Overview

According to a 2015 report from the British Council, the Chinese are more passionate about Shakespeare than the British and Hong Kongers. By tracing a historical line of Shakespeare’s development in China, this post investigates Shakespearean productions in China and their impact on Chinese communities as well as the global society.

 

Introduction

In today’s world, Shakespeare and his remarkable works are celebrated across cultures. A survey from the British Council in 2015 reports an unexpected set of statistics: “of 1,403 people interviewed in China, 68 percent said they liked Shakespeare, compared with 59 percent in Britain and 55 percent in Hong Kong” (Tsui). As a 2016 article from Post Magazine puts it, about 400 years after Shakespeare’s death, “China’s affinity with The Bard is as strong as ever” (Tsui).

But how could the Chinese love Shakespeare more than the British? How does a Chinese Shakespeare performance look like? Is there a difference in interpretation of Shakespeare’s works in the East and the West? And what are the impacts brought by different productions?

As more than ninety percent of Shakespearean performances in China took place after the Cultural Revolution (Li Ruru, Shashibiya), this blog post will examine a history of Chinese Shakespearean productions, with a particular interest in three time periods — 1976-1980, 1980-2000, and 2000 to today. For each period, I provide a short historical context as well as notable productions and theater events, attempting to present an outline of Shakespeare’s development in China and a cross-time analysis at the end.

 

An Overview of History (before Cultural Revolution)

Before we delve into post-Cultural Revolution in China, it is imperative to note Shakespeare’s arrival in China and its early development. It was in 1856 that an English clergyman introduced Shakespeare to China, around the same time as the beginning of the Second Opium War (1856-1860) (Hsiang-Lin 11). However, the first translation attempt the translation of The Merchant of Venice in 1904, and no full translation was achieved until 1921 when Hamlet was translated from Japanese (Hsiang-Lin 11-12). While no translations were complete, the first wave of Shakespearean performances occurred in the 1910s in the form of wenming xi, which is the “modern” drama presented in vernacular Chinese rather than traditional Chinese — a move away from conventional Chinese theater at the time (Li Ruru, Shashibiya). Given the turbulent political state in China during the early twentieth century, these wenming xi Shakespearean performances were unstable and soon died out.

The first series of continuous, regular Shakespearean productions in China appeared in the 1950s when the newly established Communist government invited theater experts from the “Soviet Big Brother” to direct hua ju (spoken plays). Li Ruru notes in her book Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China that in the 1950s and the early 60s, about three out of seven Shakespearean productions involved the Soviet experts (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 42). Also, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels appraised Shakespeare as a “realistic playwright” and a “Renaissance giant” whose works effectively criticize the feudalism and reflect humanism and the power of masses (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 46). Indeed, the recognition from the Communist giants granted Shakespeare agency after private theater troupes became “nationalized” in China. Nonetheless, after the relationship between the PRC and the Soviet Union exacerbated in the early 60s, in 1963 Mao Zedong publicly denounced the advocation of “feudal and capitalist arts” and the lack of interest in “promoting socialist arts” (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 50). Mao’s comment might be a direct response to the staging of Shakespeare and other Soviet devised productions, and a prelude to Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) during which “no Western or Chinese plays written before 1949 could be staged” (Tsui).

As a result of Mao’s public commentary in 1963 and the Revolution following, under the dictatorship of “The Gang of Four,” no artistic work was in progress except for the “revolutionary” operas, films and paintings. Moreover, art advocates were interrogated, jailed, exiled to desolate parts of the country, or executed; numerous historical artifacts, books, sites were ruined. As many scholars describe it, the Cultural Revolution made China a cultural desert for ten years (Sun 1934; Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 51).

 

The Revival of the Orthodox with Traumatic Residues: 1976-1980

Undoubtedly, Shakespeare’s works do not belong to the ranking of the socialist, revolutionary arts, were severely criticized and publicly banned. However, Shakespeare’s works and other cultural products were secretly available during the Revolution which resulted in a relatively quick resuscitation of Shakespeare (Tsui). Merely two years after the Cultural Revolution ended, in 1978, Complete Works of Shakespeare, a truly complete edition of Shakespeare’s works, was published (Hsiang-Lin 12). Furthermore, in the year following, a Shakespearean performance, a revival of the 1957 Much Ado About Nothing, was staged in Shanghai Qingnian Huajutuan (Shanghai Youth Spoken Drama Company), marking the homecoming of Shakespearean performances (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 51). Nonetheless, it is important to note that the influence of the Cultural Revolution, a ten-year national trauma, was still lingering within the Chinese society (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 70). Thus, it was under the mixed condition of “lingering fear,” traumatic memories, and aspiration to knowledge and future that Shakespeare performances revived.

