<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Seattlest: All&apos;s Well That Ends Well--False Advertising?</title>
<link>http://seattlest.com/2008/06/11/alls_well_that_ends_wellfalse_adver.php</link>
<description>All comments for All&apos;s Well That Ends Well--False Advertising?</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 seattle_katelyn</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:00:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>kbhackett@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>kbhackett@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Jeremy M. Barker</title>
<link>http://seattlest.com/2008/06/11/alls_well_that_ends_wellfalse_adver.php#comment-1382658</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://seattlest.com/2008/06/11/alls_well_that_ends_wellfalse_adver.php#comment-1382658</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:07:22 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;It&apos;s always disappointing to me when directors come up with a concept that&apos;s less ambitious than the text is on its own. That happens a lot, unfortunately, particularly with Shakespeare. I honestly think it&apos;s because the language is so difficult that people gloss over it; actors and directors conceptualize what&apos;s happening instead of making something happen. Short rehearsal schedules compound this; an actor has to memorize a comparably large chunk of text in comparison to the standard modern play, and as a result, they rarely master it as well.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>