What do you think?
Rate this book
Tip of the Tongue: Reflections on Language and Meaning
A thoughtful and deeply personal book by a master theatre-maker. In Tip of the Tongue , Peter Brook takes a charming, playful, and wise look at topics such as the subtle, telling differences between French and English, and the many levels on which we can appreciate the works of Shakespeare. Brook also revisits his seminal concept of the "empty space," considering how theatre—and the world—have changed over the span of his long and distinguished career. Threaded throughout with intimate and revealing stories from Brook's own life, Tip of the Tongue is a short but sparkling gift from one of the greatest artists of recent times. Tip of the Tongue is part of Peter Brook’s “Reflections” trilogy, along with The Quality of Mercy and Playing by Ear .
112 pages, Paperback
Published December 6, 2022
11 people are currently reading
125 people want to read
About the author
Peter Brook
102 books130 followersPeter Brook is a world-renowned theater director, staging innovative productions of the works of famous playwrights. A native of London, he has been based in France since the 1970s.
Peter Brook's parents were immigrant scientists from Russia. A precocious child with a distaste for formal education but a love of learning, Brook performed his own four-hour version of Shakespeare's Hamlet at the age of seven. After spending two years in Switzerland recovering from a glandular infection, Brook became one of the youngest undergraduates at Oxford University. At the same time he directed his first play in London, a production of Marlowe's Dr. Faustus. Brook made his directing debut at the Stratford Theatre at the age of 21, with a production of Love's Labours Lost.
Over the next several years, Brook directed both theater and opera, as well as designing the sets and costumes for his productions. He eventually grew disillusioned with opera, calling it "deadly theater." He directed prominent actors, including Laurence Olivier in Titus Andronicus and Paul Schofeld in a filmed King Lear. He also directed a film adaptation of Lord of the Flies. In 1962, he was named a director of the Royal Shakespeare Company.
Despite his popular successes, Brook sought out alternative ways to create vibrant, meaningful theater. He directed a season of experimental theater with the Royal Shakespeare Company, inspired by Antonin Artaud's "Theatre of Cruelty." He sought to turn away from stars and to create an ensemble of actors who improvised during a long rehearsal period in a search of the meaning of "holy theater."
Out of this search came Brook's finest work. In 1964 he directed Genet's The Screens and Peter Weiss' Marat/Sade, for which he received seven major awards and introduced Glenda Jackson to the theater. Influenced by Brecht and Artaud, Marat/Sade shocked the audience with its insane asylum environment. In 1966 he developed US, a play about the Vietnam experience and the horrors of war. Jerzy Grotowski, one of the most important theater directors of this century and a man who profoundly influenced Brook, came to work with the company during this production. Brook also did an adaptation of Seneca's Oedipus by poet Ted Hughes, a who continued to collaborate with him for many years. The culmination of this phase of Brook's work was his production of A Midsummer Night's Dream (1970). Using trapezes, juggling, and circus effects, Brook and his actors created a sense of magic, joy, and celebration in this interpretation of Shakespeare's play.
After this, Brook moved to Paris and founded the International Center of Theatre Research. He wanted to find a new form of theater that could speak to people worldwide--theater which was truly universal. He also wanted to work in an environment of unlimited rehearsal time in order to allow for a deep search-of-self for all involved. The first production that came out of this phase was Orghast (1971), which employed a new language developed by Ted Hughes. This production, performed at the ruins of Persepolis in Persia, used actors from many different countries.
Peter Brook's parents were immigrant scientists from Russia. A precocious child with a distaste for formal education but a love of learning, Brook performed his own four-hour version of Shakespeare's Hamlet at the age of seven. After spending two years in Switzerland recovering from a glandular infection, Brook became one of the youngest undergraduates at Oxford University. At the same time he directed his first play in London, a production of Marlowe's Dr. Faustus. Brook made his directing debut at the Stratford Theatre at the age of 21, with a production of Love's Labours Lost.
Over the next several years, Brook directed both theater and opera, as well as designing the sets and costumes for his productions. He eventually grew disillusioned with opera, calling it "deadly theater." He directed prominent actors, including Laurence Olivier in Titus Andronicus and Paul Schofeld in a filmed King Lear. He also directed a film adaptation of Lord of the Flies. In 1962, he was named a director of the Royal Shakespeare Company.
Despite his popular successes, Brook sought out alternative ways to create vibrant, meaningful theater. He directed a season of experimental theater with the Royal Shakespeare Company, inspired by Antonin Artaud's "Theatre of Cruelty." He sought to turn away from stars and to create an ensemble of actors who improvised during a long rehearsal period in a search of the meaning of "holy theater."