 

• Much Ado About Nothing (1957 & 1979) & Macbeth (1980)

As mentioned, the 1979 production of Much Ado About Nothing was a revival of the 1957 version. It is noteworthy that the 1957 production was directed by a Soviet expert whose name was Yevgeniya Konstantinovna Lipkovskaya during her two-year visit at the Shanghai Theater Academy. Indeed, she did help “foster the development of hua ju” as the Chinese government intended when sending out the invitation to the USSR (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 54-57). Specifically, when directing Chinese actors, she widely used the Stanislavski System, in that she adhered to a super-objective, which is a guiding ideological principle for a play and she encouraged the actors to explore the “given circumstances” by employing Stanislavski’s ‘magic If’ (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 60-66). Also, she chose to make the set grandeur, and European like; she dressed actors in late-Medieval European costumes and Western makeups such as wigs, prosthetic noses, and blue colored eyelids symbolizing blue eyes.

Directed by one of Lipkovskaya’s assistant named Hu Dao in 1957, the 1979 revival of the production Much Ado About Nothing attempted to be as faithful to the original production as possible (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 58). As shown in fig. 1., the actors still worn Western costumes and prosthetics like in the 1957 production.

Similar to Hu Dao’s 1979 version of Much Ado About Nothing, the 1980 production of Macbeth (see fig. 2.) directed by Xu Xiaozhong also adopted much of the Soviet elements, since Xu also studied the Stanislavski System in the USSR in the late 1960s. As fig. 2. demonstrates, costumes in the production remained Western-looking. Moreover, in Li’s interview with Xu, Xu shared his Stanislavski approach to rehearsals such that he encouraged the actors to interrogate their characters and examine the circumstance of where each character stands, which he thought very helpful for the actors to “get into the roles” (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 73-77). However, this production is still different from the orthodox Soviet approach. For example, Xu attempted to incorporate the red color (the symbolic color in Communist China) into design aspects and exaggerated actors’ use of hands to disclose their inner world. Moreover, as Li points out, Xu’s Macbeth still, beyond Xu’s awareness, embodied many aspects of the propaganda theater during the Cultural Revolution, such as the unnatural acting manners, the over-simplified “good versus bad” theme, and the principle of “three standouts.”¹

 

A Golden Age of Shakespearean Productions: 1980-2000

The early 1980s has been widely recognized as the “real blooming,” “the flowing,” or the “golden age” of Shakespearean stage productions in China (Hsiang-Lin 12-14; Sun 1935-1937; Zhang). After Deng Xiaoping (1904-1997), a paramount Party leader, regained power in 1981 after his fall in the Revolution, he advocated strengthening China’s tie with the rest of the world; the policies implemented under his suggestion granted relative freedom to China’s social, economic and political development (Sun 1935). At the same time, Chinese theater enjoyed freedom in exploring new theatrical forms and extending artistic genres. Notably, in 1984, the Chinese Shakespeare Society was founded in the Shanghai Theater Academy, and during its inaugural conference, the Society’s vision plan included the establishment of the journal Shakespeare Studies and the planning for the first Chinese International Shakespeare Festival (Sun 1936). This festival did take place — in spring 1986, as host cities for the festival, Beijing and Shanghai simultaneously welcomed guests across the world, staging productions (28 in total; 12 in Beijing and 16 in Shanghai) and organizing forums related to Shakespeare and his works (Brockbank 195-197). As J. Philip Brockbank recounts in his essay, “I cannot find any precedent in the history of Shakespeare theatre and festival: some two dozen different companies at a dozen theatre performed eighteen different plays…” (Brockbank 196) Although the scheduled 1990 International Shakespeare Festival was canceled due to the government’s tightened grip on cultural censorship after the Tiananmen Massacre (June 1989), the 1992 economic reform re-created a theater-friendly atmosphere, and in 1994 the second International Shakespeare Festival was held in Shanghai.

During these two festivals, both English performance and Chinese productions enriched the Shakespearean scene in China. Besides the bi-linguality of the festivals, a new form re-emerged on stage and has been sustained since then — Shakespeare in Chinese operatic forms. From 1983 to today, Shakespeare’s works have been adapted into numerous Chinese operatic genres (xiqu), including huangmeixi (Anhui opera), yueju (Zhejiang/Shaoxing opera), chuanju (Sichuan opera) and others. But the most popular ones are the adaptations in jingju (Beijing opera), kunqu, and yueju (Zhejiang/Shaoxing opera), all of which appeared in the 1986 Shakespeare Festival and throughout the late twentieth century (Li Ruru,“Chinese Traditional Theater,” 38).

