinkevi\u010di\u016bte. Shakespeare\u2019s Reception and Interpretation in the Baltics<\/em>. Edited by Maria Shevtsova, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2022. <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

*<\/a>Vesma Levalde<\/strong> (Dr. art.) is a Latvian theatre researcher and critic, associate professor at RTU Liep\u0101ja Academy Humanities and Arts Centre, and editor and author of the Latvian electronic theatre magazine KRODERS.LV. Her main interests include regional cultural history and its representation in contemporary drama, the digital age and media society, and the interpretation of classical texts in contemporary theatre. She is a member of the Latvian chapter of AITC\/IATC; as an academic, she has developed the following courses of study: Stage Culture and Performative Multimedia Art; Analysis of Current Processes in Theatre. Contact details: vlevalde@gmail.com<\/a>; vesma.levalde@rtu.lv<\/a>. https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-0584-761X<\/a>. <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

**<\/a>Sigita Ignatjeva<\/strong> (Ph.D.) is an assistant professor and researcher at RTU Liep\u0101ja Academy Humanities and Arts Centre and copy editor of scientific journals and books. She teaches translation, English literature and culture, stylistics, and editing. Her research interests include migration of cultures, the history of translation into Latvian and translational stylistics. She is a member of the Modern Language Association. Contact details: sigita.ignatjeva@rtu.lv<\/a>, sigita.i@inbox.lv<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Copyright \u00a9<\/strong> 2025 Vesma Levalde and Sigita Ignatjeva
Critical Stages\/Sc\u00e8nes critiques<\/em>, #32, December 2025
e-ISSN: 2409-7411<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Creative<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution International License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":280,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-277","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-essays"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/33\/2025\/10\/image3-5.jpeg?fit=800%2C533&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/277","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=277"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/277\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":983,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/277\/revisions\/983"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/280"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=277"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=277"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/32\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=277"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}