LETTER: Why shouldn't a woman play Richard II?

Sunday 28 May 1995 00:02 BST

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

I WAS stunned to learn that Andrew Temple finds the idea of Fiona Shaw playing Richard II bizarre and depressing ("To play the king (and be a woman)", 21 May).

Ms Shaw is one of the most exciting and innovative actresses of our age. The convention of male actors playing women has been long accepted and has occasionally transcended the piping parody of popular imagination. Why, then, should an undeniably great actress not produce a vibrant and exciting Richard II?

I have purchased tickets for Richard II and like many others look forward to it with pleasure. I would be happy to give my artistic impressions of the performance after I have seen the play but not, unlike Mr Temple, before the play has opened.

Jenny Fosdal

Twickenham, Middlesex

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

LETTER: Why shouldn't a woman play Richard II?

Join our commenting forum

Thank you for registering