 

• Twelfth Night (a yueju adaptation) (1986)

The yueju version of Twelfth Night staged in the 1986 Shakespeare Festival embodied “distinctly foreign characters, costumes, makeup, manners, and gesture” from the actors. Moreover, the set and props of the production were entirely “Western” as well. According to Li Ruru’s essay, “the front curtain is not used, and a black velvet curtain forms a backdrop; the scenery is simple but in its design still manages to convey the opulence of the baroque style,” as displayed in figure 3 (Li Ruru, “Chinese Traditional Theater,” 38). Moreover, the music and instrumentation of the music score were more westernized than traditional yueju opera — songs played by European instruments are often three-beat melodies and other western tunes, which was closer to a waltz than a yueju musical mode (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 168). Lastly, the director Hu Weimin also adopted much of the Stanislavski System in that under Hu’s direction; the actors practiced method-acting rather than traditional yueju training during rehearsals. The only remotely elements connected with yueju were the language and a few love scenes which reminded the audience of a famous episode from one of the yueju classics: Dream of the Red Chamber (Hong Lou Meng) (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 166-175).

 

• Macbeth (a kunqu adaptation) (1986)

At the same Festival, the kunqu version of Macbeth (see fig. 4) was at the other end of the spectrum — “fully sinicized,” as Li describes (Li Ruru,“Chinese Traditional Theater,” 38). Indeed, the sinicizing process in this production is holistic. The production changed it title into one with Chinese operatic flavor, Blood-stained Hands, and altered texts and characterizations in different scenes to transform the plot into a traditional Chinese one. For instance, new scenes were added — “the appearance of the ghosts of Duncan, Banquo, and Macduff accusing Lady Macbeth, and the creation on stage of Macbeth’s dream.” And certainly, the music, language, costumes, and acting techniques all aligned with the traditional kunqu form.

Indeed, by comparing the kunqu production of Macbeth and the yueju version of Twelfth Night, we could easily tell the difference — one is western and the other one Chinese. Throughout the late twentieth century, there were a great number of Shakespeare adaptations in the form of Chinese operas (Li Ruru, Shashibiya). However, the degrees of “Chineseness” and “Westerness” vary in each adaptation: they were either drastically westernized or sinicized. It was indeed rare to see one production which stayed in between.

 

• Hamlet (1989, 1990 & 1994)

The influence from the Soviet productions and Chinese operas on the modern Shakespeare adaptations is salient. Meanwhile, it is also noteworthy that experimental (avant-garde) theater has also affected the development of Shakespearean productions in China. Lin Zhaohua’s Hamlet (1989, 1990 & 1994) (see fig. 5.) is one example.

Different from the Soviet “Western-styled” productions or the Chinese operatic adaptations, Lin’s production utilized urban clothes as costumes, and natural faces without ostentatious make-up. Moreover, there was only one permanent prop, which muti-functionally served as the barber’s chair, a bed, or a rock near Ophelia’s grave. In addition, five old-looking ceiling fans “constantly rotating above the [stage center] are echoed by an isolated fan set on the right side.” Figure 5 shows the metal framework which supported the ceiling fans (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 5). The most tradition-breaking feature in the production was the role-switching — actors who played Hamlet and Claudius interchanged roles, and later in the play Polonius became Hamlet. The audience’s response was mixed, with many of them not able to understand the production, given the unfamiliarity to Hamlet and Western avant-garde theater. However, the fact that this rather novel production was not censored reflects the government’s increased tolerance toward artists after the Tiananmen Massacre (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 97-99).   

 

University Festivals and Transcultural Festivals: 2000 – today

Although the two International Shakespeare Festivals did not continue in the early twentieth century, with increasing globalization, China continues to open its door to the world, and Shakespeare has still been highly valued. Since 2000, a number of international conferences and forums have taken place in China, such as the Forum of Chinese Shakespeare in Hangzhou (2002), and Fudan University’s Forum titled “Shakespeare and China: Retrospect and Prospect” (2004) (Sun 1937). While the Chinese international policies have been increasingly welcoming, China’s internal cultural policies have been unstable. For instance, the Shakespeare Association of China (the Chinese Shakespeare Society founded in 1984) disbanded with alleged (and highly debatable) violations of bureaucratic regulations, but in 2013, the association was re-established (“Shakespeare Association”).  Meanwhile, China has witnessed fast economic growth as well as a rapidly increasing number of college students.