Out of this search came Brook's finest work. In 1964 he directed Genet's The Screens and Peter Weiss' Marat/Sade, for which he received seven major awards and introduced Glenda Jackson to the theater. Influenced by Brecht and Artaud, Marat/Sade shocked the audience with its insane asylum environment. In 1966 he developed US, a play about the Vietnam experience and the horrors of war. Jerzy Grotowski, one of the most important theater directors of this century and a man who profoundly influenced Brook, came to work with the company during this production. Brook also did an adaptation of Seneca's Oedipus by poet Ted Hughes, a who continued to collaborate with him for many years. The culmination of this phase of Brook's work was his production of A Midsummer Night's Dream (1970). Using trapezes, juggling, and circus effects, Brook and his actors created a sense of magic, joy, and celebration in this interpretation of Shakespeare's play.
After this, Brook moved to Paris and founded the International Center of Theatre Research. He wanted to find a new form of theater that could speak to people worldwide--theater which was truly universal. He also wanted to work in an environment of unlimited rehearsal time in order to allow for a deep search-of-self for all involved. The first production that came out of this phase was Orghast (1971), which employed a new language developed by Ted Hughes. This production, performed at the ruins of Persepolis in Persia, used actors from many different countries.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
September 28, 2025
Short yet profound and extremely thought provoking. The ending is marvellous - comparing the theatre to different types of mirrors and what they reveal to us. It doesn't matter how dirty, cracked or unpolished it is - its function is to reflect and so it does. The reflection, however, will be affected by its state. I wonder, what if my glasses were dirty, not the mirror itself? Can I ever posses the knowledge of who is it to blame for the distortion of my perception?
September 26, 2017
Peter Brook's reflections are always worth reading.
Read the paperback.
Read the paperback.
April 1, 2018
A very short book but, as Peter Brook would say, full of levels like a skyscrapper. Anything written by Brook is a masterclass in art and life. In this book, you learn more about the genius of Shakespeare, about the importance of the spoken word in theatre, and some more reflections about the art of theatre-making from one of the greatest directors the world has ever known.
Yes, the book is very short. Like his more recent plays, Brook goes straight to the point. To the essence. Gone are the days of 9 hour plays... Now he is very clear and precise (as if he wasn't before, but now even more so).
Maybe for those reading Brook for the first time, it might be better to do some background research...maybe have a look at The Empty Space first and/or The Open Door, and then take a look at this book. Just to understand where he is coming from.
Yes, the book is very short. Like his more recent plays, Brook goes straight to the point. To the essence. Gone are the days of 9 hour plays... Now he is very clear and precise (as if he wasn't before, but now even more so).
Maybe for those reading Brook for the first time, it might be better to do some background research...maybe have a look at The Empty Space first and/or The Open Door, and then take a look at this book. Just to understand where he is coming from.
April 25, 2018
Peter Brook gets to the essence of things. This very brief book contains a mountain of insight into language (focusing on the discrepancies between English and French, which are insightful into the meaning of language), theatre (its ephemerality and permanence), and Shakespeare (what makes his words so immortal). I was lucky to meet and speak with Peter Brook about a decade ago. If you haven't encountered him before, you're in for a treat. If you have, your highest expectations won't be disappointed.
July 20, 2022
Par chance, j'ai pu voir une oeuvre mise en scène par Peter Brook. La flûte enchantée, dépouillée et bouleversante de beauté.
Dans cet essai, il se livre à propos de la langue, des différences entre l'anglais et le français. Il parle du silence, du vide et des possibilités de sens qu'il permet. Il parle de théâtre bien sûr, de Shakespeare.
J'aurais aimé en connaître davantage sur l'art dramatique car certaines subtilités m'ont échappé.
Vraiment heureuse d'avoir pu jeter un coup d'oeil furtif dans l'univers de cet homme qui parle du bout des lèvres.
Dans cet essai, il se livre à propos de la langue, des différences entre l'anglais et le français. Il parle du silence, du vide et des possibilités de sens qu'il permet. Il parle de théâtre bien sûr, de Shakespeare.
J'aurais aimé en connaître davantage sur l'art dramatique car certaines subtilités m'ont échappé.
Vraiment heureuse d'avoir pu jeter un coup d'oeil furtif dans l'univers de cet homme qui parle du bout des lèvres.
April 9, 2018
A short book but one filled with insights.
It explains a lot of the nuances of language when used in a theatrical setting. In particular, the language of Shakespeare and how it is different depending on the performer.
I enjoyed reading this and hopefully I have taken some aspects from it I can use in my own acting. It is definitely worth a read for any performer not just those in the theatre.
It explains a lot of the nuances of language when used in a theatrical setting. In particular, the language of Shakespeare and how it is different depending on the performer.
I enjoyed reading this and hopefully I have taken some aspects from it I can use in my own acting. It is definitely worth a read for any performer not just those in the theatre.
February 12, 2018
Short but packed with passion; next time I see a theatre performance (i.e. tomorrow evening) I'll have a much better appreciation of language and an actor's delivery!
August 31, 2018
After a pause of a decade or so, am directing another play of mine for October production, and bought this, and now read this, for some stimulation if not inspiration. Peter Brook always good value.
March 17, 2023
a bit boring but also insightful
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews