Squeaking Cleopatras: The Elizabethan Boy Player

by Joy Leslie Gibson

'That woman is a woman!' So thundered Simon Callow in the film Shakespeare in Love, thus underlining one of the great differences between our theatre and that of the Elizabethans where women were prohibited from appearing on the stage. In this highly controversial book, the first on the subject for over sixty years, Joy Leslie Gibson looks at the female roles in Elizabethan and Jacobean drama from the point of view of the boys who actually had to create these fascinating and dramatic parts. Scrupulously researched, this groundbreaking book sheds new light not only on Elizabethan drama but also on society as a whole. It will be required reading for any lover of Shakespeare or anyone made curious by a visit to the theatre to see one of Shakespeare's plays.

240 pages, Hardcover

First published October 1, 2000

Reviews

[Liam Ostermann]

This is definitely an academic work and it rigourously explores the unfortunately very little archival information there is on the boy actors of Elizabethan and Stuart England. What he says is thus grounded and free of to much speculation, not entirely, without a certain extrapolation from scant evidence there we little to say. It is an interesting, but not fascinating book because too many questions remain not simply unanswered but unasked because there isn't any information available to construct an answer. I don't know if there is anything to learn from other countries or whether light could be thrown on aspects of the boy actors lives via comparable research on boys, during this period, in school, or as apprentices, within religious establishments, etc. It so hard to know, there is so much that isn't known.

I wish I could have liked the book more - but it can't be faulted in terms of scholarship. Full marks for effort but not a very exciting result.

[Mary]

I give the book credit for assembling interesting bits of trivia but it was sadly lacking in theory and substantive evidence. One topic- the author's suggestion that playwrights used shorter phrases and fewer subordinate clauses in female roles to help boy players deliver the lines (lower lung capacity and less sophistication etc) was entirely unresolved in the end. I would have liked to see a proper quantitative study of that rather than a few supporting examples selected God knows how from the literature and a few counter examples put in confusingly after. Also would have loved to see real scholarly investigation (not ad hoc speculation) into the subjects of boys' sexual experience brought to the roles and onset of puberty and voice change. Get a bio anthropologist on the line! A disappointingly cobbled together and unrigorous read.

[Michael Burge]

There are so few facts about the men who created the great female roles in Elizabethan and Jacobean plays, therefore the field is quite rich with speculation. This book extends on what we know, often into interesting (albeit shaky historical) territory, and serves as excellent groundwork for a lot more research and writing on this subject.