 

• University Shakespeare Festivals

During the twenty-first century, although there was no professional Shakespeare taking place in China before the 2016 Shanghai International Shakespeare Festival and Forums (MevKat), Chinese universities and college students became interested in staging Shakespeare performances, and hosting and participating Shakespeare festivals. Unlike the students active in Shakespeare performances during the previous century, these university students are from non-theater, -film, or -art specific schools. Li Weimin, Professor of English at the Sichuan Foreign Language College, lists the Shakespeare festivals occurred in universities in the twenty-first century (Li Weimin 52). Among the list of events, the most significant ones are the Chinese National University Shakespeare Festival and Competition. It was started in 2005 and ended in 2015, with The Chinese University of Hong Kong as its host welcoming competing clubs or troupes from universities in mainland China (Li Weimin 52-53).

Li Weimin also points out that most of the university productions of Shakespeare are done by student theater clubs or the foreign language departments at the colleges. The lack of expertise in theater made the performances not as aesthetically pleasing as possible (Li Weimin 53). Also, foreign language students tend to view participation in an English Shakespearean production as a chance to practice the language, and this pursuit to “practice” hampers student’s understanding and staging of the themes and other nuances in Shakespeare’s language (Li Weimin 53-54). Nonetheless, these university Shakespeare productions and Shakespeare festivals are a good educational tool, serving as incubators for students’ intelligent growth, and for future development in China’s Shakespeare studies and performances.

 

• National Centre for the Performing Arts

Constructed in 2001 at the location immediately to the west of Tiananmen Square and the Great Hall of the People, housed in a giant ellipsoid titanium dome with glass surrounded by an artificial lake, the National Centre for the Performing Arts (NCPA) has not only become a Beijing landmark but also the most prestigious performance center in China. Like in regional theaters across Chinese cities, Shakespearean production has been a certain appearance in each year’s agenda at the NCPA.

The 2017 NCPA production of The Merchant of Venice (see fig. 6.), for instance, adopts the western approach in costume, set design, and acting. Moreover, it incorporated Italian Tenor Arias, highlighting the exotic atmosphere of the production. The 2018 production of King Lear (see fig. 7.)directed by Li Liuyi takes an “experimental” approach, with the inclusion of a German costume designer and a Japanese set designer (“National Theatre King Lear”). 

However, Professor Wah Guan Lim from Bard College accused Li Liuyi’s experimental productions of “losing the spirit of avant-garde theater” (Lim). Lim’s comments might suggest that with compliance to the government, the “experimental theater” no longer holds the freedom to amplify voices and diverse opinions.

Besides these two productions, the video inserted below introduces three Shakespeare performances at the NCPA in 2016 during the International Shakespeare Festival. Similar to the two previous festivals, these three productions each belongs to one category — the sinicized, the orthodoxical western, and the “experimental.”

Vid. 1. China Celebrates Shakespeare. Prod. CCTV English Channel.

 

• Transcultural Festivals

After Xi Jinping, President of the PRC called the 17th-century Chinese playwright Tang Xianzu “the Shakespeare of the East” during a visit to the UK, the Ministry of Culture of the PRC has put in much effort in cultivating transcultural connections between Tang Xianzu and Shakespeare (“Tang Xianzu”). In 2016 — the 400th anniversary of both Shakespeare’s and Tang Xianzu’s death — the International Shakespeare Festival included a forum titled “Traditional and Modern — Tang Xianzu and Shakespeare on Stage in Modern China” (MevKat). An article from The Folger Shakespeare Library believes that Tang’s promotion to “the Shakespeare of China” could be viewed as a marketing decision by the Chinese government, in an attempt to exert China’s “soft power” in the world (“Tang Xianzu”). Especially in the year of 2016, frequent cultural exchanges took place between the UK and China over the topic “Tang Xianzu and Shakespeare,” such as the Fuzhou Chinese Opera performance as part of the Shakespeare 400th anniversary celebrations in Stratford (“Shakespeare Birthplace”).

 

Conclusion: A Cross-time Examination

If we look back to the range of adaptations of Shakespeare on the Chinese stage across history, they have included the Soviet-styled theater, Chinese operatic forms, experimental theater, and the combination of the three or two. Meanwhile, most of these Shakespeare productions staged received high appraisal; it is therefore not unreasonable to conclude that Shakespeare’s works are indeed ingenious in that it has excellent flexibility for re-interpretation and adaptation — whether with a minimalistic approach, or with traditional jingju movements. But the next question would be: what made Shakespeare’s works flexible and global? Also, it would be interesting to study the limits of the extent of adaptation. Could Shakespeare’s works adapt to other existing Chinese theater forms such as xiang sheng (a comedic dialogue)? And the next level of questions might include, would it still be necessary to adapt Shakespeare to another form?

My answer to the last question is a definite “yes;” throughout the Shakespeare performance development in China during the past forty years, the keyword “educational” has stood out. Shakespeare and his works have educated people with various backgrounds. To the students at the theater academies, Shakespeare provided global texts upon which Soviet experts could teach the Chinese students and scholars the Soviet approach to theater and acting which still influences today’s Chinese theater; to the Shakespearean scholars, whether Chinese or foreign, the transcultural merge of Shakespeare and Chinese operatic forms disclose the theatrical possibility residing within Shakespeare’s works, offering abundant opportunities for analyses in performance studies; to Chinese university students during the recent years, through practicing Shakespeare, they could improve their foreign language proficiency, their personal intelligent growth, and interest in theater; to the global citizens, experiencing transcultural Shakespeare performances or festivals could be culturally informing, with Shakespeare serving as the cross-section where two or more cultures meet — truly the global cultural ambassador. With the educational merit, I see future Shakespeare adaptations as beneficial to individuals, local communities and the global society in learning of professional theatrical concepts, different cultures, and languages.

Lastly, it is important to note the political component in Shakespeare’s development in China. Shakespeare and his works have been used in China as a political tool for the central government, such that in the 50s and early 60s as a propaganda means for Marx and Engel’s communist ideologies, in the 80s and 90s as a bridge to connect with the rest of the world, and in 2016 as an exertion of China’s “soft power” to the global stage. Indeed, theater as a worldwide media could serve as a remarkable political promotional tool. Nonetheless, when exercising theater as a propaganda tool, only a small portion of the theater is encouraged, and the rest is often silenced. In my view, the restriction upon cultural and artistic expression, the often co-product with political theater in China, is unhealthy in that it suffocates the development of new theater and continuity of humanity. If we compare the repertoire shown in the 2016 video and the program list in the 1986 International Shakespeare Festival, they do not differ much; the stagnancy in development may well be the result of the strict cultural policies and atmosphere in China. Nevertheless, as a crucial part of the globe under the rapidly increasing globalization, it is foreseeable that China will encourage artistic freedom like many of its peers. Also, with the statistics presented at the beginning of this blog post, it is difficult to deny Chinese society’s passion toward Shakespeare and a promising future in China for Shakespeare’s progression.

 

 

¹ “The principle of the ‘three standouts’ had been imposed on theater, literature and the arts by Jiang Qing (Mao’s wife and a member of the Gang of Four). Under this schema, artistic works were required to have ‘positive characters’ who would stand out from the mass, then ‘leading heroic characters’ who would stand out from among the positive character group, and finally a ‘central character’ who would stand out from the leading heroic’ subgroup” (Li Ruru, Shashibiya, 80-81).

 

Works Cited

Texts

Brockbank, J. P. “Shakespeare Renaissance in China.” Shakespeare Quarterly 39.2 (1988): 195-204. Print.

Hsiang-Lin, Ho. “Shakespeare in China.” The Comparatist 13 (1989): 11-21. Print.

“The International Shakespeare Association Newsletter.” The International Shakespeare Association, sec. Shakespeare in China, The Shakespeare Society of Japan 2013, p. 3. Web. 04/15/2018 <http://www.s-sj.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013_ISA_newsletter.pdf>.

Lim, Wah Guan.  “Theatre of Rebellion: Danny Yung and Political Hong Kong Theater.” Colgate University Theater Department Seminar, 17 April 2018, Colgate University, Hamilton, NY.

Li, Ruru. “Chinese Traditional Theatre and Shakespeare.” Asian Theatre Journal 5.1 (1988): 38-48. Print.

Li, Ruru. Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China. Hong Kong University Press, 2003. Print.

Li, Weimin. “Shakespearean Productions in Chinese Universities during the Thirty Years since the Chinese Economic Reform.” 136.3 (2010): 51. Web. <http://mr.gxiang.net/upfile/ebook/89/63452136829411655434.pdf>.

MevKat. “Celebrating 400 Years of Shakespeare in Shanghai.” City Weekend. Sep 22 2016. Web. http://www.cityweekend.com.cn. 04/16/2018 <http://www.cityweekend.com.cn/shanghai/article/celebrating-400-years-of-shakespeare-shanghai>.

Shakespeare Birthplace Trust 400th Anniversary Fuzhou Chinese Opera Purple Hairpin Tang Xianzu Pt 2. Anonymous YouTube, 2016. Video.

Sun, Yanna. “Shakespeare Reception in China.” 2.9 (2012): 1931-1938. ProQuest. Web. 04/10/2018.

“Tang Xianzu and Shakespeare in China.” Web. Folger Shakespeare Library. <https://www.folger.edu/shakespeare-unlimited/tang-xianzu-china>.

Tsui, Enid. “Why China’s Love Affair with Shakespeare Endures.” July 29 2016. Web. 04/18/2018 <http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/1996061/why-chinas-love-affair-shakespeare-endures>.

Zhang, Xiaoyang. Shakespeare in China: A Comparative Study of Two Traditions and Cultures. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1996. Print.

国家大剧院 National Theatre for The Performing Arts. “国家大剧院制作莎士比亚话剧《李尔王》1月重磅归来. The National Theatre for the Performing Arts Welcomes back Shakespeare’s King Lear in January” 国家大剧院 National Theatre for The Performing Arts. Dec 27 2017 2017. Web. <http://www.chncpa.org/zxdt_331/zxdtlm/yczx_332/201712/t20171227_180916.shtml>.

国家大剧院 National Theatre for The Performing Arts. ” 莎士比亚戏剧《威尼斯商人》压轴2017北京喜剧艺术节 Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice Presented at the 2017 Beijing Comedy Festival.” 国家大剧院 National Theatre for The Performing Arts. Dec 8 2017 2017. Web. <http://www.chncpa.org/zxdt_331/zxdtlm/yczx_332/201712/t20171208_180278.shtml>.

Images

Fig. 1. Much Ado About Nothing. 1979. N.p. By Dao Hu. Found in the figure collections of Li Ruru’s book Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China.

Fig. 2. Macbeth. 1980. N.p. By Xu Xiaozhong. Found in the figure collections of Li Ruru’s book Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China.

Fig. 3. Twelfth Night (yueju). 1986. N.p. Sun Hongjiang. Found in the figure collections of Li Ruru’s book Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China.

Fig. 4. Shanghai Kunqu Company. Lady Macbeth (Zhang Xunpeng) in the Kunqu Version of Macbeth (director, Li Jiayao). 1980. Chinese Traditional Theatre and Shakespeare. 1st ed. Vol. 5. N.p.: Asian Theatre Journal, 1988. 39. Print.

Fig. 5. Sun, Dexin. Hamlet. 1990. Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China. Comp. Zhaohua Lin. Hong Kong: Hong Kong UP, 2003. N. pag. Print. Found in the figure collections of Li Ruru’s book Shashibiya: Staging Shakespeare in China.

Fig. 6. 狡猾又残忍的犹太商人夏洛克在法庭上得意洋洋 The Cunning but Cruel Jewish Merchant Shylock Being Smug on Stage. 2017. 国家大剧院 National Centre for the Performing Arts. Ed. 国家大剧院 National Centre for the Performing Arts. Web. 20 Apr. 2018. <http://www.chncpa.org/zxdt_331/zxdtlm/yczx_332/201712/t20171208_180278.shtml>.

Fig. 7. 话剧《李尔王》邀请到德籍舞美设计米夏埃尔·西蒙和日籍服装设计和田惠美 The Play King Lear invites German Choreographer and Japanese Costume Designer. 2017. 国家大剧院 National Centre for the Performing Arts. Ed. 国家大剧院 National Centre for the Performing Arts. Web. 20 Apr. 2018. <http://www.chncpa.org/zxdt_331/zxdtlm/yczx_332/201712/t20171227_180916.shtml>.

Post Featured Image: Liu, Haifa. Reaching out to New Audiences: Fu Xi-ru in The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan. 2011. The Telegraph. Web. 20 Apr. 2018. <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/edinburgh-festival/8701649/Edinburgh-Festival-2011-The-Revenge-of-Prince-Zi-Dan-The-secret-of-Hamlet-in-Chinese.html>.

Video

Vid. 1. China Celebrates Shakespeare. Prod. CCTV English Channel. YouTube. CCTV English Channel, 26 Apr. 2016. Web. 20 Apr. 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GUBVW_Hkc4>.